THE MILITARY BENEFITS OF QUANTUM TECHNOLOGY / GEOPOLITICAL FUTURES

The Military Benefits of Quantum Technology

New systems will reinforce, not reinvent, hierarchies.

By: Andrew Davidson

Modern militaries increasingly depend on the continuous functioning of complex systems rather than on decisive battlefield victories. 

Military advantages, then, are created less by the outright elimination of an enemy’s capability and more by its slow degradation. 

How states maintain functional control of these systems – which are under constant pressure – has thus become a geopolitical issue.

Encryption, for example, may be intact today but could later become vulnerable to exploitation. 

Satellite disruption could introduce errors that compound over time (and distance), even if it’s initially inconsequential. 

Sensors may still “function,” but they may do so intermittently and unreliably. 

Modern war is, in this sense, fought through partial loss and adaptation, placing a premium on technologies that offer accuracy, trust and coherence under stress.

Enter quantum technologies. 

In contemporary scientific and policy usage, quantum technologies are defined as systems whose operation depends on the controlled manipulation of physical states governed by quantum mechanics, enabling performance characteristics that cannot be achieved through classical physics alone. 

In strategic terms, their significance lies in extending the operational life of foundational systems already under stress. 

In practice, the most consequential effects of quantum technologies will be found in cryptography, communications security, navigation and timing, and precision sensing – domains where loss of accuracy compounds fastest during high-intensity conflict.

Indeed, the most immediate strategic concern relates to encryption. 

Current military, government and industrial networks rely on public-key encryption systems such as RSA and elliptic-curve cryptography. 

These systems secure authentication and key exchange by exploiting mathematical problems that are extremely difficult for traditional computers to reverse. 

Their security lies in the assumption that solving these problems requires too much time and computational effort.

Quantum computing upends this assumption by enabling specific algorithmic speedups against certain mathematical problems. 

Algorithms developed for quantum systems sharply reduce the difficulty of the problems underlying RSA and ECC. 

The strategic risk is cumulative: Sensitive data intercepted and stored today may become readable once sufficiently capable quantum computers mature. 

This prospect reshapes long-term risk calculations and drives early migration toward post-quantum cryptographic standards.

Quantum communications, meanwhile, address a narrower but critical vulnerability in this process. 

Despite common misconceptions, quantum communications does not enable instantaneous signaling; all usable information exchange still depends on classical channels constrained by the speed of light. 

Rather than transmitting data, quantum communication systems are used to distribute encryption keys. 

By encoding key material in quantum states, these systems make interception detectable during the exchange itself, since observation alters the state being measured. 

If interference is detected, the key is discarded. 

Communication then proceeds over conventional networks using keys whose integrity has been verified. 

These systems are not scalable for general communications and remain dependent on classical infrastructure, but they can provide heightened assurance for a small number of extremely high-value links (strategic leadership communications, critical infrastructure control, diplomatic or financial backbones).

Quantum technologies could also reduce dependence on satellite-based positioning, navigation and timing. 

Satellite navigation and timing systems underpin precision strikes, coordination and synchronization. 

During times of disruption, these systems experience positional and temporal error as operations continue.

Classical inertial navigation systems measure motion using mechanical or electromechanical components – tiny masses suspended on springs or vibrating structures whose displacement under acceleration is converted into position and velocity over time. 

These systems are inherently noisy: Thermal fluctuations, material imperfections, vibration and aging introduce small errors that compound rapidly as measurements are integrated, causing positional accuracy to degrade quickly once external references such as GPS are lost. 

Quantum inertial navigation replaces mechanical objects with atoms cooled to near absolute zero – which behave as coherent matter waves rather than solid objects. 

Acceleration and rotation shift the quantum phase of the atomic wave, producing interference patterns that encode motion with far greater stability than mechanical sensors. 

The system does not determine absolute position; instead, it measures changes in motion with reduced noise, slowing the accumulation of error and extending the period over which navigation and timing remain precise without external updates.

Finally, quantum sensing uses exceptionally stable quantum states to measure minute changes in gravity, magnetic fields and motion. 

Quantum sensors can thus detect localized disturbances that conventional sensors struggle to resolve. 

In military applications, they can be used against stealthy platforms such as submarines or concealed underground systems, albeit at constrained and typically short ranges. 

Quantum sensing does not enable wide-area search or persistent tracking and does not replace sonar networks, satellites or traditional intelligence reconnaissance and surveillance.

Militaries at the edge of these technologies use quantum systems to hedge their bets against other systems. 

The U.S. National Security Strategy and China’s 14th Five-Year Plan feature post-quantum cryptography transitions and limited testing of quantum-resilient navigation and sensing for high-value systems. 

Most other states are preparing to adapt through external standards rather than independent development.

This approach reflects the realities of contemporary conflict. 

In Ukraine, neither side has achieved persistent denial of satellite navigation, communications or sensing; instead, both have imposed intermittent disruption that degrades accuracy and slows decision-making. 

Precision has not disappeared so much as it has become dependent on redundancy, workarounds and continual adaptation.

Economically, quantum technologies matter for the same reason they matter strategically: They help secure systems whose failure would impose cascading costs. 

Financial markets, energy grids, telecommunications networks and industrial control systems depend on trusted encryption, precise timing and continuous synchronization. 

Quantum development functions as a hedge against long-term systemic exposure.

Transitioning to post-quantum cryptography and timing and navigation requires a ton of money, institutional coordination and long investment horizons. 

(Importantly, quantum systems benefit those who already have advanced financial and industrial ecosystems in place. 

They’re not a newly available foundation for power in themselves.) 

Quantum technologies are expensive not because of computational complexity, but because they require sustained control over fragile physical states. 

This demands extreme cooling, isolation, precision fabrication and continuous calibration that only capital-intensive systems can support.

Geography reinforces these constraints. 

Development and deployment require a stable energy supply, controlled environments, secure facilities and proximity to research and industrial centers. 

In other words, quantum systems will have to be tethered to specific locations. 

These locations – not diffused networks writ large – will benefit from the resilience offered by new technologies. 

Quantum will insulate existing power centers from future threats, but it won’t create new power centers all over the world. 

The result is consolidation rather than transformation, with outcomes determined less by innovation alone than by the capacity to sustain investment, infrastructure and integration over time.

Over the next several years, quantum development is likely to function as a force multiplier for states already able to afford long-term investment. 

Advanced industrial powers will consolidate their advantage through integration. 

Quantum technologies are unlikely to deliver sudden military dominance or rapid economic transformation. 

Instead, their significance lies in how they shape the ability of states to maintain operations as core systems are increasingly contested. 

And because they are more likely to be adopted by wealthier and more technologically advanced states, they will reinforce power hierarchies instead of reshaping them. 

In this sense, quantum is a revolution not in how power is exercised but in how it is protected.