DoD Security Policy is Incoherent and Unmanageable, IG Says
“DoD security policy is fragmented, redundant, and inconsistent,” according to a new report from the Department of Defense Inspector General. This is not a new development, the report noted, but one that has persisted despite decades of criticism.
There are at least 43 distinct DoD security policies “covering the functional areas of information security, industrial security, operations security, research and technology protection, personnel security, physical security, and special access programs,” the Inspector General report noted.
“The sheer volume of security policies that are not coordinated or integrated makes it difficult for those at the field level to ensure consistent and comprehensive policy implementation.”
The solution to this fragmentation and incoherence is the development of a comprehensive and integrated security policy, the IG report said.
Lacking an integrated framework and an “overarching security policy…, [the] resulting policy can be stove-piped, overlapping and contradictory.”
The issuance of such an overarching security policy, described as “the necessary first step,” is expected later this year.
See “Assessment of Security Within the Department of Defense — Security Policy,” DoD Inspector General report DoDIG-2012-114, July 27, 2012.
After months of delay, the council tasked by President Trump to review the FEMA released its final report. Our disaster policy nerds have thoughts.
FAS and FLI partnered to build a series of convenings and reports across the intersections of artificial intelligence (AI) with biosecurity, cybersecurity, nuclear command and control, military integration, and frontier AI governance. This project brought together leaders across these areas and created a space that was rigorous, transpartisan, and solutions-oriented to approach how we should think about how AI is rapidly changing global risks.
Investment should instead be directed at sectors where American technology and innovation exist but the infrastructure to commercialize them domestically does not—and where the national security case is clear.
To tune into the action on the ground, we convened practitioners, state and local officials, advocates, and policy experts to discuss what it will actually take to deploy clean energy faster, modernize electricity systems, and lower costs for households.