Meaning: The quote "We seem to be our own worst enemies. We should require critical U.S. infrastructure to remain in U.S. hands." by Duncan Hunter, a politician, reflects a sentiment often expressed in discussions about national security and economic independence. This statement suggests a concern about the potential vulnerability of critical infrastructure, such as energy, telecommunications, and transportation systems, if they were to fall under the control of foreign entities. It also implies that such infrastructure is currently at risk of being transferred to non-U.S. ownership, which could have negative implications for the country's security and sovereignty.

The notion of being our own worst enemies speaks to the idea that domestic decisions and actions can inadvertently weaken the country's position and leave it susceptible to external threats. This could refer to a range of scenarios, such as lax regulations allowing for the acquisition of critical infrastructure by foreign companies or the outsourcing of key capabilities to overseas entities. In either case, the concern is that the U.S. might be undermining its own interests and security through shortsighted or misguided policies.

The call to require critical U.S. infrastructure to remain in U.S. hands is a proactive stance aimed at protecting vital national assets from potential risks associated with foreign ownership or control. This sentiment aligns with the broader concept of economic nationalism, which emphasizes the importance of safeguarding domestic industries and resources. Proponents of this approach argue that maintaining control over critical infrastructure is essential for ensuring national security, economic stability, and the ability to respond effectively to emergencies and crises.

From a national security perspective, the control of critical infrastructure is a matter of strategic importance. Energy, telecommunications, and transportation networks are essential for the functioning of modern society and the operations of the military. As such, they are potential targets for adversaries seeking to disrupt or undermine the U.S. This is particularly relevant in an era of cyber threats, where vulnerabilities in essential infrastructure could be exploited to inflict significant harm on the country.

Economic considerations also come into play, as the ownership and operation of critical infrastructure can have far-reaching implications for jobs, investment, and technological innovation. There is a concern that foreign ownership of key assets could lead to the loss of control over important sectors of the economy, as well as the transfer of valuable intellectual property and know-how to overseas competitors.

It's worth noting that discussions around the ownership and control of critical infrastructure often intersect with debates about trade, globalization, and the role of government in regulating economic activity. While advocates of free trade and open markets argue that foreign investment can bring benefits such as capital inflows and technology transfer, others caution against the potential risks and vulnerabilities that may arise from excessive reliance on external actors for critical resources and services.

In the context of the quote, Duncan Hunter's perspective reflects a position that emphasizes the need to prioritize national interests and security when making decisions about the ownership and control of critical infrastructure. This view is informed by concerns about the potential consequences of ceding control over essential assets to non-U.S. entities, and it underscores the importance of maintaining sovereignty and resilience in the face of evolving geopolitical and economic challenges.

In conclusion, the quote by Duncan Hunter encapsulates a call to action aimed at protecting the U.S.'s critical infrastructure from potential threats associated with foreign ownership or control. It highlights the intersection of national security, economic stability, and sovereignty in discussions about the strategic importance of maintaining domestic control over essential assets. This sentiment reflects broader debates about the balance between economic openness and the imperative to safeguard vital national interests, and it underscores the complex considerations that inform decisions about the ownership and operation of critical infrastructure.