#187: NATO Leading Innovation - DIANA Chief Commercial Officer Ryan Benitez

Countries of militaries that rapidly develop, deploy, and evolve technology, thrive.

Those who lag, blounder, America, NATO, the world order are being challenged and innovated against at a faster pace than ever before. From the global special operations symposium in Athens Greece, I sat down with Ryan Benitez of NATO-Gayana to talk about how innovation, technology, rapid capability development and are shaping the future of defense across the alliance.

As Diana's chief commercial officer, Ryan explains her work inside one of NATO's most four leading organizations. Guyana, the Defense Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic, connects startups, researchers, and industry leaders to solve some of the most urgent challenges facing allied militaries. From emerging technologies to dual-use solutions, Guyana is helping NATO move faster,

stay adaptable, and maintain an edge in an increasingly competitive global environment. Ryan also shared her experience in the Navy in how venture capital informs her approach

to modern innovation, why collaboration between nations and private industry is more critical

than ever, and how Guyana is empowering new ideas that can redefine readiness, resilience,

“operational effectiveness, not only key peaks, but move faster than our enemies.”

All the Jedberg podcast is a free-brain foundation on social media, listen on your favorite podcast platform, read on our website and watch the full video version on YouTube, as we show you why America must continue to lead from the front, no matter the challenge. Ryan, welcome to the Jedberg podcast. Thanks for having me.

So we're here, we're in the lobby last day of G-soft Europe, where we've had an incredible opportunity to see what not only our NATO partners are doing, but our partners in allies from across Europe, and all the way into the delegation from the Philippines, was here. I had a chance to send out with them yesterday with a J-soft commander from the Armed Forces of the Philippines, and really talk about how innovation is affecting the various militaries,

and the challenges that they face with their adversaries to tend to be our adversaries across the world. You spent nine years as a surface warfare officer in the Navy, you won't hold that against you. You've had a few Navy folks on.

Right. Right. Right. But now you're the Chief Commercial Officer at NATO, Diana, the Defense Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic.

So NATO, front and center in today's fight. We see NATO conversations all the way from President Trump, through Secretary Hegzeth, to many of the conversations we've had on this show with various senior leaders within NATO.

Really, really, in my mind, an important organization, a critical organization when we talk

about the strategic effects of the United States, and how do we achieve our aims across the world when we can't do everything. So these partnerships and these alliances make it critical to do so, and it's been like that for 80 years or so at NATO.

“So, talk for a second about what is NATO, Diana, and what's your role there?”

Sure. Absolutely. So, as you mentioned, NATO, Diana, Defense Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic. Quite a mouthful, but if you can get the acronym right. We were actually stood up at the NATO summit.

We were chartered at the 2021 NATO summit, and we very quickly opened our doors in 2022. So, it was a very rapid stand-up, and we have a headquarters office in London, and we have two satellite offices, one in Estonia and one in Halifax. And overall, I think the alliance all need that, you know, we needed to access the emerging technologies out that innovators were putting together, and we need to also protect those

sensitive technologies within the alliance. And so, that was a core of the mandate for Diana. And so, since then, we really, you know, you had to think about us as a startup within NATO almost, and year one, we started out supporting 44 companies, year 274, and now we're

“going to be at full operating capacity, so we'll be supporting 150 companies at least”

every year, and then we'll be doing kind of some rapid iteration outside of our normal cycle. So, it's an accelerator. We have a footprint of 20 sites across NATO, 180 test centers across NATO. So we've really done a great job building out this core structure and foundation to give

these mission driven innovators and startups what they need to succeed as a dual-use startup. So, when we look at innovation in the startup world, you had a VC background say after you came out of the Navy, where you were also public affairs officers. Right. Yeah.

We love our public affairs officer. Right. Japs of all trade. Yeah. Yeah.

talk to everybody.

But you then went into a venture capital and you're looking at early stage investment

into companies that have some sort of a product or technology that may advance you whatever is we're talking about, but specifically here for defense, when you look at these companies and you say you're working to scale up to 150 companies and you talk about backing them. What are they doing? What are their primary, some of the examples of things that they're producing and then

what level of backing are you giving them is it purely financial or there are other aspects that you're supporting them? Yeah. Absolutely.

“I'm only four months into this gig, and so I think coming in with a VC lens has been actually”

quite helpful into this role. So companies that come into NATO, Diana, they get non-dilutive funding. So I want to emphasize that Diana is a NATO body, so that works to our advantage. So our superpower there is that we have the brand of NATO behind us. We can act as a neutral third-party convener to bring together special operators, for example,

across the Alliance that want to come to the table and iterate. So they'll come with a requirement. They'll come with a requirement, so what we're looking for number one is does this technology

align with a critical capability need that an operator and user has brought to the table?

Taking a step back also. Now NATO, Diana, as an agency is different than a lot of the divisions you might see at NATO HQ, and that's because we have a board and the 32 nations sit on our board. We have one representative from each nation. So we have to make sure that we're fielding the right technology to meet the various nations

out there with a NATO. So we look for a capability alignment at the early stage as any former VC would know you know, team is everything. So is it going to be the right team to execute? We all know that former veterans may great founders actually.

I'm sure you've had a few on here, but can the team execute and then do they have that growth mindset? And we want them.

Once they come in, we're already thinking about that transition pathway ahead of time.

“What operational exercise are we going to put them into?”

How are we going to help them test for interoperability amongst the allies? And I think it's a huge advantage also for the U.S. and the Department of War as well because you know, they're able to look at a lot of the companies in NATO, Diana, usually it's at least about 20% U.S. companies historically to be honest. And these companies are able to look at and test for interoperability, which is a huge value

ad for any NATO ally, especially the U.S. too. Interoperability is one of those buzzwords that comes up in a lot of conversations, especially in a form like this, bringing everyone together. But interoperability has different scales, where we can say that we're interoperable if our nations can speak to each other and can communicate with each other.

But that's vastly different than being interoperable and saying, okay, I have this weapons platform or this ISR platform in your region. You have need for it, I'm going to give it to you, you're going to use it and give it back to me when it went. Yeah, so I'll give you just an example of this specifically.

We just had six of our startups at RUTMIS, I don't know the acronym for RUTMIS, but it's a large Portuguese naval exercise, but many of the nations attend including the U.S. So, you know, companies go in and our startups there were able to adapt like on the fly and demonstrate that they could meet NATO stand eggs, which are the regulations for interoperability. So there's a new one, stand egg 4017 for unmanned systems.

So we got a company there, they came in not being able to meet that standard, they quickly rewired their system and demonstrated that to the whole community of allies there.

“I think that's what we unlock at Diana at the early stage of development for some of these”

critical technologies. You said that countries will come in with some sort of requirement. Sure. And then you have to validate is that requirement something that is actually needed and can be sourced at this time.

When you look out at the NATO alliance and the capabilities that exist, what gaps do you think exist in the technology that you're now looking to fill? Yeah, I mean, the flavor of the month right now is counter U.S., flavor of the last couple of years. So I think that's top of mind, integrated air missile defense is top of mind, but we're

thinking about some of these capabilities in a different way. It's hard to find a startup that's doing integrated air missile defense, early stage startup. However, how do we think about pairing various emerging startups together to deliver the

So I think we're thinking about effects based capabilities in that sense.

“And that I think, you know, that is innovation in itself and that's what one thing of Diana”

can bring to the table when we look at the gaps or the long lead times for these legacy systems.

So speed of technology is critical in innovation.

So there's two components to that. Number one is how quickly can we identify the requirement, develop the technology, feel the prototype and then get it out into testing. The other piece of that is how do we now get it through the procurement cycle of a nation in order to scale it and integrate it into the force and we know that in the US, that

process has become quite long and cumbersome and there's a lot of efforts right now to try to modify that although I would argue that we've been talking about that my whole 20 years. That have been involved around the military. So how are you accelerating the technology speed and closing the gap from identifying the requirement to getting it out to the force?

Absolutely. So, you know, I just spoke about this on the panel here at GSoF and when you hit an acquisition barrier, you know, it can have significant impact. So what we have done at Diana, and this is fairly new. So this is maybe about three months old, this funding authority that we have.

We call rapid adoption service, essentially. So not only is Diana finding the best companies throughout the alliance, doing the down select, giving them non-dylative funding, but also to facilitate rapid adoption, we have this service. So once you're a Diana portfolio startup, you satisfied competitive down select. What does that allow us to do?

That allows us to work with any NATO nation out there that says, I have money, I haven't needed, I'm looking for this capability, we can then put a NATO Diana company directly on a prototyping contract without competition, right? So that in itself is one way that we are overcoming some of these barriers. So NATO nations, depending on the nation, they have longer lead times track position.

They can come to us, essentially wired transfer us the funding, and then we will put that start up on a prototyping contract. Now you might say, okay, well, what happens after the prototyping? Well, that's where we can just do a direct handoff with NATO procurement for production. So this is all new, and I want to really highlight, we, I can't go into the specifics

of our first success story of this, but it is the special operations community that has closed our first example of this, just yesterday.

And as you know, the special operations community has always been early adapters of streamlined

“acquisition and innovation, that's why, you know, I came out here for this.”

So I think we're going to see more examples of us being able to rapidly facilitate prototyping across NATO. So the country with the requirement is providing the funds, certainly there's the countries we'll have to go through whatever process they have to allocate those funds to be able to do that.

Right. So that could, in itself, could be a barrier, but like we said, it's kind of very nationwide, my nation, we are NATO, so most nations do have that direct transfer capability with NATO. Yeah.

What countries do you think from an innovation standpoint are leading the rest of the alliance? Yeah. I think we've seen the Netherlands do a lot. They came in really quickly, they like to test with a lot of our startups and put them directly on contract.

“I think you're looking at, especially nations that have, they might have a less of a traditional”

defense industrial base, you look at the U.S. who've got all these primes here, and most of the primes have presences across Europe. But there are some nations that there's a less of that large defense prime presence. And so they're really turning to some of the emerging technology capabilities and other ways of doing things for innovation purposes.

And I think we see a lot of companies doing that, especially towards the East as well. When faced with the challenge, Green Braise adapt, overcome, and keep moving forward. Now is your chance to stand with them.

Join the 1952 society with a monthly gift of just $19.52 to provide critical medical devices

for wounded, ill, and injured Green Braise. Your support fuels their recovery, helping them return to duty, or continue serving their communities. A Green Braise mission never stops. Neither should our support.

How do you convince a country that it is a better idea to get involved with a program

like this, look at a smaller early stage company who might need their requirement, then going to a big defense manufacturer, especially when you have resource constrained countries who may not be willing to lose money. I mean, one of the big things in DC is, you've got to be willing to lose what you put in.

Yeah. And some nations are naturally more risk-averse than others. So they might still choose to go down that pathway.

“I think what I would say is that within Diana, we have a couple of superpowers.”

One is, we're keeping a pulse on the market, the demand signal. We get thousands and thousands of applications, so we're really able to develop a pattern

of recognition of what is novel, what is state of the art.

We have a great relationship with the venture capital community. And usually, the venture capital community that's investing in defense, it's nice to know where they're placed in their bets as well, because they usually have a defense background. So we bring access to that type of assessment for some of those nations. And I mean, how many nations are coming forward and getting involved?

Thirty-two nations. So... Well, thirty-two have a seat on the board. Thirty-two have put on the board. But how many are coming with requirements?

Yeah. A large, a lot. I would say. The majority. There are a few nations out there that are less active.

But look, now that we are up at full operating capacity, we get out. We proactively recruit. We proactively look at who wants to iterate with us, where can we get out on a range and test? So there's other ways for us to bring some of those nations to the table and

“work with them on, "Hey, how can we help you with your innovation base?”

How can we help you send more companies develop and grow more companies that will be right for NATO-Diana?" As you look across the market, the industry to see what's out there. And then also, analyze our adversaries. Where do you think NATO is behind our adversaries?

Yeah. I mean, that's a tough question.

I think I like to always think we're ahead, plus...

Uh, me too, but... Yeah, I think there's a lot, again, as I mentioned, we're seeing a lot of lessons learned on Ukraine, the innovation cycle there is weeks. So I think a lot of times, you know, we're going to have to be able to forward deploy low costs, the trade-able systems, manufacture at scale.

We don't have time to bring things back to be fixed, to bring things back for large adjustments. So I think being able to really be closer to the front lines, forward manufacturing, lower costs, the trade-able, unmanned systems, integrated... I already mentioned the two capabilities, I think, where we need to spend a lot of focus

on how can we get more innovative and solving the problem set of, you know, air missile defense and carry us? I think when we look at assessing NATO's capabilities and the countries of NATO against our adversaries, you almost have to make it a policy question more than a capability question, and you'll hear people get up, and I rightfully agree with this, that the U.S. military,

especially our European allies, are the most advanced militarily than any other nation in the world, especially our adversaries, like the Chinese and the Russians. But when you look at how much more quickly they can field things, and our adversaries willingness to use them, that's where NATO and the U.S. may tend to lag our adversaries. Yeah, I mean, I think it's scary, right?

I mean, we've seen Russia's ability over the past couple of years to really ramp up and scale their own production of drones, right? And they're getting more tech savvy. The good thing is, there's been, I do think there's been a mindset, there's been a reset this year, right?

The NATO summit, there's a new mindset, there's going to be more spent, you know, we're going to be up to 5% spending, and I think 1.5% of that has to be spent on innovation.

“I think that the country is especially along the eastern border, right?”

They live this, you know, every day. And so I think the word defense used to not be top of mind for some of these nations, and it is now, it's an acceptable word, especially in the venture capital community in Europe as well. Before it was like, no, no, no, no, we're not going to think about defense, but that we've

seen that shifts very recently. So I do think from a timing perspective, or headed

Yeah, yeah.

When you look at it, Russia doesn't have better drones than the US, but can they feel

the amount of faster rate? Yeah. Have a willingness to use them in ways that the US is not possibly China doesn't have better aircraft carriers, but they can build them out of faster rate and deploy them faster. Right.

So is it a capability gap or is it a willingness gap? Right.

“That's kind of what you have to start to look at.”

You have makes it challenging when you're trying to advance and field these capabilities because, yes, we want to stay ahead, but at the end of the day, we've got to be willing. What is the litmus test that allows us to actually field some of this technology, right? So in a way that makes a difference on the battlefield. When you look at emerging technologies across NATO, how would you define readiness?

What is readiness of NATO look like? Yeah, I think NATO has its own processes. You have the Council of National Arrimand Directors. You've got the various force planners. They've had their system and they've used for years, and I think that there's strong

foundation there, the important thing is what we need to do is make sure that we're aligning with what they're working on at NATO HQ, right? With the Council of Arrimand Directors and these force planners, and make sure that we're acting as a bridge to the emerging technology market, right? So that we're translating those legacy needs into needs that might resonate with the start

of the emerging tech community.

“It's important to not lose sight also of, okay, what's on the horizon?”

We have to always be looking 10 years down the road.

We can't be just distracted by this counter-UAS crisis that we're kind of facing right now if you've been reading the headlines. So it's really about what are the emerging technologies on the horizon? We got to pay attention to quantum, bio-security, and then what do we need now? What are the higher technology readiness levels now that we need to field?

So I think, you know, where I sit, we're trying to act as a bridge for that. Yep. I did a chance before this to sit down with Lisa Costa, who was the Chief Innovation Officer at the US Space Force, and also held a Chief Information Officer position at Socom. I asked her the same question I'll ask you because I think it's important and you just

brought it up. When you look down the road, five, 10 years from now, what does that battlefield look like in terms of technology and how does the advancements in AI and unmanned systems compare to today's human centric battlefield? Yeah, I think it's a good question.

I think when the Ukraine conflict started, we actually thought that maybe it would be a little bit more advanced, and then we saw some legacy tactics. But now... French warfare? Yeah, I mean, I think we were surprised by that, at least I was.

“But I think looking into the future, cost is going to become an issue, right?”

We've got to develop low cost. It's going to have to be, as I mentioned, forward manufactured, quickly fielded the electronic warfare domain space and cyber are going to become.

They are ready critical areas that we operate in, but I don't think that's going to change.

I think figuring out how we also hand in hand look at our own critical infrastructure and resilience, right, in urban areas and pair that with thinking about, okay, what does this look like in the battlefield? But what does this look like in urban areas? We're seeing drones intercepted and fall down and just fill in populations now.

So I think looking into the future, we're going to have to be, okay, we're on the forebattle field, but how do we think about defending critical infrastructure as well? I'm talking about denial of service detects. Right. So we've got the power.

We've got the water. I mean, a war half a world away, especially for us as Americans who are insulated by oceans and generally friendly partners to our north and our south, war's not a necessarily front center every day like it is in Europe. Right.

For cut the power, cut the water through a cyber attack or sabotage, now we're going to have real problemers. Right. As long we look at the effects on the US populace and what's really going to affect and put a nation at war, I come back to denial of service detects.

Yeah, scary. Well, no, and are they leveraged the battlefield of today, wherever that may be? So yeah, a lot of things to think about when we talk about innovation and where it might

Yeah. All right.

So what's next for dying?

“You've got to scale up to 150 companies, how are you going to do that?”

Yeah. So we're already scaled up. As I mentioned, we got 20 sites across the alliance and we've got 180 test centers. So we're fully scaled to support our core program. But I do think, as I mentioned, Diana, we've been given a lot of leeway and how we

want to innovate and how we want to begin fielding technologies. So what I think you're going to start seeing is our ability to really rapidly spin up just like that and do a two months rapid iteration with warfighters, with operators.

I'm going to look heavily to the special operations community.

I think to come to the table and iterate, get things demoed, you know, fail fast or succeed fast, right?

“So I think you're going to see some rapid spin ups out of us off cycle, the venture capital”

community. So we are chartered to stand up a trusted capital database. And one of the pillars of NATO Diana is to protect. So how do we make sure that all of these hundreds of startups coming through NATO Diana that are getting fielded, have access to the trusted capital that they need to succeed.

So NATO Diana is going to lead the way on how do we bring these capital providers into

a high trust environment so that number one, they understand the demand signal from NATO

from across the alliance and then number two companies coming in through Diana have access to that capital because, you know, the government can't fund alone, you know, and I think where the magic happens is where private capital begins to see value in some of these capabilities. Yep.

Well, the next step is we got to circle back on a conversation in some time and we got to interview one of these companies who gets accelerated through the program and then the leadership of the country that actually puts it to use. Yeah, there's a lot of winners coming out of Diana, you're going to see more.

“And as I mentioned, I think the special operation community is going to be the early adopter”

of a lot of the technologies and an early adopter of NATO's Diana's, you know, streamlined pathways for getting tech fielded out to the warfighter. Awesome. All right. What are we going to follow up on that?

Great. Absolutely. Appreciate you taking the time to down with us. Thank you so much. Thanks for having me.

American jet birds went on to form the foundation of the United States Special Forces in the Special Activities Directorate of the Central Intelligence Agency. Thanks for listening to the Jedberg podcast on the official program of the Green Breit Foundation. I'm your creator and host, friend, Richard.

Join us next week for a new episode on Apple Spotify wherever you get your podcast. Check us out on YouTube for full episodes, highlights, and other long and short-form content. If you like what you heard, give us a like and leave a review. Follow the Jedberg podcast and the Green Breit Foundation on LinkedIn, Instagram, Facebook, and our next reference.

Send your comments and inquiries to [email protected]. Ask former members of Special Operations Forces, the Jedberg Media Channel, and the Green Breit Foundation remain committed to supporting all generations of U.S. Army Special Forces and their families. Thanks for joining us on this episode.

How you prepared today to determine success tomorrow. (upbeat music)