This lesson continues our broad look at the US intelligence community, focusing in on the role of policymakers, the evolution of priorities, and thus the organization of the intelligence community, and, quite importantly, ethical issues in intelligence. We will also zero in on the role and place of GEOINT in the community. This is another heavy reading week, with more of those quizzes you are learning to love. Once again, we are going to leverage the knowledge and experience of Mark Lowenthal and his textbook Intelligence: From Secrets to Policy. We are also going to examine NGA's foundational doctrinal manual: NGA Publication 1.0 Geospatial Intelligence (GEOINT) Basic Doctrine, published in April 2018 (link listed under Required Readings). Government doctrinal publications are authoritative in that they provide official definitions, delineate roles and responsibilities, and articulate techniques, procedures, and processes. Much of the underlying authority for doctrine comes from US federal law, as codified in the US Code. Recognize, however, that in the US, "doctrine is not dogma." In other words, doctrine is a guide that coordinates the efforts of agencies and provides guidance on how to conduct business, but operational variation from doctrine is allowed as long as one does not violate the law and is successful.
My teaching approach this week is the same as last week in that you have to read four chapters from the textbook and scan NGA Pub 1.0. I want you to read the book in conjunction with the online lesson. I will provide a brief pre-read commentary for each chapter that asks you to contemplate several questions as you read and provides some other perspectives for comparison. At the end of this module you can take Lesson 5 - GRADED Quiz (#4) one time for your lesson grade.
I suggest that if you have the time, you read the rest of Lowenthal's book. The chapters I did not assign on Counterintelligence, Covert Action, Oversight and Accountability, and Foreign Intelligence Services make for fascinating reading.
At the end of this lesson, you will be able to:
If you have any questions now or at any point during this week, please feel free to post them to the GEOG 882 - General Discussion Forum in Canvas.
Lesson 5 will take us one week to complete. Please refer to the Calendar in Canvas for specific time frames and due dates. Specific directions for the assignments below can be found within this lesson.
It is important that you understand the doctrinal underpinnings of the premier GEOINT organization in the US and perhaps the world.
To get a flavor for the topic, please take a few minutes (4:46 running time) to view Episode Three, Chapter One of the Geospatial Revolution Series.
KEVIN POMFRET: Right now, you can track people with their knowledge or without their knowledge. But, is that really an invasion of privacy or is that just new technology?
MATT O'CONNELL: It's important that we be able to look at any place in the world because if trouble strikes, our government has to deal with the situation.
LETITIA LONG: We are the eyes of our nation, if you will. You need geospatial intelligence to target bad guys.
JAN VAN SICKLE: Mapping to some degree has always been driven by conflict, shall we call or war.
ON-SCREEN TEXT (SET TO MUSIC): In the early 1990s, the Socialist Federal REpublic of Yugoslavia broke apart along ethnic lines. War engulfed the region and the central republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina became a killing field.
UNKNOWN NEWS ANCHOR: In the face of the Bosnian Serb Offensive, another Muslim Enclave Falls. Crisis in the Balkans.
UNKNOWN NEWS ANCHOR: The shelling continued for a second day.
WESLEY K. CLARK: A line of siege was established on the hills around Sarajevo. There are snipers shooting people. Tens of thousands of people were killed.
IRV BUCK: In Bosnia and Herzegovina, we had three separate groups. You had the Croatians. You had enclaves of Serbs. nd you had enclaves those Muslims. It was real mess. Finally, the West decided had to it had to iron this situation out by cutting up the country. So, this is what the Dayton Accords were all about.
IRV BUCK: We had to figure this out so that everybody gets a fair shake here.
ALIJA IZETBEGOVIC: I believe that he did not last for long.
IRV BUCK: And the only way to do that was really geospatially. We brought in this thing called PowerScene. We took digital translation data and we overlaid it with imagery. They have joystick. You can fly over the train. Back down into the valley. We were able to get them to agree that, yes, this is a majority Muslim village, or this is a majority Serb village.
WESLEY K. CLARK: Garage door was an isolated enclave, which was populated by Muslims. The Bosnian Muslims wouldn't give up this piece of ground. They demanded secure access to it. And the question is, where would the lines be drawn.
RICHARD JOHNSON: Eventually the solution was to build a road to open a corridor to them. We used PowerScene to fly a route over the mountains that was far enough away from the Bosnian Serbs that the traffic would not be intercepted or shot at.
JAN VAN SICKLE: We needed a wider corridor. And we had to demonstrate that to the president of Serbia.
WESLEY K. CLARK: Milosevic was smart but he wasn't a field soldier. He never walked that terrain. Well, can't we make this more narrow? Why so many kilometers? Well, you can see right here, Mr. president. Here's the mountain top on one side. Here's the mountain top on the other. You can't draw a line down the side of a hill like this and have it defensible. They have to have the high ground on either side of this valley. He could see this with real terrain. Ultimately, he couldn't beat the argument and we had our road and that's what we needed.
RICHARD JOHNSON: This was the first successful use of deployable digital technology in diplomatic negotiations.
SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC: For the great efforts, the United States invested.
RICHARD JOHNSON: It was hugely satisfying and emotional to know that we helped in the war.
PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON: After nearly four years of 250,000 people killed, the people of Bosnia finally have a chance to turn from the horror of war to the promise of peace.
Then read the NGA fact sheet above and complete the required readings. If you are really enthusiastic, look over Joint Publication 2-03 Geospatial Intelligence Support to Joint Operations (a link to the Optional Reading is provided below).
Joint Publication 2-03 Geospatial Intelligence Support to Joint Operations [7] (PDF). Recall that NGA is both a DoD combat support agency and a national intelligence agency. Read this article if you are interested in learning more about the role of GEOINT within DoD.
Prepare for the quiz by answering the following questions.
Lowenthal notes that most authors and intelligence experts do not consider the policy maker to be part of the intelligence process. Lowenthal disagrees, and that is why he adds two stages to the process. Remember that, according to Lowenthal, "Intelligence refers to information that meets the stated or understood needs of policy makers and has been collected, processed, and narrowed to meet those needs." The needs of policy makers drive intelligence priorities, which will drive the intelligence process, and, very importantly, drive resource allocation. Note also the problems that can arise when the "understood" needs of policy makers are unclear or contentious. To put this another way, the needs of the client policy maker drive the mission and activities of the geospatial intelligence professional. A clear understanding of the client's requirements (which may change over time) is essential to the successful intelligence enterprise.
Read Lowenthal's Chapter 9: "The Role of the Policy Maker" in Intelligence: From Secrets to Policy.
As you read, do some critical thinking and ask yourself:
Now consider how this discussion applies to GEOINT. According to NGA Pub 1.0:
GEOINT can also create a Common Operational Picture (COP) of a specific area by effectively using multiple and advanced sensors, multiple types of data and information (including operations, planning, logistics, etc), as well as multiple intelligence disciplines (INTs) to present a comprehensive visual depiction. This capability provides many advantages for the warfighter, national security policymakers, homeland security personnel, and IC collaborators by precisely locating activities and objects, assessing and discerning the meaning of events, and providing context for decision makers.
In short, GEOINT provides innovative, versatile solutions for meeting today's demanding intelligence requirements and predicting tomorrow's future threat environment. (NGA Pub 1.0 pages 5-6, emphasis added)
NGA Publication 1.0 Geospatial Intelligence (GEOINT) Basic Doctrine
This passage points out that NGA provides GEOINT products and support to a wide customer base beyond federal government policy makers as envisioned by Lowenthal. NGA customers also include warfighters (military commanders and their forces engaged in planning and operations), the homeland security community (focused on both terrorism and disaster planning and response—i.e., all hazards preparedness and response), and other domestic and international partners (allies).
Prepare for the quiz by answering the following questions.
Read Lowenthal's Chapter 12: "The Intelligence Agenda" in Intelligence: From Secrets to Policy.
As you read, do some critical thinking and ask yourself:
Compare and contrast Lowenthal’s priority changes between the 8th and 9th editions. Why have these priorities changed, and what is the impact on GEOINT
Note how Lowenthal’s priorities changed in Chapter 12 between the eighth and ninth additions. He promoted Heath Issues presumably due to the COVID 19 pandemic and concerns over future pandemics. He also made Climate Change its own category. While there are still "climate deniers” out there, the position of the US Government in the Fourth National Climate Assessment [8] is:
This assessment concludes, based on extensive evidence, that it is extremely likely that human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse gases, are the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century. For the warming over the last century, there is no convincing alternative explanation supported by the extent of the observational evidence.Highlights of the Findings of the U.S. Global Change Research Program Climate Science Special Report (2017).
The assessment goes on to indicate there will be serious issues for US national security due to global climate change. I’ll let you speculate on why he dropped Peacekeeping Operations from the list.
8th Edition Intelligence Priorities (2019) |
9th Edition Intelligence Priorities (2023) |
---|---|
Cyberspace | Cyberspace |
Terrorism | Terrorism |
Proliferation | Proliferation |
Narcotics | Health Issues |
Economics | Climate Change |
Demographics | Narcotics |
Health and Environment | Economics and Energy |
Peacekeeping Operations | Demographics |
Support to Military | Support to Military |
Prepare for the quiz by answering the following questions.
Read Lowenthal's Chapter 13: "Ethical and Moral Issues in Intelligence" in Intelligence: From Secrets to Policy.
As you read, do some critical thinking and ask yourself:
Dr. Joseph Czika, Senior Program Officer, ICSB, NASEM: Welcome to the colloquium entitled revolution in Intelligence Affairs the Future Strategic Environment. My name is Joe Czika. I am a staff member of the Intelligence Community Studies Board of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. This is the 15th colloquium in the partnership of the Academies with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. You will notice that this is the third of a series of colloquia on the Revolution in Intelligence Affairs. I refer you to the ICSB website for information on the prior to colloquia and to access the videos of those presentations. Before introducing the representatives from the sponsoring organizations, I want to make a few administrative announcements. This is an unclassified meeting. This colloquium is being held as a virtual colloquium. As is our custom. This colloquium is being video recorded and the recordings will be available in the near future. Check the ICSB website for notice of their availability. Please note, at the bottom of your screen, or somewhere on your screen, is a feature that allows you to ask questions for our panel, both during the three individual panels and the grand panel at the end of the program. In those questions, please identify yourself and clearly state your question and whether it should be directed at any specific speaker or the entire panel.
You can submit those questions anytime during the colloquium. Also available to you is the colloquium program or agenda, complete with speaker biographical information. Lastly, I would like to thank Dr. Anthony Vinci for his invaluable support for this series of colloquial. To extend a welcome from the office of the Director of National Intelligence is Mr. Dan Flynn. He's the director of the Net assessments in the ODNI. In this position, he is responsible for developing forecasts and comparative assessments to identify emerging intelligence challenges and opportunities for U. S. Intelligence capabilities. Prior to his current assignment, Mr. Flynn was the Director of the Global Security Program for the National Intelligence Council's Strategic Futures Group. Prior to joining the NEC, Mr. Flynn served as the chairman of CIA's senior analytics service. Mr. Flynn is a distinguished graduate of the National War College, where he earned a master's degree in National Security Strategy. He also earned a BS. Degree in aerospace engineering from Boston University. Dan, thank you for your introduction and welcome.
Mr. Dan Flynn, Director, Office of IC Net Assessment, ODNI: Thank you, Joe, for that kind introduction. I want to thank the National Academy of Science and the IC Studies Board, as well as all our speakers today for supporting our event. To give everybody a little more context of why we're here. As Joe said, I'm from the Office of Director of National Intelligence, specifically the Policy and Capabilities Directorate, and it's the responsibility of our directorate to articulate a path forward for the intelligence community. And we do this also by investing in strategic bets to address enduring challenges as well as potential opportunities for the IC looking forward what they need to prepare for in the future. Before we can prepare for the future though we need to understand what that future is that we're preparing for. And that's the job of my team and ICNet assessments. To think about intelligence, environment ten to 20 years from now and identify those emerging challenges and opportunities for the IC to inform our senior leadership so they can make better decisions about what are the resources and investments we need to make as a community to be prepared for that future. Our role is similar to the Pentagon's office in that assessment that many of you may be familiar with that was set up by the late Andy Marshall back in the 1970s.
Dr. Joseph Czika: They looked at the future security environment to inform the senior DoD leadership on the changes that were occurring that the DoD needed to prepare for part of that work. They looked at the so called revolution in military affairs, which looked at was it possible to have technological innovation, organizational adaptation and doctrinal concept improvements to create revolutionary changes in military capabilities. Many now are suggesting that there isn't on the verge of a revolution intelligence affairs. And so, hence purpose of this colloquium. And as Joe mentioned, we've had a series of these. This is the third in the series. Our first was last April when we talked about technology drivers that might shape a revolution, intelligence affairs, things like artificial intelligence and machine learning and the explosion of information that we'll be seeing from the Internet of things and how that's going to change the conduct intelligence. Our second colloquial was in late June, which we talked about organizational implications of revolutionary intelligence affairs and how the IC might have to react to that. Today's colloquium is looking at drivers in the strategic environment and how that may shape the future as well as shape intelligence. The panels today will also discuss kind of looking back over the series, what are the key implications for the intelligence community going forward.
Mr. Dan Flynn: Now, many of you may be wondering why we're going outside the community to have these conversations. Well, history has shown that many organizations, often when they look within themselves, fail to see the revolutionary changes that are occurring on the outside. And so it's important that we speak with some people who have been thinking deeply about a lot of these issues. And luckily for us, we have a great panel series of panels of experts, many of whom I've had the privilege to work for or work with during my career. So, I'm really looking forward to what they come up with today and what insights they have for us. And I look forward to working with them again and engaging on this topic some more in the future. So, with that, my thanks to everyone and I'll hand it back to Joe. Thank you.
Dr. Joseph Czika: Thank you, Dan. Now to extend a welcome from the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine is Dr. Scott Weidman. He's the deputy executive director for the Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences of the National Academy of Sciences. Prior to that, he served as the Director of the National Research Council's Board on Mathematical Sciences and analytics, and he has held many leadership positions in the NRC. He holds a doctorate and master's degree degrees from the University of Virginia and a bachelor's degree in Mathematics and Material Science from Northwestern University. Scott, thank you for your welcoming comments.
Dr. Scott Weidman, Deputy Director, DEPS, NASEM: Thank you, Joe. And thank you, Dan. As Joe said, I just want to offer a welcome to all of you for coming to this, especially if you haven't interacted with the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine in the past. We are very energized to play a role as a kind of a matchmaker between the intelligence community and the broader world of science, engineering and medicine. We are not part of the government. We are a nonprofit that primarily serves to provide advice to the government. And we're a fairly large organization. We have at any given time, there's approximately 500 or 600 committees of experts serving pro bono to help plan activities, conduct studies, or oversee activities like this one. And we collectively put out about 200 reports a year. Most of those are public in the public domain, some fraction is classified and more limited. So, we cover a wide range of topics. And the main reason that this activity of our Intelligent Community Studies Board, which is the parent organization for this forum today, was set up to establish that connection between the IC and a broader science and technology communities. So, we're very interested in doing what we can to help.
Dr. Joseph Czika: We're very sensitive to the fact that, as Dan said, a lot of this could be done behind within the community itself in a more closed session. But there is a lot of benefit to reaching further, trying to see over the horizon, trying to understand different perspectives that can maybe forced all surprise. So, that's all i wanted to say. Welcome very much to all of you. We look forward to today's event and we look forward to a long connection between our communities. Thank you!
Dr. Joseph Czika: Thank you, Scott. As you're aware, we're departing from our normal practice of presenting individual speakers for today's colloquium. Rather than the usual five speakers speaking individually, we have great 12 experts along with our moderator talking to us via panel sessions. In each session, each panel member may open with a statement, no longer than about 10 minutes. When all panel members have completed their statements, the general discussion will be moderated by Anthony Vincy. At the conclusion of the third panel discussion, he will moderate a general discussion among all the panelists from all three sub-panels. You can submit your questions at any time using the smartsheet available on your screen.
We know from earlier readings that one of the mortal sins in the intelligence business is to politicize intelligence. Consider the perspective of a former CIA analyst in assessing the track record of a former Secretary of Defense (who you will recall controls about 80% of the intelligence assets on a daily basis, and is a major consumer of intelligence products).
ON THE POLITICIZATION OF INTELLIGENCE [12]
Tomes, Robert. "On the politicization of intelligence"; War on the Rocks, September 29, 2015
The Politics of Intelligence and the Politicization of Intelligence: The American Experience [13] (Hastedt, Glenn).
Abstract:
The relationship between intelligence analysis and policy decisions is a contentious one with both policymakers and intelligence analysts frequently expressing frustration over its underlying dynamics and with each faulting the behavior of the other. This article examines one aspect of this relationship, the manner in which intelligence analysis can become politicized. Rather than view politicization as an aberration it is treated here as a normal feature of intelligence analysis. A typology of politicization organized around the concepts of hard and soft politicization is presented and illustrated with historical examples from the American experience with intelligence analysis.
Prepare for the quiz by answering the following questions.
Read Lowenthal's Chapter 14: "Intelligence Reform" in Intelligence: From Secrets to Policy.
As you read, do some critical thinking and ask yourself:
Prepare for the quiz by answering the following questions.
Listen to two simulated on-the-ground news broadcasts about the crisis in Atlantica:
Why Atlantica and Why Now? [14] (6.6 Mb mp3 file)
(Transcript of Why Atlantica and Why Now?) [15]
Fighting in the South-Central Highlands of Atlantica [16] (8.1 Mb mp3 file)
(Transcript of Fighting in the South-Central Highlands of Atlantica) [17]
Yet again, we had a lot of reading this week. Completion of this lesson gives you a basic understanding of issues affecting the US intelligence community. Our four chapters and additional readings covered:
Remember once again that what you read in the Lowenthal book was written by a national security insider who is a veteran of the CIA. His personal history and experience give him a particular cultural filter. This lesson included a doctrinal publication, NGA fact sheets, and several articles from media outlets. Your challenge is to be a critical thinker and to use your higher order thinking skills of interpretation, analysis and synthesis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation in utilizing the readings.
Your last challenge this week is to take Lesson 5 - GRADED Quiz (#4) on this week's readings.
Return to Lesson 5 in Canvas. Look for the Lesson 5 - GRADED Quiz (#4), where you will find the twenty-five question quiz on this week's readings. Each question is worth two points. Take all the time you want and feel free to use your book, but be forewarned. This is another tough quiz. To do well, you must have read and studied the readings.
Before you move on to Lesson 6, double-check the Lesson 5 Checklist [4] to make sure you have completed all the required activities for this lesson.
In Lesson 7, you will be required to complete four Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) online training courses. Please note that FEMA's Independent Study Exams require a FEMA Student Identification (SID) Number. If you do not yet have a SID, register for one today at FEMA Student Identification System [19]. For directions on how to request an alternative ID number, please see FEMA's Frequently Asked Questions on that same page.
Before we get too far ahead of ourselves, you have to get through Lesson 5 - GRADED Quiz (#4) successfully. Good Luck!
Links
[1] https://www.nga.mil/about/About_Us.html
[2] https://irp.fas.org/agency/nga/doctrine.pdf
[3] http://issuu.com/nga_geoint/docs/2015-nga-strategy
[4] https://www.e-education.psu.edu/geog882/node/1746
[5] https://www.youtube.com/c/wpsuvideo
[6] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XofeIB1v7s0
[7] https://irp.fas.org/doddir/dod/jp2_03.pdf
[8] https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/
[9] https://www.psu.edu/news/university-park/story/penn-state-begins-first-online-geospatial-intelligence-program/
[10] https://www.nationalacademies.org/icsb/intelligence-community-studies-board
[11] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vuqOqLl30Y
[12] https://warontherocks.com/2015/09/on-the-politicization-of-intelligence/
[13] http://www.researchgate.net/publication/263227524_The_Politics_of_Intelligence_and_the_Politicization_of_Intelligence_The_American_Experience
[14] https://www.e-education.psu.edu/geog882/sites/www.e-education.psu.edu.geog882/files/file/WNNAtlantica1.mp3
[15] https://www.e-education.psu.edu/geog882_2023/node/2097
[16] https://www.e-education.psu.edu/geog882/sites/www.e-education.psu.edu.geog882/files/file/WNNAtlantica2.mp3
[17] https://www.e-education.psu.edu/geog882_2023/node/2098
[18] https://www.e-education.psu.edu/geog882/sites/www.e-education.psu.edu.geog882/files/file/map.html
[19] https://cdp.dhs.gov/femasid