The Emerging “New GEOINT”

The Emerging “New GEOINT”

When I presented “The Russo-Ukrainian War: GEOINT’s New Epoch” at the 2023 Esri User Conference in San Diego, CA, it generated a lot of interest. At that time, I was beginning to perceive a seismic shift in the fundamental technological and doctrinal concepts that underpin GEOINT's foundation of imagery, IMINT, and geospatial information. A year later, I am more convinced that a transformation is unfolding before us. Some describe it as a Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA) sparked by the Russo-Ukrainian War. Regardless of the terminology, the war is serving as a lethal laboratory, where new warfighting methods, technologies, and organizational structures are being developed, tested, and refined. My continued study of the conflict has provided me with some early insights into GEOINT’s future.

In this article, I predict that a 'New GEOINT' will emerge, bringing significant changes and challenges to the discipline. To me, the primary question is not whether there will be a New GEOINT, but rather what the changes will be and how we will address them.

Lessons Being Learned

The following trends were developed by a team that included me and three colleagues from academia and industry and published by the USGIF as a "thought leadership" piece in February 2024. A few GEOINT lessons being learned from the Russian-Ukrainian War are:

Hybrid Warfare: A concept that relies on human geography, hybrid warfare involves efforts designed to destabilize a functioning state and divide its society.

Platforms and Sensors: IMINT’s platforms and sensors are rapidly evolving. The use of various platforms, including drones and smartphones, has increased the transparency of the battlefield that “there is no place to hide.”

Uncrewed Systems: Uncrewed systems or drones, once seen primarily as tools for reconnaissance, are now a cornerstone of both Ukrainian and Russian combat power.

Information and Organizational Fusion: Fusion has been critical in the effective use of systems like the Ukrainian HIMARS, leveraging a robust information infrastructure, efficient reconnaissance, and the innovative application of commercial drone technology.

Precise Positioning: The conflict underscores the clash between precision weapons and Russian massed firepower. Russian forces have made extensive efforts to jam and spoof GPS signals, reducing the effectiveness of drones and precision weapons.

Battlefield Big Data: The conflict in Ukraine has used social media, drones, and smartphones to collect vast amounts of geospatial data.

Machines for Improved Speed and Quality of Decisions: Ukrainian military operations centers use AI to process battlefield data, analyze situations, and select targets, engaging in what is referred to as algorithmic warfare.

Democratization: In future conflicts, it is likely that opposing nations or proxy groups will have access to GEOINT and could use the same infrastructure against the nations currently aiding Ukraine.

What Does All of This Mean?

We are witnessing an evolution of technology, doctrine, and organizational structures that will impact GEOINT. The Old GEOINT framework is from a time when data was scarce, and intelligence was produced in silos. The Old GEOINT originated on a tasking and collection, processing, exploitation, and dissemination (TPED) structure. It is not fast enough for the current battlefield. This system, which heavily relies on hierarchical and linear processes, is being outpaced by the complexity of modern battlefields. This complexity demands a more networked, agile, and integrated approach. The New GEOINT paradigm is fluid and interconnected, emphasizing a network of tasks, blending human and machine as a team, and leveraging a sensor web to effect real-time decision-making. Here is the stark contrast:

• Focus: The Old GEOINT focused on the decision makers. The New GEOINT focuses on users including human decision makers and machines.

• Products: The Old GEOINT delivered “products.” The New GEOINT is humans leading a human-machine team that delivers customized intelligence to the user.

• Tasking & Collection: The Old GEOINT followed a process of tasking systems to collect data. The New GEOINT is connecting data sources and assessing its utility.

• Intel Cycle: The Old GEOINT operates in a stepwise cycle. The New GEOINT functions as networked target-centric tasks.

• Data Standards: The Old GEOINT has rigid standards. The New GEOINT uses AI to translate the data at hand for a need.

• Analytics: The Old GEOINT has human and machine tasks. The New GEOINT blends human-machine teams into the analytic workflow.

• GEOINT Inputs: The Old GEOINT relies on imagery, image Intel, & GEOINT Intel. The New GEOINT is sensor web to effect/application.

• Learning & Adaption: The Old GEOINT reacts to change. The New GEOINT leads change with continuous learning, experimentation, and adaptation.

• Systems: The Old GEOINT focuses on national systems. The New GEOINT focuses on national, allied, commercial, open source, and citizen systems.

• Operations: The Old GEOINT functions as INTs. The New GEOINT functions as a unified intelligence enterprise.

The implications of these changes are multifaceted. For tradecraft, it means new roles and skills are required, such as AI trainers and GeoAI scientists. Education and training programs must adapt to equip the workforce with these competencies. System development will need to incorporate design thinking to retain human creativity and non-linear problem-solving. Organizationally, we must be prepared for traditional structures to be challenged and redefined.

Conclusion

As I said in the introduction, the question is not if GEOINT will transform, but what the change will entail and how we will respond. The transformation of GEOINT is not just a technological shift but also fundamental cultural change. This article is a call to action for engaged leadership during this transformative period. As we navigate this new epoch, we must embrace innovation, foster collaboration, and remain committed to adaptation. This is not just about reacting to change; it is about leading it. I close with a word of caution. As Sun-Tzu states in The Art of War, “The wise leader, in his deliberations, always blends consideration of gain and harm.” When transitioning to the New GEOINT, our leaders need to be pragmatic and weigh the positive and negative social, political, and economic impacts, anticipating not only the tangible effects but also the emotional consequences – it’s going to be a tough job.