Artificial Intelligence in the Intelligence Community

A National Security Risk or Asset, We Decide

Emma Bohse

Professor Jan Babcock

ENGL 138T

20 April 2021

Figure 1
AI in Everyday Life

Robots that can clean a messy room may seem like a thing of the future, but so did self-

driving cars and automated personal assistants, like Amazon Alexa or Google Nest. However,

these technologies all became possible or have the opportunity to become possible through

artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning. AI is intelligence that machines show, while

machine learning is the “training” these AI systems go through to complete a particular task or

learn a set of data.1 Systems built through machine learning and AI are more intertwined into

people’s lives than many might expect. When scrolling through a TikTok “for-you-page” or

Netflix’s movie and show recommendations, one does not even give a second thought to the

perfectly tailored content. However, these normal technologies are AI at work, learning what

users like and making predictions based on this to show users other things they may enjoy.

AI in the Intelligence Community

Besides self-driving cars and social media algorithms, AI has the potential to aid

intelligence communities in the defense of the country. From gathering intelligence to

controlling drones to protecting the nation’s cyberspaces, AI has many applications throughout

the intelligence community.2 However, as AI advances and the capabilities of systems grow, the

risks of implementing them increase. With 49% of defense organizations already taking

advantage of AI solutions and the remaining 51% of organizations considering or piloting AI

technologies, artificial intelligence is taking center stage in intelligence communities across the

world.3 However, because AI is such a recent technology, there are limited regulations to ensure

it is implemented safely and reliably; this means that while there is the potential for AI to

successfully aid in defending the nation, there is the possibility for malfunctions and problems

that put people and the nation at risk. AI has powerful applications throughout the intelligence
community, but without increased regulations and research, these benefits become potentially

deadly risks, driving the need for government policies to regulate the use of AI and fund research

and education.

Figure 2: How far along defense organizations are in implementing AI for various
purposes.

Concerns About Implementing AI

As the use of AI increases, the systems being developed are becoming more advanced.

While this leads to powerful AI throughout the intelligence community, it also makes it more

difficult to ensure that these systems are implemented safely. AI is intelligence shown by

machines, but it still lacks human morals or logic, leading to three main AI “accidents” or

potential malfunctions.4

Failure of Robustness
 The first is a failure of robustness where the AI system receives inputs that are

unexpected or that it has not been trained to handle.5 For example, in 2018, researchers came out

with an AI system that could detect skin cancer more accurately than dermatologists.6 However,

the system was not trained to handle people of color, so many went undiagnosed.7 Related to the

intelligence community, hypothetically, an AI system could control missile launches. If this

system decided that a glare was an enemy missile because it was not trained to distinguish

between the two, it might accidentally launch a missile leading to retaliation.8 Failure of

robustness also makes a system easy to hack because the machine does not know enough to flag

or fix the changes.9

Failure of Specification

The next potential malfunction is a failure of specification where the machine does not

interpret the algorithm as the programmers intended; this can lead to unexpected behaviors and

side effects.10 For example, in 2017, during wildfires in California people were evacuating using

traffic apps like Waze.11 However, these apps were focused on alleviating traffic, so they sent

cars directly into the wildfires.12 Now, imagine if an AI system was designed to control a drone

that gathers intel, the drone might add unnecessary information to "complete its task”; this

happens because a system will cut corners to finish a task if not properly programmed.13

Failure of Assurance

The last potential malfunction relates to failure of assurance where the AI system cannot

be properly monitored or controlled during operation; this typically happens when people do not

understand what the AI systems are doing or have the time to recognize and fix mistakes before a

malfunction occurs.14 For example, in 2019, Boeing experienced a couple of plane crashes due to

a new system malfunctioning and reading sensors incorrectly; based on the incorrect data they
received, systems kicked in to “stabilize” a plane that did not need to be, making the pilots lose

control.15 Something like this tragic incident could happen again if the intelligence community

begins to rely on auto-piloted or self-controlled cars, planes, drones, etc. These three main AI

“accidents” and malfunctions are just the tip of the iceberg without proper system safety,

implementation, research, and education.

An Increasing Risk

As AI continues to progress, the probability of accidents and malfunctions occurring

increases. Competition to utilize AI and develop more sophisticated systems is heating up, which

may lead to cutting corners or not testing systems thoroughly.16 Systems are also becoming

increasingly complex and fast; this makes it harder for people to find problems, fix problems,

and intervene when something does go wrong.17 Those who operate AI systems may be

untrained or rely too heavily on the machine’s intelligence as well, leading to concerns over the

operator’s abilities to intervene when necessary.18 Finally, older AI systems are being used in the

development of newer systems, which is a security concern. If one AI system is used throughout

multiple programs, it can be targeted and hacked to bring down a large network of AI systems.19

Overall, as AI systems increase in complexity and implementation, there is a need for more

concrete policies to regulate their use, the testing they go through, and the research and education

needed to use them.

 Figure 3: Percentage of respondents that believe there are currently risks with the AI they
implemented in each application.

Current AI Policies

The National Science and Technology Council

Currently, there are limited policies in place addressing the use and implementation of

AI. In 1993, the National Science and Technology Council was created by President Clinton; this

council was established to create policies regarding the use of technology.20 Since their

foundation, the National Science and Technology Council has facilitated research,

communicated with the private sector, and strengthened education about technology.21 To

address these goals, the National Science and Technology Council funneled money into research

about the applications of science and technology.22 They also partnered with universities around

the country and established research labs and facilitates.23 Each of these research partners had to

follow and apply certain rules and principles, such as ensuring no impacts to the environment

and the health and safety of the nation.24 AI is now beginning a similar process. Under the

National Science and Technology council, there is the Select Committee on Artificial

Intelligence. The goals of this committee include leading research and development of AI,
leading the implementation of trustworthy AI, preparing the current and incoming workforce to

integrate AI systems, and ensuring collaboration and communication across government

agencies.25 While these are strong steps forward, there are only two executive orders and a

memorandum that try to tackle these goals so far.

Maintaining Leadership in AI

In 2019, Executive Order 13859, Maintaining American Leadership in Artificial

Intelligence, was passed. It outlines how the United States must drive technological

breakthroughs, create technical standards, educate the current and future workforce, foster public

trust, and promote an environment that supports AI.26 The executive order also pushes funding

for the research and development of AI technologies, along with government collaboration with

private sectors.27 Finally, it brushes the surface of what data AI systems can use to train,

attempting to ensure the privacy and protection of civil liberties for United States citizens. 28

Guidance for Regulations

In 2020, a memorandum was released detailing a guide for regulating AI applications.

While a memorandum is not law, it lays the foundations of possible laws and sets up a

framework that suggests how AI should be used and regulated. It pushes the principles of public

trust and participation in AI, integrity, risk management, benefits and costs, flexibility, fairness,

transparency, safety and security, and coordination when implementing and regulating AI.29

However, the memorandum also aims to aid in reducing barriers to developing and implementing

AI through access to more federal data, communication to the public, creating technical

standards, and regulating cooperation.30

Promoting the Trustworthy Use of AI

 A few months after this memorandum was released, Executive Order 13960, Promoting

the Use of Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence in the Federal Government, was passed outlining a

few regulations on the use of AI. This executive order included the idea that AI should be used

when appropriate, that the Office of Management and Budget should come out with more

regulations, and those who use AI should follow specific principles.31 These principles are

respecting that Nation’s values, designing for purpose and performance, being

accurate/reliable/effective, ensuring safety/security/resilience, making

understandable/transparent AI, and regularly monitoring systems as well as being held

accountable for tests and malfunctions.32 While these regulations are a step in the right direction,

they are vague and leave much up to interpretation. Executive Order 13960, Promoting the Use

of Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence in the Federal Government, also does not apply to AI used

in defense or national security systems.33

Policy Suggestion 1: Increasing Education and Research Opportunities Based on

the National Science and Technology Council

Education and research are a huge part of developing AI technology and systems. While

the Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence touches on increased funding for research and

ensuring that the nation’s current and future workforce is prepared to handle AI, there are no

concrete steps about how this will be done. This brief suggests that there should be an outline of

how research funding will be used and an increase in the research budget, along with a push

towards partnering with universities and labs to educate the nation on the use and

implementation of AI.

The National Science and Technology Council’s Policies

 The National Science and Technology Council outlined how much the research budget

would increase for different forms of research surrounding technology use in the federal

government, including non-defense, defense, basic, health-related, and information technology

related research and development.34 In total, the budget was increased by $83.3 billion, allowing

the government to increase research and development to address their goals of maintaining

leadership in STEM and harnessing the power of technology.35 They also outlined how the

government will partner with universities to pursue research and educational opportunities,

helping to ensure the future work force is trained to handle technology.36 The National Science

and Technology Council also supported initiatives to strengthen federal government laboratories

and ensure they could utilize newer technology, preparing the current work force.37 This has

allowed the National Science and Technology Council to take advantage of emerging technology

to work on biosafety/security, ocean mapping, neuroscience, minerals, cybersecurity, and more;

with all the good these policies have done for technology, similar policies could have major

impacts on the future of AI.38

Applying These Policies to AI

Implementing these same initiatives, The Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence

could focus the AI budget on different sectors. This will allow research and development of AI

to be applied to a multitude of challenges, giving scientists and programmers the resources to

develop stronger, more reliable, safer AI systems. Without the resources to properly develop and

implement AI systems, corners might be cut. The Select Committee could also follow the

Council’s lead in partnering with universities and the federal government’s labs to ensure that

people know how to work with AI systems and develop safe, reliable programs. If people fully

understand how to use AI through increased research and educational opportunities, many of the
AI accidents and malfunctions can be avoided. Especially problems with assurance where people

do not understand the scope of a system and therefore cannot react to stop or fix a problem

efficiently. Increased research and education will also allow the United States to lead in AI

development and implementation in the private and public sectors, as well as in the intelligence

community, which is a major goal of the executive orders and memorandum the Select

Committee already released.

Policy Suggestion 2: An Agency/Administration to Regulate and Test AI Systems

Modeled After the FDA

Along with increased research and education, it is imperative that AI systems go through

testing that ensures they are safe and reliable. However, there are no policies that specifically

regulate how much testing systems must go through or what tests they should pass. This brief

proposes implementing a federal agency or administration to test and analyze different AI

systems to ensure safety and reliability, as well as checking these systems every year to see if

they are still performing properly. While every AI system has different purposes, there should

still be a threshold they must pass and check-ups to ensure the systems are still working properly

down the line. The Science and Technology Council does not have these types of regulations on

technology, but because AI systems are not necessarily staffed by humans it is imperative that

they are safe and reliable in situations without human interference, especially when used by

intelligence communities for national security purposes. Also, the one executive order that lays

out principles for AI systems does not apply to defense or national security systems, so

regulations are needed in that sector as well as increased regulations all around. 39

The Food and Drug Administration’s Policies

 These regulations could be modeled off the Food and Drug Administration. The FDA

approves food, drugs, medical products, animal products, vaccines, cosmetics, tobacco products,

and more.40 Every food or drug is slightly different, so ensuring their safety requires flexible, but

strong standards. The FDA approves foods and drugs through an analysis of what it brings to the

table, assessment of benefits and risks through data, and development of strategies that manage

potential risks.41 These policies have allowed the FDA to approve over 20,000 safe prescription

drugs and control over $2.7 trillion worth of products ranging from food to medical supplies.42

People eat and use FDA approved products all the time, showing their methods work. While it

seems like the FDA and AI have little in common, the FDA is able to research and ensure the

safety of a multitude of products; this applies to AI as every system is different but needs to be

implemented safely and reliably.

Applying These Policies to AI

An agency, like the FDA, could go through a similar process with AI systems to ensure

this happens. Through research, testing, and setting standards, like the FDA, AI systems can be

regulated. Completing tests and check-ups are imperative to avoiding AI “accident” and

malfunctions. Specifically, specification and robustness, especially if these systems are being

used by intelligence communities that are working towards securing and defending the nation. If

a system is tested properly and enough, failures of robustness will not be as much of a risk

because tests can reveal the information a system might be missing. It will also aid in reducing

failure of specification because with testing, it will be clear if a system is acting the way it was

intended. It is shown through research that using a structured identification approach to find

critical risks, instituting robust guidelines, and refining guidelines depending on the nature of a
risk aids in reducing the risks of implementing AI systems; these can all be things that a new

agency/administration look for and actively incorporates into AI systems.43

This new agency or administration can also help decide if something should be controlled

by AI or not. If their research suggests that there are risks in having certain systems be controlled

completely by AI, then the administration or agency can suggest more human interference. They

can also work to develop standards about what does and does not fall under the scope of AI,

much like the FDA decides what products are safe; this administration or agency could help

answer questions like should the nation rely on AI to deploy missiles, or should humans always

be involved in the final decision and how much can AI help in these scenarios. Overall, much

like the FDA, AI needs some sort of group that continues to implement standards as its use

grows and regulate it no matter how advanced it gets.

Looking to the Future

Each of these policy options aims to reduce the risks of implementing AI systems. While

this has the potential to hinder some research and applications of AI, the benefit of ensuring safe

and reliable systems is more important. If the nation continues with the few, vague policies and

suggestions it has in place, there could be a disastrous mishap with an AI system that puts the

nation and innocent people at risk. Also, every policy that has been suggested has been done

before for a different application, so the resources to implement them are available. By bringing

awareness to AI accidents and potential malfunctions, these policies can gain the support they

need to continue. There have already been more “minor” incidents that have affected human life,

like self-driving car accidents and misdiagnosed cancer patients.44 So, do not wait for a

nationwide disaster to be a wake-up call. Implementing more regulations and policies to support

the safe growth of AI allows the nation to be a leading developer of AI, while ensuring its
citizens are protected. The intelligence community can reap major benefits from AI, if used

properly and safely, so what is there truly to lose?45 AI can be a powerful ally to the nation’s

defense or a major hindrance. It is up to policy makers to regulate its use, so the intelligence

community can use AI’s strength to defend the nation. As systems become more powerful, the

risk of implementing them only grows, so the time to act is now.

Figure 4: Where defense leaders see AI helping them secure the nation.

A Call to Action

Many do not even know what AI is or what it is fully capable of, so making policies

regarding and regulating AI needs to become a front-page-issue. The public can contribute to

increased education by seeking out resources to raise their awareness of AI and its flaws and
benefits, along with sharing this information to begin an open conversation about the

implementation of AI. At the end of the day, these policies are in the hands of law makers and

politicians, so supporting officials who understand the urgency of addressing AI and speaking up

about the issue to government officials will have the biggest impact. AI systems have the power

to do so much good for the nation, but these rewards cannot be reaped without addressing the

concerns that come along with them. Through increased funding and education, along with a

federal body that regulates and approves AI systems, the intelligence community and private

sectors can use AI to its full benefit safely, efficiently, and reliably.

End Notes

Figure 1: Samsung, “Artificial Intelligence” (Samsung, 2022),

https://research.samsung.com/artificial-intelligence.

1. Tim G. J. Rudner and Helen Toner, “Key Concepts in AI Safety: An Overview” (CSET, 2021),

https://cset.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/CSET-Key-Concepts-in-AI-Safety-An-

Overview.pdf.

2. Daniel Chenok and others, “Deploying AI in defense organizations” (New York: IBM, 2021),

https://www.ibm.com/downloads/cas/EJBREOMX.

3. Ibid.

Figure 2: Daniel Chenok and others, “Deploying AI in defense organizations” (New York: IBM, 2021),

https://www.ibm.com/downloads/cas/EJBREOMX.

4. Tim G. J. Rudner and Helen Toner, “Key Concepts in AI Safety: An Overview” (CSET, 2021),

https://cset.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/CSET-Key-Concepts-in-AI-Safety-An-

Overview.pdf.
5. Zachary Arnold and Helen Toner, “AI Accidents: An Emerging Threat” (CSET, 2021),

https://cset.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/CSET-AI-Accidents-An-Emerging-Threat.pdf.

6. Haenssle et al., “Man against machine: diagnostic performance of a deep learning convolutional

neural network for dermoscopic melanoma recognition in comparison to 58 dermatologists”

(NIH, 2018), https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29846502/.

7. Zachary Arnold and Helen Toner, “AI Accidents: An Emerging Threat” (CSET, 2021),

https://cset.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/CSET-AI-Accidents-An-Emerging-Threat.pdf.

8. Ibid.

9. Ibid.

10. Tim G. J. Rudner and Helen Toner, “Key Concepts in AI Safety: An Overview” (CSET, 2021),

https://cset.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/CSET-Key-Concepts-in-AI-Safety-An-

Overview.pdf.

11. Jefferson Graham and Brett Molina, “Waze sent commuters towards California wildfires, drivers

say”, (USA Today, 2017), https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2017/12/07/california-

fires-navigation-apps-like-waze-sent-commuters-into-flames-drivers/930904001/.

12. Ibid.

13. Dario Amodei et al., “Concrete Problems in AI Safety” (2016),

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1606.06565.pdf.

14. Zachary Arnold and Helen Toner, “AI Accidents: An Emerging Threat” (CSET, 2021),

https://cset.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/CSET-AI-Accidents-An-Emerging-Threat.pdf.

15. Ibid.

16. Ibid.

17. Ibid.

18. Ibid.

19. Ibid.
Figure 3: McKinsey & Company, “The State of AI in 2020” (McKinsey Analytics, 2020),

https://www.mckinsey.com/Business-Functions/McKinsey-Analytics/Our-Insights/Global-survey-The-

state-of-AI-in-2020.

20. Administration of William J. Clinton, “Executive Oder 12882- President's Committee of Advisors

on Science and Technology” (Washington D.C.: White House, 1993),

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/WCPD-1993-11-29/pdf/WCPD-1993-11-29-Pg2450.pdf.

21. White House and Congress, “U.S. national science and technology goals” (Washington D.C.:

White House, 1999), https://www.oecd.org/sti/inno/2754226.pdf.

22. Ibid.

23. Ibid.

24. Ibid.

25. National Artificial Intelligence Initiative Office, “Legislation and Executive Orders” (Washington

D.C.: Committe on AI, 2021), https://www.ai.gov/legislation-and-executive-orders/.

26. Donald Trump, “Executive Order 13859- Marinating American Leadership in Artificial

Intelligence” (Washington D.C.: Federal Register, 2019),

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/02/14/2019-02544/maintaining-american-

leadership-in-artificial-intelligence.

27. Ibid.

28. Ibid.

29. Russell T. Vought, “Guidance for Regulation of Artificial Intelligence Applications”

(Washington D.C.: Office of Management and Budget, 2020), https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-

content/uploads/2020/11/M-21-06.pdf.

30. Ibid.

31. Donald Trump, “Executive Order 13960- Promoting the Use of Trustworthy Artificial

Intelligence in the Federal Government” (Washington D.C.: Federal Register, 2020),

 https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/12/08/2020-27065/promoting-the-use-of-

trustworthy-artificial-intelligence-in-the-federal-government.

32. Ibid.

33. Ibid.

34. White House and Congress, “U.S. national science and technology goals” (Washington D.C.:

White House, 1999), https://www.oecd.org/sti/inno/2754226.pdf.

35. Ibid.

36. Ibid.

37. Ibid.

38. Office of Science and Technology Policy, “NSTC Documents & Reports” (Executive Office of

the President, 2017),

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/administration/eop/ostp/nstc/docsreports.

39. Donald Trump, “Executive Order 13960- Promoting the Use of Trustworthy Artificial

Intelligence in the Federal Government” (Washington D.C.: Federal Register, 2020),

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/12/08/2020-27065/promoting-the-use-of-

trustworthy-artificial-intelligence-in-the-federal-government.

40. FDA, “FDA at a Glance” (Office of the Commissioner, 2021),

https://www.fda.gov/media/154548/download.

41. FDA, “FDA Rules and Regulations” (FDA, 2020), https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-

information/fda-rules-and-regulations.

42. FDA, “FDA at a Glance” (Office of the Commissioner, 2021),

https://www.fda.gov/media/154548/download.

43. Benjamin Cheatham et al. “Confronting the risks of artificial intelligence” (McKinsey Quarterly,

2019), https://www.cognitivescale.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Confronting_AI_risks_-

_McKinsey.pdf.
 44. AIID, “Artificial Intelligence Incident Database” (AIID, 2022),

https://incidentdatabase.ai/?lang=en.

45. Thanh Cong Truong et al., “Artificial Intelligence in the Cyber Domain: Offense and Defense”

(Symmetry, 2020), https://www.mdpi.com/2073-8994/12/3/410/htm.

Figure 4: Daniel Chenok and others, “Deploying AI in defense organizations” (New York: IBM, 2021),

https://www.ibm.com/downloads/cas/EJBREOMX.