Lessons from The Intelligence Community’s Annual Threat Assessment (Part 2)
I would like tentatively to share the insights of Ms. Emily Harding is deputy director and senior fellow with the International Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, D.C., and Mr. Jake Harrington is an intelligence fellow in the CSIS International Security Program.
Their theme is “Lessons from The Intelligence Community’s Annual Threat Assessment.”
Once a year, the intelligence community (IC) produces an unclassified survey of global threats. This exercise comprises two pieces: a written product called the Annual Threat Assessment (ATA) and testimony before the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, called the Worldwide Threats Hearing (WWTH). This year, more than most, the written and verbal testimony diverged.
The written testimony was completed using information available as of January 21—more than a month before the Russian invasion of Ukraine. As a result, while the written testimony gives top billing to the comprehensive, society-wide threat from China, the verbal testimony before the intelligence committees was largely focused on the global implications of the war in Ukraine. However, that in no way suggests that the IC failed to predict a Russian invasion—quite the opposite. Members on both sides of the aisle praised the IC for its work anticipating Putin’s moves.
