The National Intelligence Council’s report Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World is now available on the Director of National Intelligence’s Web site. In the report, the Council reviews and integrates an array of trends and forces that are likely to shape the future. The Council concludes, among other things, that “The whole international system—as constructed following WWII—will be revolutionized,” that wealth will continue to flow from West to East, and that resource constraints may “[raise] the specter of scarcities.” At times, the report sounds almost Malthusian.
While the Council’s credentials are impeccable, the effort generally yields broad assertions framed by carefully phrased caveats. After digesting the report, a thoughtful reader should review the limitations of scenario planning and perhaps reconsider the Council’s assessment with a red teamer’s eye for the unlikely but irresistible twists of history that have led us to where we are today.
From the monthly archives:
November 2008
OSD/DDRE/RRTO and STRATCOM/GISC recently released the unclassified white paper Anticipating Rare Events. The body of the report features 22 chapters on methods and approaches relevant to red teamers and analysts. Chapter 4.13 specifically addresses unconventional red teaming. Of note, RTJ advisory board member Jeff Cares penned chapter 4.15, “Co-evolutionary Gaming for Uncertain Futures.” In the coming weeks, we intend to comment on various aspects of the white paper.
Interest in red teaming tends to grow following a major disaster or surprise. The Sept. 11 attacks, for example, triggered a surge in red teaming activity.1 Almost overnight, a professional red team became the sine qua non of a good counterterrorist or security program. Interest jumped again as U.S. forces in Iraq confronted a largely unexpected but seemingly predictable insurgency. [click to continue ...]
Notes:
- I informally watched the search engines before and after the attacks. The number of companies offering red teaming services clearly increased from late 2001 through, say, 2004. Based on my very rough survey, I believe the number has actually started to decline. [↩]
In situations of competition and conflict, no single player can dictate the outcome.1 What occurs depends on the strategy each player pursues. In turn, the strategy each player pursues depends on the strategy each player believes his or her opponent will pursue, and so on. Analysts often use game theory to model such situations.
In 1977, Peter Bennett introduced hypergame analysis, an elegant and useful extension to game theory. Unlike standard game theoretic models, Bennett’s concept permits players to perceive different games. This feature better approximates real-world conditions and, in particular, allows analysts to model situations involving manipulation, stratagem, and deception more directly. [click to continue ...]
Notes:
- If one player can dictate the outcome, it is no longer a situation of competition or conflict. [↩]
