Dynamic - Counter-Intelligence Simulation Lab (MIT D-CISL) (name still being discussed)

1
Dynamic - Counter-Intelligence Simulation Lab
(MIT D-CISL)(name still being discussed)
PAINT

• Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
• PI Stuart Madnick ltsmadnick_at_mit.edugt Co-PIs
  Nazli Choucri ltnchoucri_at_mit.edugt Michael Siegel
  ltmsiegel_at_mit.edugt
• National Security Innovations (NSI)
• Robert Popp ltrpopp_at_natlsec.comgt
• Version as of 2 Sept 2007 1130 AM

2
Products

• System Dynamics (SD) causal model
• Shows the cause-and-effect relationships within
  and between the key sub-systems (e.g.,
  Leadership, Infrastructure, Terrorist Groups)
  which provides high-level insights
• Software (in Vensim) of the SD causal model
• Allows for running simulations of the SD model
• Including outputs of simulations of various what
  if cases

Sample SD Model
Sample SD Simulation Output
3
Technology

• Technology SD models formalize causal
  relationships and simulate system behavior over
  time using differential equations
• Analytical techniques are used to test
  contingencies and study range of potential
  pathways
• SD has been used as modeling simulation method
  over 50 years

• Challenge
• Develop model to address the PAINT challenge
  problem.
• How overcome
• MIT-NSI team combines SD modelers, political
  scientist experts, and domain experts with
  experience in developing complex social science
  SD models for DoD/IC problems.

Sample Inputs/Outputs of SD Models
4
Evaluation Validation(12 ways in proposal 2
key ways are)

• Behavioral Reproduction
• Use past data (as well as other sources) to help
  determine parameters up to, say, two years ago.
• Including known planned changes
• Each stock (e.g., number of terrorists) is a
  metric.
• Measure how well SD model projections match the
  following years.
• System Improvement of ProActive Intelligence

• Does the model generate useful insights as judged
  by decision makers?
• In particular, identify emerging threats and
  effective proactive intelligence options (i.e.,
  tipping points, counterfactual analysis,
  high-leverage mitigation)

Identification of Tipping Point
5
Contributions

• Demonstrate iterative model development
  experimentation
• Combines the objectives of designing system
  architecture and developing a platform to
  identify high-leverage mitigation options and
  proactive strategies
• Simulations combine inputs from domain knowledge
  and data

• Produce output which informs problem domain by
• Early identification of emerging threats
• Ability to explore the counterfactual
• Propose effective probes and iterate with
  proactive intelligence

6
PAINT Information Flow
Strategy Generation Exploration
Response Options
Data
Dynamic Simulation Models
Feedback
Core Function
Range of Functions

• Our contribution is at the nexus of goals 2-3-4
• (2) Develop dynamic simulation model
• (3) Explore range of possible strategies,
  simulate outcomes pathways
• (4) Test feedback and multiple-order effects from
  mitigation and intervention
• (2) Incorporate feedback and refine model
  parameters
• - Also has a synergy with (1) Data Utilizing
  data to set parameter
• values determining what data is
  needed/useful.

7
Domain

• Domain Directly address Challenge Problem.
• High level domain consists of the interaction
  between the structure of political and social
  institutions (e.g.. Leadership, Military,
  Terrorists) and the physics of material systems
  (e.g., nanotechnology, engineering systems)
• Needs
• Access to relevant Subject Matter Experts (SMEs)
  and IC analysts
• MIT resources
• MITs access to multi-disciplinary literature and
  perspectives in Political Science Nanotechnology

• Develop the overall domain and individual system
  of elements
• Focus on sensitive processes that shape immediate
  threats
• Develop and identify the range of potential
  pathways that develop from different contingences

8
(No Transcript)
9
MIT Backup Slides

• For possible use in discussions and backup
  groups -
• Previous Historical Cases
• Brief Nanotechnology Sources

10
Historical Cases - Goal

• Provide examples of countries which have formed
  technologically-oriented military plans
• Identify what conditions caused the countries to
  form these plans.
• Identify conditions and dynamics which may have
  signaled the formation of these plans.
• Work with our MIT Political Science colleagues
  (SMEs) to develop case studies specific
  emphasis on the conditions, dynamics, pathways,
  and indicators

11
Partial List of Countries which formed
technologically-oriented military plans

• Developing Countries
• North Korea Biological, Chemical, and
  especially Nuclear research in last 15-30 years.
• India/Pakistan Nuclear arms race.
• Libya Sought weapons for regional military
  dominance.
• Iran-Iraq War (1980s) Biological Chemical
  weapons.
• South Africa Supposedly had a nuclear weapons
  project following nuclear energy development
  assistance.
• Early China Acquired nuclear weapons
  technology and support from Soviets in exchange
  for Uranium ore.
• Egypt Sought to develop weapons.

12
Partial List of Countries which formed
technologically-oriented military plans

• More Developed Countries
• Germany between the World Wars Sought military
  development for aggressive purposes.
• Contemporary China Continues to do Biological
  and Chemical research
• USSR Arms race with the US.
• United States, NATO Leaders in development of
  advanced military tools.
• Israel Acquired technology and weapons through
  alliance with United States and other sources.
• Britain, France, and Germany during WWI
  Developed chemical gas weapons - each side
  escalated weapons.
• Japan prior to WW II

13
Brief history India development of nuclear
weapons

• Mid-1950s Acquires initial technologies under
  Atoms for Peace campaign.
• 1962 India attacked by China in 1962 (still
  territorial disputes).
• 1964 China's first nuclear tests.
• 1965-1971 India fights two wars with Pakistan.
• April 1998 India plans for nuclear testing after
  Pakistan tests new missiles.
• May 1998 India successfully tests five nuclear
  devices.
• Today India now believed able to produce about
  50-90 weapons. Previous president, Dr. Kalam, was
  originally missile scientist, later head of
  various nuclear tests.

Source Federation of American Scientists
http//www.fas.org/nuke/guide/india/nuke/index.htm
l
14
Brief history Pakistan development of nuclear
weapons

• 1972 Program started after 1971 India-Pakistan
  War.
• 1975 Following Indias successful tests,
  Pakistan aggressively pursues nuclear technology.
  
• Dr. A. Q. Khan, a Pakistani expat, returns from
  Europe after stealing nuclear technology
  secrets from Dutch research.
• Pakistan continued to work towards nuclear
  weapons, possibly with help from China and N.
  Korea.
• May 1998 Pakistan successfully tests six nuclear
  warheads.
• 2004 A.Q. Khan is later dismissed after
  confessing to providing nuclear technology to
  Iran, Libya, and North Korea by building devices
  in Malaysia with assistance from Dutch, German
  and South African individuals.

Source Federation of American Scientists
http//www.fas.org/nuke/guide/pakistan/nuke/index.
html
15
What does a state need to develop nano-weapons?

• Two extreme methods of technology development for
  weapons
• 1. Develop technology/weapons in-house
• Need sophisticated technology research program
• Needs state stability (Regime Resilience),
  government support, strong academic program.
• Needs well-developed RD, manufacturing plants,
  etc.
• Such technologies usually need to be made in
  stable states (e.g., democratic or
  autocratic).
• 2. Rely on outsource solutions
• Need to have a well-developed ally who has
  interest in your region and in building you up.
• e.g. Israel US
• Need to have access to black market products.
• e.g. North Korea and Iran, via breakup of USSR.

16
Why would a state develop nano-weapons?

• Real or perceived threat
• India/Pakistan nuclear development
• Cold War weapons race
• Signaling mechanism / popular status booster
• North Korea
• China 1949 (nuclear weapons)
• Area dominance
• Globally United States, NATO, etc.
• Regionally Libya, North Korea, etc.
• As tools for aggression
• Germany between WWs

North Korean Weapon Parade Source ABC News
17
Iranian Nanotechnology on Web
www.irannano.org Structure of overall-management
of nanotechnology development - Members of the
Office Special Office of Nanotechnology
Development will continue to assume the
responsibility of policy-making and management of
nanotechnology development in the country with
the following staff

• First vice-president (Director of the Office)
• The ministers of Economic and finance affairs,
  Health and medical education, Agricultural Jihad,
  Defense and armed forces logistics, Industries
  and mines, Science, research and technology, Oil
  and the Director of planning and management
  (judicial members of the office)
• The Chairman of Technology Cooperation Office of
  the Presidency (Secretary of the Office)
• Five experts of the nanotechnology and
  experienced managers of the country (government
  and private) chosen by the Office Director
• Sub-Systems of the Office
• The secretariat of the Office The secretariat of
  the Office, Technology Cooperation Office of the
  Presidency (TCO), and the Secretary of the
  Office, is the Chairman of TCO.
• Coordination Council of the Office includes
  representatives of judicial members of the Office
  as well as the real members will be formed. The
  work description and the authority of the
  Coordination Council will be approved in the
  Office
• Group works and apparatus committees
• Information from http//nano.ir/en/pages.php?Page
  s_Id36
• Only mention of weapons on these sites was carbon
  nanotubes were utilized to make the swords of
  Damascus http//www.nature.com/news/2006/061113/f
  ull/061113-11.html

18
Nanotech At MIT

• A range of research groups and activities at MIT
• Institute for Soldier Nanotechnologies
  http//web.mit.edu/isn/
• MIT Nanoengineering Group http//web.mit.edu/nano
  engineering/
• Center for Nanofluids Technology
  http//web.mit.edu/nse/nanofluids/
• Suresh Research Group (Bio-focused)
  http//sureshgroup.mit.edu/
• A partial list of other nanotech activities _at_
  mit http//web.mit.edu/research/category/nano.htm
  llinks

19
Bio/Chemical Weapons Programs

• http//www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/bioc
  hem.weapons/
• Countries which have bio/chemical weapons
  descriptions of most common weapons.

20
Nuclear Weapons Programs http//www.isis-online.
org/mapproject/introduction.html
http//cns.miis.edu/research/cbw/possess.htm