The Evolution of an Imperfect System

The Central Intelligence Agency, established by the National Security Act of 1947, profoundly shaped the modern landscape of U.S. intelligence. Subsequent attempts to adapt the IC have largely fallen short. In 2003, the Department of Defense created the Under Secretary for Intelligence (later amended in 2020 to the Under Secretary for Intelligence and Security), intended to provide oversight of defense intelligence efforts. While possessing potential influence, this office has often struggled to assert its leadership role. Similarly, the 2004 creation of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) – designed to manage community intelligence – did not fundamentally restructure the IC’s organization.

Three Imperatives for Change

Three critical developments necessitate a comprehensive overhaul. First, the accelerating pace of technological innovation demands that technology be at the heart of the IC’s operations. Second, the increasing prevalence of gray zone conflicts and cognitive warfare requires a shift in focus from traditional intelligence gathering to proactive influence operations. Finally, the IC’s current unwieldiness and fragmentation hinder its effectiveness, necessitating a leaner, more integrated structure. Congress is considering piecemeal changes to the DNI’s authorities and procurement processes, but these efforts fall short of the systemic reform required.

A Vision for the Future IC

The IC must embrace a new paradigm, prioritizing technological leadership, open-source intelligence, strategic integration, closer collaboration with the Department of Defense, and a dedicated focus on irregular, cognitive, and gray zone activities. This requires a fundamental shift in mindset and organizational structure.

Technology as the Cornerstone

A technology-driven IC necessitates the creation of two key organizations, built upon existing structures: a comprehensive Open Source Center and a centralized technology hub. The Open Source Center would serve as the IC’s primary analytical engine, modeled after the Cold War-era Foreign Broadcasting Information Service (FBIS). This center would curate and analyze all publicly available data, leveraging artificial intelligence to identify anomalies and patterns. Analysts with varying levels of security clearance would contribute, ensuring broad access to unclassified information that can be integrated into comprehensive intelligence assessments. This center would build upon the existing Open Source Centers at the CIA and DIA, expanding their capabilities and reach.

Complementing the Open Source Center, a dedicated IC technology hub would streamline technology procurement and development. Inspired by organizations like IARPA (IARPA), DARPA (DARPA), and IN-Q-TEL (IN-Q-TEL), this hub would foster competition and collaboration between government and industry, accelerating the adoption of cutting-edge technologies across the IC. This would reduce redundancies, lower costs, and ensure that the IC remains at the forefront of technological innovation.

Strengthening the Role of the DNI

The DNI must be empowered to fulfill its original mandate: to serve as the central leader for oversight, guidance, and integration of the entire IC. This requires granting the DNI full authority over the National Intelligence Program budget, eliminating the current system where agency directors can circumvent the DNI’s direction by appealing directly to Congress. To further streamline operations, the Under Secretary for Intelligence and Security (OUSDI&S) should simultaneously serve as the DNI’s Deputy, with the Director for Military Affairs acting as a liaison between the two offices. This would consolidate meetings and clarify lines of authority.

Furthermore, the DNI must assume responsibility for developing comprehensive strategic competition strategies, working with the National Security Council (NSC) and leveraging the expertise of the IC’s National Intelligence Managers. This would ensure that intelligence efforts are aligned with broader U.S. foreign policy goals.

Refocusing All-Source Agencies

The CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) have increasingly encroached upon each other’s areas of expertise, leading to duplication of effort. The CIA should concentrate on non-military issues, such as political stability and economic trends, while the DIA should focus on military and military technology matters. While some overlap is inevitable, clear delineation of responsibilities is essential.

Leveraging Specialized Agencies

The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and the National Security Agency (NSA) are invaluable assets. Their core competencies should be preserved by providing them with commercially available data, rather than tasking them with data collection and analysis outside their areas of expertise. They should remain focused on their respective domains – geospatial intelligence and signals intelligence – and avoid venturing into all-source analysis.

Embracing Irregular and Cognitive Warfare

Irregular warfare, including cognitive warfare, must become a central pillar of U.S. national security policy. This requires a shift in focus from traditional military dominance to influencing governments and populations, employing denial and deception, and conducting information operations. A “whole-of-government” approach is essential, with the DNI coordinating intelligence efforts across all agencies – State, Treasury, Energy, and the military services – to develop and implement comprehensive strategies.

To support this effort, a new agency, modeled after the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), should be established to oversee both CIA and DoD human intelligence (HUMINT) and clandestine operations. This agency would focus on deconfliction, training, and deploying the best personnel from across the government to address critical gaps and requirements. The current Community HUMINT office could serve as the nucleus for this new entity, but it must be moved from the CIA to the DNI to ensure effective leadership and integration.

Reforming Defense Intelligence

The DIA, originally designed as an all-source agency to support the warfighter, has become overly bureaucratic. DIA headquarters should be streamlined to focus on providing support to the Pentagon and Combatant Commands (COCOMs), including training, resources, personnel, and data. Analytical and collection personnel should be redeployed to the COCOMs, OSD, and Joint Staff, placing them closer to the decision-makers they serve.

Frequently Asked Questions

• What is the primary goal of reimagining the U.S. intelligence community?
  The primary goal is to modernize the IC to effectively address 21st-century threats, including technological advancements, gray zone conflicts, and a fragmented organizational structure.
• How will the proposed Open Source Center enhance intelligence gathering?
  The Open Source Center will leverage publicly available data and AI to identify anomalies and patterns, providing early warning of potential threats and supplementing traditional intelligence sources.
• What role will the DNI play in the reformed IC structure?
  The DNI will be empowered to serve as the central leader for oversight, guidance, and integration of the entire IC, with full authority over the National Intelligence Program budget.
• Why is it important to refocus the CIA and DIA on their core competencies?
  Refocusing these agencies will eliminate duplication of effort and ensure that each agency is leveraging its unique expertise to maximize its effectiveness.
• How will the new agency focused on irregular and cognitive warfare contribute to national security?
  This agency will develop and implement strategies to influence governments and populations, employing denial and deception, and conducting information operations to deter adversaries and protect U.S. interests.