US Intelligence Challenged by Foreign Technological Innovation
“The increasing pace and adoption of global scientific and technological discovery heighten the risk of strategic or tactical surprise and, over time, reduce the advantages of our intelligence capabilities,” according to a new report on U.S. intelligence research and development programs prepared by a congressionally-mandated Commission.
“Foreign countries’ growing expertise and proficiency in a number of emerging or potentially disruptive technologies and industries–gained either by improving their own capabilities, by using surreptitious methods, or by taking advantage of an erosion of U.S. capabilities and U.S. control over critical supply chains–have the potential to cause great harm to the national security of the United States and its allies,” the report said.
In order to adapt, the report said, the US intelligence community will need to place renewed emphasis on scientific and technical intelligence; improve coordination and management of competing collection and analysis programs; and accelerate the production of actionable intelligence, among other recommended steps.
See the Report of the National Commission for the Review of the Research and Development Programs of the United States Intelligence Community, Unclassified Version, released November 2013 (NYT, WP).
The Commission also produced a White Paper on The IC’s Role Within U.S. Cyber R&D.
Confirmation that the construction of the security perimeter and associated security infrastructure at RAF Lakenheath are still ongoing once again raises questions about whether U.S. nuclear weapons have already been deployed to the base.
Alaskans are sensibly pulling back from the vogue for bans and returning to a western tradition that has worked for more than half a century – one that welcomes innovation but also oversees it closely.
The strength of our nation’s data policy isn’t just in the rules we write, but in how effectively we translate those rules into a system that prioritizes the public good. Join us in this movement to design and build more resilient national data policies.
The human cost is measured in deaths. The financial cost is measured in the $52 billion taxpayers pay annually end stage renal disease – double NASA’s budget.