Worldwide threat assessment of the us intelligence community 2017

Homeland Security

Discussion Questions: Review the Strategic National Risk Assessment. Compare and contrast the deductions about the national-level threats and hazards as listed by the DHS in the SNRA against the findings you made in Week 5's analysis of the WTAs. As always, assume what is listed first is the greatest risk [also called "most dangerous"] and probability [also called "most likely"] and the last is least. Given the "Natural" events that have occurred across America since 2006 [i.e. post-Katrina], are the ranking of riskiest/most dangerous events in the "Natural" threats and hazards in the table on p2 logical? Why or why not?

Attachments:

- Strategic National Risk Assessment

- Week 5 Assignment

I'm posting 2 example assignments for this weeks assignment. Only use as example. Don't copy.

- Example Assignment 1

- Example Assignment 2

Name

Institution

Date

DNI Worldwide Threat Assessment

Through 2017 and 2018, most elements of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) world threat assessment looked almost similar. In reality, there existed several distinguishing factors between the two. The adjustments were made as a result of the order of priorities of several threats made to US National security. Taking an assumption that first threats depict top priorities while last threats depict last priority, the threats were perceived critical by the US National security.

According to the 2017 report, cyber threats are described as global threats that are impacting citizen’s confidence and trust in several sectors. The sectors include but are not limited to economy, governance norms, and essential institutions. Although the cyber threats have been discovered by the US earlier the threats kept on coming from countries like China, Iran, and N. Korea. The threats can best be explained in ways through which they impacted the nation physically, psychologically, and even economically. The 2018 report on the other hand revealed that foreign countries like Russia, Iran, and China were revealed as the biggest causes of cyber domain threats. The report went ahead to quantify and incorporate graphics to explain the impacts and capacity of the countries in cyber-attacks. The information was important in offering more evidence (Coats, 2018). The report further analyzed the extent to which the threats were strong and their impacts on infrastructure development. The report revealed that cyber attacks can be pointed out by international criminals and they can utilize it in stealing the important information they need.

The second variation involves matters to do with mass destruction weapons. According to the 2017 report, mass destruction, as well as proliferation of weapons, were listed as a top priority. In the 2018 assessment report on the other hand these weapons were listed as a second priority, triggering the rapid increase in threats out of in and out-state testing of chemical weapons. The ground-launched missile that Russia developed significantly contributed to the rise in priority.

In both 2017 and 2018 assessments, human security is regarded to have the lease priority. The priority is examined in terms of environmental risks and climate change issues (Coats, 2017; Coats, 2018). The threat creates an avenue for a propelled industrialization, pollution, and ignited agriculture. There is a need for the US to find ways through which the issue can be addressed.

Decisively, the 2017 and 2018 threat assessment reports recognize the power and impacts of cyber threats, counter space, and terrorism. They further recognize the effects of emerging technologies and impacts of natural resources on people, the nature and power of weapons that can be used have also been identified. However, none of them points out the element of human security or lists it as a global threat. There exists a lot of similarities between the two reports and minor adjustments that have resulted from threats presented in the previous years.

References

Coats, D. R. (2017). Worldwide Threat Assessment. testimony, Washington, DC, May, 23, 428610-1.

Coats, D. R. (2018, February). Statement for the Record, Worldwide Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Daniel R. Coats, Director of National Intelligence, February 13, 2018. In the United States. Office of the Director of National Intelligence. The United States. Office of the Director of National Intelligence.