I will not replicate all that is at www.oss.net and to a much lesser extent, www.earth-intelligence.net, but do want to recognize a handful of extraordinary individuals by isolating their especially meritorious contributiions to the long-running debate about national intelligence reform and re-invention.
Recognizes how quickly and radically the world — and our threat environment — are changing.
“This environment is demanding reevaluations of the way we do business, expanding our analytic envelope, and altering the vocabulary of intellignece. Threats are more diverse, interconnected, and viral than at any other time in history.”
Recognizes the importance of integration across disciplines and domains — working toward multidisciplinary and multidomain.
The Introduction alone is reason enough to take the time to download the document.
Robert David STEELE Vivas
ROBERT STEELE: This is a good read. I am particularly delighted that the introduction embraces the specific recommendations I have been making since 1988 within the government and since 1992 publicly. There is more that could be done in terms of outreach to people who will never have clearances, but this is a very fine start. I offer the following supplemental observations in support of the DNI's testimony.
Cyber
Among the mission areas assigned to the National Security Agency (NSA), the assurance of trusted communications for US commercial communications and computing including domestic supervisory control and data acquisition systems across all functionalities appears to require a great deal more oversight and performance evaluation; at the same time, the US Government appears to need a Center for Computational Mathematics and a Center for Real-Time Financial Transaction Analytics.
Given the central role played by digital financial transactions in relation to multi-billion dollar money laundering by US banks that have operated with virtual impunity for decades, a decision needs to be made, and appropriate resources devoted to, the application of NSA's proven capabilities against global financial crime rooted in US banks.
Francesca Musiani
Internet Governance is a vital topic and its inclusion in this report is noteworthy. One of the most promising and innovative experts in the world on emerging alternative paradigms for Internet Governance is here in Washington DC completing a Yahoo! Fellowship with the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University. Dr. Francesca Musiani does not have a clearance and is not a US citizen. She leaves in June. Her email is francesca.musiani AT gmail DOT com. It would also be beneficial for the IC to be paying Dr. Gordon Cook for Reference: Cook Report on Internet Protocol and at least quarterly consulting, his email is cook AT cookreport.com. Stephen E. Arnold continues to be my virtual CTO and remains a genius. Arnold IT is critical starting point and second opinion for anyone that wants to be moderately tuned in or better.
After conducting an 18-month study, this Task Force concluded that the cyber threat is serious and that the United States cannot be confident that our critical Information Technology (IT) systems will work under attack from a sophisticated and well-resourced opponent utilizing cyber capabilities in combination with all of their military and intelligence capabilities (a “full spectrum” adversary). While this is also true for others (e.g. Allies, rivals, and public/private networks), this Task Force strongly believes the DoD needs to take the lead and build an effective response to measurably increase confidence in the IT systems we depend on (public and at the same time decrease a would-be attacker's confidence in the effectiveness of their capabilities to compromise DoD systems. This conclusion was developed upon several factors, including the success adversaries have had penetrating our networks; the relative ease that our Red Teams have in disrupting, or completely beating, our forces in exercises using exploits available on the Internet; and the weak cyber hygiene position of DoD networks and systems. The Task Force believes that the recommendations of this report create the basis for astrategy to address this broad and pervasive threat.
Paul van Tongeren (2013): Potential cornerstone of infrastructures for peace? How local peace committees can make a difference, Peacebuilding, 1:1, 39-60
Co-founder, International Civil Society Network on Infrastructures for Peace, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
(Received 9 October 2012; final version received 28 November 2012)
In many conflict-affected countries local peace committees (LPCs) have an impact on local communities by keeping the violence down, solving community problems and empowering local actors to become peacebuilders. Of course, committees like these are confronted with many challenges; the biggest challenge is that they are very dependent on the broader, political or conflict environment. If that environment becomes very polarised or violent, they will be gravely affected. LPCs are committees or structures formed at the level of a town or village with the aim to encourage and facilitate joint, inclusive peacemaking and peacebuilding processes within their own context. The article describes 10 examples of LPCs in countries such as the Democratic Republic of Congo, Colombia and Afghanistan. It is remarkable to see that in those countries hundreds of LPCs exist, with in most cases limited impact. The article describes as well a broader framework of infrastructures for peace, as it is implemented in several countries, such as Ghana and Kenya. This is a promising approach. The article concludes with some conclusions and proposals to enhance LPCs and infrastructures for peace nationally and internationally.
Keywords: local peace committees; local peace communities; infrastructures for peace; local peace building