Georgetown Hosts Kalaris Conference to Discuss Role of Technology in National Security
By Ga Ram Lee
Georgetown University hosted the annual Kalaris Intelligence Conference on September 27 in Gaston Hall; this year’s topic was “The Art and Science of Intelligence.” This conference invited members of National Geospatial Intelligence Agency (NGA) and other panelists to contribute to discussions on the increasing role of emerging technology, such as artificial intelligence, in national security issues.
Part 1: Conversation with NGA Director
The conference began with a conversation with Robert Cardillo, the director of the NGA, in which he provided a general overview of the organization’s role and upcoming challenges in the realm of national security. NGA analyzes satellite pictures and aims to locate any activity that could pose a threat to the country. Cardillo explained that, during the 1980s, at the peak of the Cold War, the nation’s singular threat was the Soviet Union, and the main function of the NGA was to understand how the Soviet Union maintained its intelligence. Back then, the government had a monopoly on access to space, but the barriers to space have recently been dropping. It has become a commercial opportunity for the private sector. There are now more than 150 satellites in space, in addition to government units, and the satellites produce more than 1.5 million pictures per day. In response to the exponential growth of satellites and the increase in collected intelligence, Cardillo said, “it is important to be able to discriminate between human activity that is normal, commercial, civil, and those that could be a threat.” He elaborated, “we are dependent in the sense that the majority of our mapping, charting, and geospatial data are predominantly derived from commercial sources.” Cardillo explained the partnership between the NGA and private companies as an effort to employ private-sector expertise to gain insight into intelligence.
Part 2: The New Age of Artificial Intelligence
The first panel of the conference was titled “The New Age of Artificial Intelligence (AI)” and consisted of Dr. Andrew Brooks, chief data scientist at NGA, Dr. Valerie Browning, director of Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), John Doyon, director of the Office of Data Strategy and Innovation at the National Counterterrorism Center, Dr. Meg Leta Jones, assistant professor in the Communication, Culture & Technology Program at Georgetown University, Patty Mims, director of Global National Government at Esri, and was moderated by Eric Adams, a technology writer.
Adams asked the panelists how AI was relevant to national security matters and what improvements could be made to the technology so that it coexists with humans. In terms of AI’s potential in national security, all panelists were in consensus that the analysis of immense volumes of data is expedited with automation. With the increasingly high volume of data being produced, AI enables a more efficient workflow and identification of patterns. Jones explained three general concerns about integrating AI into the workforce: skill degradation, failure to understand situational awareness, and automation bias. Especially, automation bias is created when people rely too much on technology to avoid high-risk, burdensome decisions such as medical diagnoses or flying planes. She added, “we need to have an accountability structure in place for the individual to be aware that they are accountable for decisions and situationally aware of the circumstances that machines do not register.”
Mims stated that the fundamental science of AI usually comes from the academic community, but government agencies also leverage technology from some commercial companies to further their own ends. However, there were mixed opinions on the partnership between the private and public sector on the use of AI. She stated, “[the industry] brings in certain technical skills and knowledge and combined with government, it can be really powerful.” Brooks argued, “in the sense of creating something together...changing from perhaps an older model in which we are an industry and going to provide information without telling how it works...we should become more open and transparent in what you are building, how you are building it, and limitations moving forward with the partnership.” Even regarding being transparent about how AI is being used for national security purposes, Brooks supported an open dialogue with the public, not only the parties involved in the project, on how technology is and is not being used. In response, Jones claimed, “I just want to remind at this point of the conversation, there are reasons for the skepticism in this relationship. We have different rules for private entities than for public entities, and when we blur the lines, that can be really messy. We have demanded that data scientists have an ethical education, so I am not really interested in improving how that happened...I think there is still some more room for public participation.”
The panel discussion concluded with Browning’s remarks on the lure of working for government agencies. She expressed that there were concerns about insufficient personnel to meet future demand, so programs that incentivize students to become the next teachers of technology will be beneficial.
Part 3: Delivering Advantage to Enable Decision Makers
The second panel included Dr. Ben Buchanan, assistant teaching professor at Georgetown, Eric Fanning, president of the Aerospace Industries Association, Ellen McCarthy, vice president of Intelligence & Analytics at Noblis, and Justin Poole, deputy director of the NGA and was moderated by Eric Schmitt, senior writer for the New York Times.
The main discussion point for this panel was how members of the intelligence community determine how much information is enough and how they assess the value of information they have obtained. McCarthy emphasized that understanding the client’s needs is the priority when gathering sufficient information; she said, “you have to understand the mission of the organization, the architecture of the organization, and you have to understand the workflow of the organization...and this is intimacy with the client.” She added that it has now become important to implement new tools to understand the intent of adversaries; very similar to how it was in the past, nation-states have become a threat, and members of the intelligence community need to understand on a psychological level what national leaders are thinking. This is where the role of technology and machines that read patterns in speech, body language, and events could become useful. Fanning, speaking from the perspective of the client, said that, although intelligence briefers may have more knowledge than the client, sometimes it helps if the client is directly placed in the context, such as visiting the test range organized by the Air Force. Fanning stated that, more than the confidence of the briefer, it was the client’s ability to understand the context better that makes the intelligence more valuable.
When the issue of the capacity of violent, non-state actors was raised, Poole stated that such adversaries have definitely improved their offensive capabilities, especially in cyberspace and social media. Employing mechanisms to the counter these capabilities is part of the NGA’s portfolio and will be further explored. Fanning argued that adversaries may not be able to compete with the United States financially or in technological capacity but can certainly win by developing technology faster. He said, “we need to figure out a way to get the loop faster and faster so that we are just not responding to what they are doing, but we are going out in front of them…. We want to take advantage of going outside of the traditional method of finding a platform to compress the cycle.” These statements all came down to the conclusion that the partnership between the government and private sector, although seen adversarial by a few, was crucial. Buchanan also argued that individual skills, such language diversity, computer programming, and active engagement through asking questions will help the advancement of the intelligence community.