Intelligence gathering is neither straightforward nor foolproof. The intelligence community's abject failure when it came to the matter of Iraq and WMDs illustrates that point rather effectively, as does the failure to anticipate the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, as well as the USSR's wild goose chase over Able Archer 83. When we think of the application of science to the intelligence gathering world, it's usually something like spy satellites or listening devices, but the US intelligence community needs to pay more heed to the world of the neurosciences, according to a new report from the National Research Council.
One of the major findings in "Emerging Cognitive Neuroscience and Related Technologies" is that the intelligence community should invest in research for detecting and measuring psychological states via neurophysiological markers. It's no secret that polygraphs are almost worthless. Their analysis is highly subjective, and it's fairly simple to fool them. But advances in neuroscience, specifically neuroimaging, mean that a lie detector that actually works is much closer to reality. It's fairly obvious why this would be of interest to the intelligence community, but it's just a single example of developments in the neurosciences that are of potential interest.
Other key findings include the need to stay up-to-date with the state of new pharmacological developments, along with other neuroimaging advances, the potential growth in computer modeling of cognition, and distributed human-machine systems. The NRC recommends that the intelligence community pay particular attention to developments overseas. Although not explicitly stated by name, the implication is that China and India, referred to obliquely as "countries where software research and development is relatively inexpensive and where there exists a sizable workforce with the appropriate education and skills" may be in a position to advance past the US into technological superiority.
The report was commissioned by the Defense Intelligence Agency, who are aware of emerging trends in neuroscience but lack the personnel to truly understand them. This lack of sufficiently trained people is highlighted in the report, which points out that the intelligence community needs to recruit more officers and analysts with advanced science backgrounds, and should expand collaborations and links with academia.
That last point could be a potentially provocative one. Last year, arguments over the complicity of psychologists in the torture of detainees by the US military and intelligence agencies reverberated through the American Psychological Association, and it doesn't take much imagination to think similar things could happen in the neuroscience community. Then there's the specter of programs such as the CIA's MK Ultra, which ran during the 1950s and 1960s, and attempted to use psychoactive drugs to induce mind control.
On the other hand, it's worth bearing in mind that the US has neither a monopoly on intelligence agencies nor neuroscience research, and it would do well to make sure it was aware of developments in competitor nations with national security implications. After all, that's why we have intelligence agencies! Whether all of this means more funding for researchers in neuroscience is not quite clear, but we saw a large spike in funding for biodefense following the anthrax mailings. Then again, with black budgets, perhaps we'll never know.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment