Faced with a complex and evolving security environment, Army Intelligence
requires a directional and provisional blueprint for the future. is blue-
print, described in the following pages, discusses how to leverage innova-
tive concepts and Science and Technology (S&T) to adapt to current and
emerging threats while informing the design of the future Intelligence force
and systems; to target and develop the right technologies to support the fu-
ture force envisioned in the Army Operating Concept; and to address future
long-term requirements beyond 2035. Army Intelligence must partner with
industry, academia, Department of Defense initiatives, the joint community
and the Army’s acquisition community to develop the capabilities required
to support the future force envisioned in 2025 and beyond.
In the November 1956 issue of ARMY magazine, Lieutenant Colonel Robert
B. Rigg described the Army of 1974 as one in which Soldiers would routine-
ly use exotic technologies such as rotor-wing aircra, helmet radios, see-in-
the-dark goggles, pocket radars and composite body armor.
1
Additionally,
he foresaw an operational environment lled with “mechanical spies” and
“seeing-eye drone scouts.” Today, one might view his vision as quaint or dat-
ed. e Army’s use of helicopters, combat vehicle crewman’s helmets, night
observation devices, unattended ground sensors and unmanned aircra
systems is all taken for granted. What should be appreciated, however, is the
scope and breadth of his vision to project these capabilities against a future
operating environment in the years immediately following the Korean War,
as well as the eort necessary to bring that vision to fruition. In 1956, ad-
vances in aerospace, sensing and communications provided a glimpse into
what could be. Rigg extrapolated those emerging technologies and imagined
how they could be integrated into a coherent means of ghting based on his
interpretation of future threats and the American way of war. If the Army is
to ght and win in future wars, it must thoroughly understand the challeng-
es that it will face and how those challenges will impact the way it intends
to ght. It must act now to ensure that it possesses a technological edge over
its adversaries.
e Army Operating Concept states that anticipating the demands of future
armed conict requires an understanding of continuities in the nature of
war as well as an appreciation for changes in the character of armed conict.
Army Intelligence:
Focus Areas for
Science and Technology
APRIL 2017
ILW SPOTLIGHT 17-1
PUBLISHED BY THE INSTITUTE OF LAND WARFARE
AT THE ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY
ISSUE
Army Intelligence requires a directional
and provisional blueprint for the future.
SPOTLIGHT SCOPE
• Addresses critical Modernization
efforts to close gaps in Army War-
ghting Challenge #1, “Develop Situ-
ational Understanding: how to develop
and sustain a high degree of situational
understanding while operating in com-
plex environments against determined,
adaptive enemy organizations.”
• Describes how the Army will adapt
in the near term (up to 2025), evolve
Soldiers, systems and organizations
into improved warghting capabilities
in the mid-term (2026–2035) and
innovate dominating capabilities for
the far-term (2035–2050).
IMPERATIVES
• Appreciation for changes in war’s
character (not its nature) due to evolu-
tionary and revolutionary technology,
evolving geopolitical stress, signicant
cultural changes and increasingly
urban global population.
• Immediate action to secure techno-
logical edge over adversaries in the
near term and in the future Operating
Environment.
• Capability development to converge
SIGINT, cyber, EW, human intelligence
and counterintelligence.
• Partnership of Army Intelligence with
national laboratories, academia and
industry.
www.ausa.org
