“This is a different world than it was, just even five years ago… yet, we look at our security apparatus and how much has it changed?” said Judith Kelley, Dean of the Duke Sanford School for Public Policy.

On December 7th, Duke in DC and the Sanford School for Public Policy hosted an event, titled “Trends, Challenges, and Solutions for Government National Security Apparatus” to address the rapidly evolving global landscape and the U.S.’ 21st century  national security apparatus. Issues like climate change, cyber security and immigration all contribute to the list of threats we face as a nation. Moderated by Dean Kelley, this event was part of a year-long celebration of 50 years of Public Policy at Duke.

Is the American national security apparatus equipped to handle these new and pressing issues? The event’s panelists – Sue Gordon, former U.S. Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence and Duke University Rubenstein Fellow, and Tim Nichols, former Intelligence Officer in the Marine Corps and visiting professor of the practice at Sanford addressed this question head on.

Nichols, who also leads the Sanford School for Public Policy’s new Master of National Security Policy program, mentioned several non-traditional challenges that our national security apparatus has been called to address. “I’m pleased to see challenges like climate change, migration, pandemics and cyber threats starting to enter the lexicon of our Congress and Executive Branch.”

Gordon added that the COVID-19 pandemic actually improved the clarity to which we are observe many of these changes. “In this administration, you’re seeing a recognition that we need to address some of these changes… whether it’s climate change and domestic extremism and economic insecurity as now being national security issues.”

“What’s happening at our borders, what’s happening with pandemics, what’s happening with climate, what’s happening with supply chain/food insecurity/economic security is actually national security.”

Sue gordon

On Cyber Security…

Creating cyber policy change in Congress can be complicated. Gordon explained, “if you’re going to brief on cyber to the Congress, you have to hit Senate Intelligence committee, armed services committees, judiciary committees and the homeland security committees.” She added, “We have to stop thinking about cyber as something technical and different and recognize that it is the way the interests everywhere are being accomplished now.”

While neither Gordon nor Nichols saw the need for a designated “cyber force” agency, Nichols provided three key ideas for cyber: the importance of strong central policy, an agile resource line, and sufficient investment in cyber technologies.

On Veteran’s Affairs…

“If you asked me what it takes to treat veterans who have been scarred, mentally incapacitated after war, it takes more than you can ever give,” Nichols added, “the lesson to be learned is let’s try to avoid military conflict as much as possible.”

Unfortunately, he also recognized the VA’s current lack of resources when it comes to adequately address veterans’ needs, both mental and physical.

On Foreign Aid and Competition…

On the topic of international competition, Kelley alluded to the European Union’s (EU) involvement with the Global Gateway project. Noting the project’s goal of investing in overseas projects is “clearly intended as somewhat of an answer to China’s global Belt and Road Initiative in the digital space in particular.”  

In terms of a national technology strategy, Gordon explained that “from a mindset perspective, we still think of critical technologies as something that needs to be protected,”  and said the E.U.’s actions highlight a key message, “technology is ubiquitous.”

On Immigration…

Throughout the discussion, Gordon and Nichols highlighted the shifting purview of national security. “What’s happening at our borders, what’s happening with pandemics, what’s happening with climate, what’s happening with supply chain/food insecurity/economic security,” Gordon explained, “is actually national security.”

Nichols also mentioned the enormous “resource gap” that exists within our immigration system – although the capabilities and policies exist to address border security, current resource levels are not sufficient and there needs to be a ‘holistic approach.’

On Disinformation…

Kelley turned the conversation to the role of the intelligence community in battling disinformation online. As the federal government begins to address the issue, Kelley asked the panelists, “How are we supposed to get the maximum out of our efforts to counter misinformation if we’re not coordinated on what we’re trying to do in that sphere?”

“The intelligence community has done a really good job of exposing disinformation for policymakers,” Nichols explained and after conveying this information, it becomes a “policymaker decision as to what to do.”

On the Changing National Security Landscape…

As the world continues to evolve, the panel alluded to the importance of regularly reviewing and in some cases, restructuring the national security apparatus. Nichols explained there are still “good bones in our structure.” Rather than completing redesigning the apparatus, he called attention to the importance of the government to recruit strong talent and the need for congressional committees to “really address their structure and how it impedes agility in the Executive Branch.”

Gordon took a more “from scratch” approach, emphasizing the importance of designing the national security apparatus based on, ”what should it look like today?” The Sanford School for Public Policy’s new Master of National Security Policy program is still accepting applications for Fall 2022 and you can learn more about the program here.