The diminishing U.S. lead in various scientific disciplines related to national security has posed a particular challenge for U.S. intelligence agencies, according to a newly released 2006 report (pdf) of the Intelligence Science Board.
“While the overall effect of a declining S&T [science and technology] position on the United States remains the subject of debate, there can be no debate concerning its enormous impact on the Intelligence Community,” the report said. “Today’s collection and analysis needs… require an entirely new approach to increasing the contribution of S&T to the intelligence enterprise. Neither the Intelligence Community nor the S&T establishment has put forth viable strategies for accomplishing this change.”
The authors endorse the creation of the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA), which was in fact established. Otherwise, the report is largely derivative of previous studies on similar topics, and is mostly devoid of original analysis. See “The Intelligence Community and Science and Technology: The Challenge of the New S&T Landscape,” Intelligence Science Board, November 2006, released December 2010.
The Intelligence Science Board, which was disestablished last year, provided independent science advice to the Director of National Intelligence. Its most important and influential product was a 2006 report entitled “Educing Information: Interrogation: Science and Art” (pdf) on the weak scientific basis for prisoner interrogation practices.
With summer 2025 in the rearview mirror, we’re taking a look back to see how federal actions impacted heat preparedness and response on the ground, what’s still changing, and what the road ahead looks like for heat resilience.
Satellite imagery of RAF Lakenheath reveals new construction of a security perimeter around ten protective aircraft shelters in the designated nuclear area, the latest measure in a series of upgrades as the base prepares for the ability to store U.S. nuclear weapons.
It will take consistent leadership and action to navigate the complex dangers in the region and to avoid what many analysts considered to be an increasingly possible outcome, a nuclear conflict in East Asia.
Getting into a shutdown is the easy part, getting out is much harder. Both sides will be looking to pin responsibility on each other, and the court of public opinion will have a major role to play as to who has the most leverage for getting us out.