AVOIDING SURPRISE IN AN ERA OF GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY ADVANCES
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, D.C.
www.nap.edu
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This is a report of work supported by Contract HHM402-04-C-0015 between the Defense Intelligence Agency and the National Academy of Sciences. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number 0-309-09605-7
Limited copies of this report are available from:
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences, Room 940
National Research Council
500 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001
(202) 334-3118
Additional copies are available from:
The National Academies Press
500 Fifth Street, N.W. Lockbox 285 Washington, DC 20055 (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area) Internet, http://www.nap.edu
Copyright 2005 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.
COMMITTEE ON DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY TECHNOLOGY FORECASTS AND REVIEWS
RUTH A. DAVID, Chair,
ANSER, Inc., Arlington, Virginia
STEVEN R.J. BRUECK,
University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
STEPHEN W. DREW, Science Partners,
LLC, Summit, New Jersey
ALAN H. EPSTEIN,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge
ROBERT A. FUHRMAN,
Lockheed Corporation (retired), Pebble Beach, California
SHARON C. GLOTZER,
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
CHRISTOPHER C. GREEN,
Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan
DIANE E. GRIFFIN,
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland
J. JEROME HOLTON,
Defense Group, Inc., Alexandria, Virginia
MICHAEL R. LADISCH,
Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana
DARRELL D.E. LONG,
University of California, Santa Cruz
FREDERICK R. LOPEZ,
Raytheon Company, Goleta, California
RICHARD M. OSGOOD, JR.,
Columbia University, New York
STEWART D. PERSONICK,
Private Consultant, Bernardsville, New Jersey
ALTON D. ROMIG, JR.,
Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico
S. SHANKAR SASTRY,
University of California, Berkeley
JAMES B. SMITH,
Raytheon Company, Tucson, Arizona
CAMILLO J. TAYLOR,
University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
DIANNE S. WILEY,
The Boeing Company, Arlington, Virginia
Staff
MICHAEL A. CLARKE, Lead Board Director
DANIEL E.J. TALMAGE, JR., Study Director
CARTER W. FORD, Research Associate
LANITA R. JONES, Senior Program Assistant
Preface
The development and writing of this report presented considerable challenges in terms of both the study schedule and the need to avoid conveying sensitive U.S. vulnerabilities to potential adversaries. Meeting both challenges has been difficult for the study committee and staff, but every effort was made to respond to the stated need of the Technology Warning Division of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) for maximum openness.
I wish to express my appreciation to the members of the committee for their contributions to the preparation of this report. The committee is also grateful to the staff of the Technology Warning Division of the DIA for its sponsorship and active participation throughout the study.
The committee greatly appreciates the support and assistance of National Research Council staff members Michael Clarke, Daniel Talmage, LaNita Jones, and Carter Ford in the production of this report.
Ruth A. David, Chair
Committee on Defense Intelligence Agency Technology Forecasts and Reviews
Acknowledgment of Reviewers
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
Bishnu Atal (NAS, NAE), AT&T Laboratories (retired),
Randy Katz (NAE), University of California, Berkeley,
Leslie Kenne, LK Associates,
Joshua Lederberg (NAS, IOM), The Rockefeller University,
John Lyons (NAE), U.S. Army Research Laboratory (retired),
Louis Marquet, Consultant,
S. Thomas Picraux, Arizona State University, and
Eugene Sevin (NAE), Consultant.
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Robert Hermann, Global Technology Partners. Appointed by the National Research Council, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.
Figures, Tables, Boxes, and Charts
FIGURES
Figure 1-1 |
Shares of total world R&D, 2003, |
|||
Figure 1-2 |
U.S. R&D funding by source, 1953–2003, |
|||
Figure 2-1 |
Concepts constituting the basic framework for U.S. military capability as defined by Joint Vision 2020, |
|||
Figure 5-1 |
TransScreen, power holographic projection creates the illusion of life-size, holographic images, |
|||
Figure 5-2 |
Example of a projected three-dimensional image that appears to be floating above the hand, |
|||
Figure 5-3 |
Life-size hologram, |
|||
Figure E-1 |
Spatial and temporal resolution capabilities of different neuroimaging modalities, |
TABLES
Table 1-1 |
The Changing Nature of Defense Technology, |
|||
Table 1-2 |
The Nature of Innovation Is Changing, |
|||
Table 1-3 |
Challenges Identified for the National Nanotechnology Initiative, |
|||
Table 3-1 |
Potential Observables and Sources of Information on Potential Threats to Communications Capabilities, |
|||
Table 3-2 |
Examples of Sensor Modalities and Their Potential Utility, |
BOXES
Box ES-1 |
Statement of Task, |
|||
Box ES-2 |
Report Statement of Task, |
|||
Box ES-3 |
Proposed Methodology for Technology Warning, |
|||
Box 1-1 |
Candidate Technologies Likely to Impact National Security by the 2015 Time Frame, Identified by a Panel of Experts, |
|||
Box 2-1 |
Relevant Definitions from Joint Vision 2020 Serving as Foundation for Assessment Methodology, |
|||
Box 2-2 |
Proposed Methodology for Technology Warning, |
CHARTS
Chart 2-1 |
Example of Technology Assessment Chart, |
|||
Chart 3-1 |
Technology Assessment: Electromagnetic Pulse Generators, |
|||
Chart 3-2 |
Technology Assessment: Electromagnetic Pulse Generators, |
|||
Chart 3-3 |
Technology Assessment: Radio-Frequency Jammers, |
|||
Chart 3-4 |
Technology Assessment: Modular Network Nodes, |
|||
Chart 3-5 |
Technology Assessment: Malicious Code, |
|||
Chart 3-6 |
Capability Identification: Sensor Jamming, |
|||
Chart 3-7 |
Capability Identification: Camouflage, |
|||
Chart 3-8 |
Capability Identification: Sensor Spoofing, |
|||
Chart 4-1 |
Technology Assessment: Jet Engines, |
|||
Chart 4-2 |
Technology Assessment: Storable Liquid Propellant and Micro Rocket Engines, |
|||
Chart 4-3 |
Technology Assessment. Higher-Performance Small Rocket Engines, |
|||
Chart 4-4 |
Technology Assessment: Nanoscale Surface Machining, |
|||
Chart 4-5 |
Technology Assessment: Electronically Tuned Surface Coatings, |
|||
Chart 4-6 |
Technology Assessment: Negative Index of Refraction Materials, |
|||
Chart 4-7 |
Technology Assessment: Low-Cost, Uncooled, Low-Noise Infrared Detector Arrays, |
|||
Chart 4-8 |
Technology Assessment: Narrowband, Tunable Frequency Agile, Imaging Infrared Optical Filters, |
|||
Chart 4-9 |
Technology Assessment: High-Accuracy Microelectromechanical Systems Gyros and Accelerometers, |
|||
Chart 4-10 |
Technology Assessment: Automated, Ad Hoc, Cellular Phone/Computer Systems, |
|||
Chart 4-11 |
Technology Assessment: High-Speed Processor Chips and Mega-Flash Memories, |
|||
Chart 4-12 |
Technology Assessment: Large Geographic and Economic Web Databases, |
|||
Chart 4-13 |
Technology Assessment: Increased Energy Density or Slow-Burning Energetic Materials, |
|||
Chart 4-14 |
Technology Assessment: High-Power, Low-Cost Microwave Radio-Frequency Chips and Arrays, |
|||
Chart 4-15 |
Technology Assessment: Very Low Cost Radio-Frequency Proximity Fuses, |
Chart 4-16 |
Technology Assessment: Increased-Speed Digital Signal Processor and Processor Chips, |
|||
Chart 4-17 |
Technology Assessment: Very High Pulse Power Systems, |
|||
Chart 4-18 |
Technology Assessment: Bioagents, |
|||
Chart 4-19 |
Technology Assessment: Tactical Nuclear Electromagnetic Pulse, |
|||
Chart 4-20 |
Technology Assessment: Very Low Cost, Compact Near-Infrared Images, |
|||
Chart 4-21 |
Technology Assessment: Wireless Technology, Frequency Modulation Techniques, Global Positioning System Crypto Capture, |
|||
Chart 4-22 |
Technology Assessment: Multistatic Systems, |
|||
Chart 4-23 |
Technology Assessment: Strong Commercial Encryption for Personal Digital Assistants and Cellular Phones, |
|||
Chart 5-1 |
Technology Assessment: Tunable Lasers, |
|||
Chart 5-2 |
Technology Assessment: False Radio-Frequency Identification Signals, |
|||
Chart 5-3 |
Technology Assessment: Projection of Realistic-Looking Real-Time Optical or Infrared Images, |
|||
Chart 5-4 |
Technology Assessment: Adaptive Materials, |
|||
Chart 5-5 |
Technology Assessment: Bacteriorhodopsin, |
|||
Chart 5-6 |
Technology Assessment: Transgenic Crops, |
|||
Chart 6-1 |
Technology Assessment: Exploitation of DNA Databases for Covert Communications, |
|||
Chart 6-2 |
Technology Assessment: Bacteriorhodopsin for Holographic Messaging and Development of Advanced Holographic Technologies, |
|||
Chart 6-3 |
Technology Assessment: Development and Distribution of Norovirus Organisms, |
|||
Chart 6-4 |
Technology Assessment: Development and Distribution of Avian Influenza Organisms, |
|||
Chart 6-5 |
Technology Assessment: Development and Distribution of Organisms as Decoys, |
Acronyms
ASIC
application-specific integrated circuit
BOLD
blood-oxygen-level dependent
C4ISR
command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance
C&C
computing and communications
CMOS
complementary metal-oxide semiconductor
COTS
commercial off-the-shelf
DARPA
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
DIA
Defense Intelligence Agency
DNA
deoxyribonucleic acid
DOD
Department of Defense
ECM
electronic countermeasures
EEG
electroencephalography
EMP
electromagnetic pulse
EMU
extravehicular mobility unit
EPROM
electron paramagnetic resonance oxygen mapping
ERP
event-related potential
FCS
Future Combat Systems
FLIR
forward-looking infrared
fMRI
functional magnetic resonance imaging
GDP
gross domestic product
GOTS
government off-the-shelf
GPS
Global Positioning System
IC
intelligence community
IFF
identification friend or foe
IP
Internet Protocol
IR
infrared
ISR
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance
LED
light emitting diode
MANPADS
man-portable air defense system
MAV
micro air vehicle
MD-5
message-digest algorithm
MEG
magnetoencephalography
MEMS
microelectromechanical systems
MRI
magnetic resonance imaging
NIC
National Intelligence Council
NIRS
near-infrared spectroscopic imaging
NRC
National Research Council
NSF
National Science Foundation
OECD
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
R&D
research and development
RCS
radar cross section
RF
radio frequency
RFID
radio-frequency identification
RPG
rocket-propelled grenade
S&T
science and technology
SAR
synthetic aperture radar
SHA
secure hash algorithm
SQUID
superconducting quantum interference device
TWI
The Welding Institute, Ltd.
UAV
unmanned aerial vehicle
UCAV
unmanned combat air vehicle
UV
ultraviolet
VTOL
vertical takeoff and landing
WMD
weapons of mass destruction