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).
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).