Intelligence Complex Admits Need For Outside Technical Talent

[grepcat <grepcat () DIS ORG>]

Aviation Week & Space Technology
April 30, 2001

Intelligence Complex Admits Need For Outside Technical Talent

By William B. Scott, Big Sky, Mont.

Battered by a decade of downsizing and lean budgets, U.S. intelligence
agencies no longer have the technical expertise needed to counter a broad
spectrum of threats to national security, according to their chief
scientists. Consequently, these executives are turning to academia,
industry, government laboratories and even science fiction writers for
ideas and temporary expertise to solve critical technical problems.

Technology leaders from the CIA, Army and Navy recently turned to
approximately 500 engineers, scientists and managers attending the 2001
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Aerospace
Conference here and openly asked for help. It was their first such
venture.

''ONE REASON WE'RE HERE is to reach [individuals],'' said John
R. Phillips, chief scientist in the CIA's Directorate of Science and
Technology. ''We want your ideas.'' He emphasized that this was not a
temporary appeal to correct near-term problems, but the start of what he
hoped would be a long-term relationship with technical societies like the
IEEE. ''We want to come back,'' he said, noting that presentations to
other organizations are planned. As one of the nation's premier annual
technical venues, the IEEE conference was chosen for the initial ''trial
run.''

Ken Parys, chief scientist and assistant director of the Office of Naval
Research, admitted that appealing directly to the U.S. technical community
for assistance is a major departure for the normally silent intelligence
complex -- and a measure not universally supported by his colleagues. But
the loss of scientists and engineers, the difficulty of attracting and
hiring new ones, and the explosion of technological advances demanded new
methods.

He and his colleagues admitted they have little or no money to offer, but
emphasized that intelligence work is an opportunity to use cutting-edge
technologies and help solve very challenging and important national
problems. They obviously appealed to attendees' patriotism, a tactic that
still yields many takers, they said.

Mary Scott, Army chief scientist for the National Ground Intelligence
Center, said serious problems with ''our ability to do science and
technology (S&T) analysis'' were recognized about three years ago. S&T
analysts typically assess the technical prowess of foreign nations, and
completion of their report is a mandatory step before the Defense
Dept. can justify acquiring a new weapon system. In other words, the
intelligence agencies must first validate the threat, then a program to
counter it can be launched.

One of the few bright spots in her, Phillips' and Parys' message was that
the critical S&T analyst shortage was recognized by the Clinton
Administration and mitigating steps are underway. By all indications, the
Bush Administration will continue to support rebuilding the intelligence
community's S&T capabilities.

While simultaneously recruiting and openly soliciting ideas that could
help their agencies, the three chief scientists underscored their needs by
listing a host of problems. Collectively, they painted a gloomy picture of
a drastically weakened and overtasked technical intelligence
infrastructure:

-- Threats to U.S. and allied interests are multiplying, and range from
terrorist attacks with biological/chemical weapons and computers to the
proliferation of missiles, submarines and advanced aircraft. Soon, dozens
of nations and non-nation states (such as cartels and terrorist
groups) will be able to constantly harass and disrupt American business
and military operations, using ''asymmetric'' techniques rather than
direct military attacks.

-- Cutbacks during the 1990s caused a serious ''brain drain'' of S&T
analysts. The average age of those remaining is climbing, and many senior
people will be retiring soon.

-- The entire intelligence complex is having a difficult time attracting
new scientists and engineers, and the salaries they can offer are not
competitive with those of the commercial sector. The Defense Dept. intel
groups, which must stick to government-established salary grades for
civilian technical personnel, are at the greatest disadvantage. The CIA
apparently has more salary flexibility and has been able to compete better
for certain skills.

-- Career paths for S&T analysts need to be greatly improved to bolster
recruiting and retention efforts. To do that -- and bring salary scales up
to competitive levels -- new legislation will probably be required.

-- Most critical S&T skills are only one or two people ''deep,'' and those
employees are stressed to unhealthy levels. A common refrain heard by
intelligence executives is: ''Even if you hire new people, I don't have
time to train them.'' Parys said it takes 6-8 years before a new S&T
analyst has the expertise necessary to make top-quality assessments of a
foreign nation's military capabilities.

-- The undermanned, overstressed S&T intelligence complex has not been
able to keep up with the rapid pace of technological advancement. It was
forced to prioritize its limited resources, which, in turn, led to
embarrassing ''misses,'' such as the surprise nuclear tests conducted by
India and Pakistan.

Challenged by an indignant Congress, one official said, ''We didn't have
the resources to watch [India and Pakistan] 24 hr. a day. We could do
that, but what do you want to trade for it? What do you want us to
ignore? This is a zero-sum game.''

As the demand for more and better intelligence grows exponentially,
Phillips and his Defense Dept. counterparts are looking outside their own
organizations for immediate assistance in solving critical technological
problems. These have taken a number of routes, but all are aimed at
improving clandestine and covert operations, bolstering
counterintelligence, and analyzing information from myriad
sources. Expanding use of encryption, for example, is complicating
agencies' abilities to monitor development of weapons of mass destruction,
movement of terrorist groups, and the activities of ''non-nation states.''
How to deal with that will require innovative approaches, Phillips said.

Even when the agencies are able to collect vast amounts of data, turning
that huge volume of information into ''knowledge'' is an overwhelming
task. ''It's killing us in a few [areas],'' he said.

As a result, a number of initiatives have been undertaken to entice people
to either work for the intelligence complex full-time, or at least provide
expertise on an as-needed basis. These include:

-- Establishing an Intelligence Technology Innovation Center where experts
from academia, national laboratories and industry can work on ''the
nightmare threats of the future,'' Phillips said. The center has at least
three years of budget commitment, drawing funds from multiple intelligence
entities. Participants will address not only technical issues, but broad
system-level ones such as assessing the national will of a country to use
WMDs.

-- Using the DCI [director of central intelligence] Post-Doctoral
Fellowship Program to underwrite work by a handful of students. Eight
''post-docs'' are now in the program, working on research of interest to
the CIA, and Phillips hopes to eventually expand that number to about 100
per year. They will research robotics, biological neural networks and
information technology problems, for example.

-- Setting up ''In-Q-Tel,'' a not-for-profit corporation to draw expertise
from the information technology community. Its task is to ''solve the
CIA's toughest problems,'' Phillips said. About $20-30 million per year
are going to private industry as part of this effort, which has attracted
interest from roughly 500 companies.

-- Launching a Defense Dept. program called S&T Expert Partnership
(STEP) to access temporary technical expertise for intelligence
needs. Scott said she is seeking ideas for STEP projects, but cautioned
companies that ''STEP is not a big program [with money to spend]. We want
to tap brainpower on an as-needed basis. We're asking you to help us.''
This year, STEP is funded at about $1 million, which is underwriting
several prototype efforts, but its budget is expected to triple.

According to conference attendees, therein lies a major problem for these
new intelligence community efforts. Company executives, managers and
technical personnel have heard many such announcements of private/public
''partnership opportunities'' over the last several years, and they now
greet such declarations with a dose of suspicion. Usually,
''partnerships'' are merely government attempts to ''pick our brains
on-the-cheap,'' a manager here said. Rarely has a company -- or individual
-- realized monetary gain from cooperating, and corporate executives
continue to search for a valid business case that would make these
arrangements pay off.

Still, to many here, the fact that Phillips, Scott and Parys even made the
substantial effort to address an engineering conference deep in the
mountains of Montana was a refreshing departure from the intelligence
community's norm. The CIA and Defense Dept. ''spooks'' are to be commended
for attempting to open their tightly closed doors and invite outside ideas
and expertise, one noted.

ALL THREE OF THE VISITING executives admitted the intelligence complex has
a monumental credibility-building task ahead of it, because negative
perceptions about dealing with intel groups are rampant. Several
conference attendees recounted anecdotes of attempting to work with an
intelligence agency -- such as submitting ''white paper'' ideas -- only to
see the concepts resurface as a very familiar-looking program awarded as a
sole-source contract to a favored company or university. That too-common
practice fueled a perception that the intelligence complex was arrogant.

Parys said he was fully aware of such negative legacies, but ''we have to
start somewhere to change those [perceptions], and that's why we're
here.''

The intelligence community is reaching even further afield, making
presentations to science-fiction author groups, and is looking for
innovative concepts among comic-book artists and writers, for instance.

''The CIA must be willing to take risks. We want people who can think the
unthinkable,'' he quipped.

ISN is hosted by SecurityFocus.com
---
To unsubscribe email LISTSERV () SecurityFocus com with a message body of
"SIGNOFF ISN".