• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

"Book" Club: Project 2025, Chapter 4, Part IV: Intelligence (1 Viewer)

The ultimate goal of the chapter on Defense is to "transform our armed forces for maximum effectiveness in an era of great-power competition by ”reestablishing a culture of command accountability, nonpoliticaiization, and warfighting focus.

As I go through Chapter 4, I’ll have to break this into parts. Written by former Trump Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller, most of this chapter deals with the inner machinations of how the Department of Defense functions, and most of these recommendations are way above my current understanding of how the military works. I am hoping those with military experience will chime in. Quotations are cribbed from the document itself, and I can provide page numbers if needed.

The Defense Intelligence Enterprise must deliver accurate, unbiased, and timely insights consistently and with clarity, objectivity, and independence. If they continue on their current path, however, both the DIE and the Intelligence Community writ large will continue to provide inaccurate and politicized intelligence assessments that mislead policymakers

To improve the intelligence process, Christopher Miller recommends that the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security should provide a “top-line, dissenting, or clarifying view of DIE and IC assessments” when needed needed. He recommends aligning intelligence collection and analysis with countering China and Russia, and other national interests. Then, a “global federated intelligence framework” should be established with allies and partners as well as Combatant Commands. Feedback loops that increase improvement and accountability on an ongoing basis will be established. Publicly available information will be harvested in order improve data collection and analysis, and the practice of having multiple DIE organizations pay for the same publicly available information will be ended. Artificial intelligence and machine learning will be invested in in order to exploit “open-source and classified” date. Policies that hinder the execution of technical solutions or the designing specific approaches through corruption at the point of collection will be ended. A process to discern intelligence based on relative value compared to the speed of data collection and the volume of data collected will be developed in order to streamline data and information analysis.

To expand the integration of intelligence activities, Mr. Miller wants to improve cyber defense and capabilities by improving the “duel-hat structure between the National Security Agency and U.S. Cyber Command (USCYBERCOM). Then, to counter China, he will bring back the economic analysis strategies that will counter China’s “whole-of-government” strategy, which combines security with “predatory economic objectives.” Through a critical thinking approach, the U.S. will gain strategic intelligence to counter rivals and emerging technologies, such as hypersonic, unmanned aerial systems (UAS), cyber, advance fighter aircraft, and advanced underseas warfare. Human intelligence and counterintelligence will be retooled and integrated with both “defensive and offensive cyber operations.” Finally, the DoD and DHS will realign with each other to develop intelligence that will defend against “foreign targeted disruptions,” including by defending critical infrastructure and securing the border between Mexico and the U.S.

To restore accountability and public trust, Miller recommends restoring critical thinking to intelligence process. He also wants to restore analytic integrity and return to operations driven by true intelligence. Then, he will eliminate the “customer is always right” conflict of interest in the intelligence community’s customer-based model to one of true independence, even if it challenges the assumptions of the those requesting the intelligence. That intelligence would then be given to senior policy makers on either an independent basis or through products driven by consensus, such as the National Intelligence Estimates.

Finally, Miller wants to eliminate intelligence obligations that do not advance military readiness. Specifically, he believes that the responsibility for conducting security clearance and other investigations for 95% of the civilian government workforce should be returned to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM).
 
Just to focus on one small part of this,
To restore accountability and public trust, Miller recommends restoring critical thinking to intelligence process.
Did he provide evidence that critical thinking is absent and thus needs to be restored?
He also wants to restore analytic integrity
Did he provide evidence that analytic integrity is absent and thus needs to be restored?
and return to operations driven by true intelligence.
Did he provide evidence operations driven by true intelligence is absent and thus needs to be restored?
Then, he will eliminate the “customer is always right” conflict of interest in the intelligence community’s customer-based model
Did he provide evidence that a "customer is always right" conflict of interest exists in the intelligence community?
to one of true independence, even if it challenges the assumptions of the those requesting the intelligence.
Did he provide evidence that true independence is not present?
That intelligence would then be given to senior policy makers on either an independent basis or through products driven by consensus, such as the National Intelligence Estimates.
Did he provide evidence that intelligence is currently not being given to senior policy makers on either an independent basis or through products driven by consensus?
 
Just to focus on one small part of this,

Did he provide evidence that critical thinking is absent and thus needs to be restored?

Did he provide evidence that analytic integrity is absent and thus needs to be restored?

Did he provide evidence operations driven by true intelligence is absent and thus needs to be restored?

Did he provide evidence that a "customer is always right" conflict of interest exists in the intelligence community?

Did he provide evidence that true independence is not present?

Did he provide evidence that intelligence is currently not being given to senior policy makers on either an independent basis or through products driven by consensus?
No to all, but that's not necessarily the point of any chapter in Project 2025. It's more of … aspirations, solutions, wish lists, objectives, or goals than saying that something is necessarily broken. So, you could also read this as "our objective is to keep the status quo" if what he's mentioned was actually being done before Project 2025's publication. But these are definite questions that you should ask when reading this or any chapter. Good to see critical thinking on here :)

As far as the "customer is always right" mentality -- I can kind of see undue pressure on the intelligence community to agree with the person requesting the intelligence (if their position is known). Iraq War II is an example of where that pressure -could- have come into play.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom