Domestic and Foreign Intelligence Services - Research Paper Example

Domestic and Foreign Intelligence Services Introduction Intelligence Services play important roles to national governments across the globe since they offer essential information that is used to make key decisions in relation to national security threats. National security threats may arise from domestic, foreign and military and hence the need for national intelligence services. The purpose of national intelligence service includes collection or gathering of intelligence information, analysis of such information, counter-intelligence and covert action (Pasternak, 2010). National Intelligence Services vary from one country to another and it depends majorly on the commitment of national governments in protecting their national security. Intelligence services can be broadly categorized into three types namely, external, internal and unitary. External or foreign intelligence services deals with the collection of information about the capabilities of foreign states and entities and it mainly targets operations that are outside the borders of a country. Internal or domestic intelligence services on the other hand focuses or operates against targets within the borders of a country. Unitary intelligence services integrate both internal and external intelligence functions in one organization (Ehrman, 2009). Most countries have separated domestic intelligence responsibilities and foreign and law enforcement responsibilities. Currently, the top most ranked countries in terms of intelligence services include United States, Israel, United Kingdom, China, Germany and Russia. This paper explores the similarities and differences between the intelligence service of United States and United Kingdom. Domestic and Foreign Intelligence Service of United States and United Kingdom Intelligence comparison across global countries is an arduous task given the fact that intelligence is one of the closely guarded and most secretive functions of governments. Literatures on intelligence services are limited, although there has been a renewed emphasis in the western world in regard to openness to intelligence. Although considerable strides have been made towards public discussion of roles and functions of intelligence services, it is still a secretive affair in governments. Comprehensive comparison and analysis of intelligence services mandates, functions and operations is thus hampered by the restriction that exist on information access and even though the internet and other sources of data from scholars can be exploited, they are often classified (Burch, 2007; O’connell, 2004). Current prospect suggest that comparison of intelligence services can be done in a transparent environment, it should be acknowledged that it is the secrecy that enable intelligent services to operate. Domestic and foreign intelligence services between countries can be compared based on various benchmarks and parameters. Example of benchmarks or frameworks that intelligence services might be compared include national security context, national security structure, organizational size and budget, organizational cohesion, management and oversight and information collection emphasis. In addition, intelligence service comparison can also be based on the analytic emphasis of the respective agencies, intelligence-decision making relationships, operational emphasis, cooperation of intelligence agencies with other diplomatic and security organization and policies, practices and procedures for counter-intelligence (O’connell, 2004). Domestic Intelligence Both domestic intelligence services of United States and United Kingdom have common jurisdiction in relation to national security. The main function of the intelligence services include the provision of unique, special and secretive information that can aid and support security of both nations. In United States, domestic security intelligence is collected by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), a law enforcement agency that also acts as a subordinate to the attorney who is the head United States Department of Justice (Vitkauskas, 1999). Therefore, in its operations, FBI is not restricted to intelligence collection only but also it has executive action such as prosecution or other form of punishments. The domestic intelligence agency in United Kingdom is known as Security Service and commonly referred as MI-5. The role and responsibilities of MI-5 include response to security threats such as terrorism, counterintelligence, weapons of mass destruction and organized crimes within the confines of the United Kingdom territory (Vitkauskas, 1999). It is the agency that is charged with the protection and safeguarding of British economic interests and parliamentary democracy in the United Kingdom. As a domestic intelligence agency, MI-5 is responsible for the protection of public utilities such as air, gas rail and key industries such as defense contactors, civil nuclear power, oil and other crucial industries in United Kingdom (Posner, 2005). MI-5 boasts of a long term and established tradition of executing domestic intelligence operations in United Kingdom and the wider scope of responsibilities that have included electronic surveillance, recruitment and infiltration of terrorist groups (Burch, 2007). In relation to information sharing, MI-5 is the central domestic intelligence agency in United Kingdom that is charged with the collection and analysis of information and further relay them to United Kingdoms Joint Intelligence committee. The role Joint Intelligence Committee is to prioritize intelligence information from MI-5 and regularly update and provide intelligence assessments to ministers and other senior officials (Ehrman, 2009). The oversight of United Kingdoms domestic intelligence service rests with the intelligence and security committee of members of parliament. Members of this committee are direct appointees of United Kingdom Prime Minister. The development of MI-5 I United Kingdom can be attributed to a long history of United Kingdoms effort to suppress and combat militants from Irish nationalists. In addition, espionage, sabotage and recurrent threats from hostile national governments also led to the formation of MI-5 as a domestic intelligence service in United Kingdom. Presently, MI-5 has transformed, expanded and re-oriented its efforts and structures so as to deal with threats from transnational Islamic groups that operating in United Kingdom and from terrorist organizations that engages in the use of technology to develop weapons of mass destruction or proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (George & Bruce, 2008). Although MI-5 has independent and clearly defined roles and responsibilities, it works in concert with other police forces in United Kingdom such as the Metropolitan and provincial Special Branches (SB). Although the responsibilities and functions of United States and United Kingdom domestic intelligence services tend to be similar, there exist distinctive features on their origin, history and structure. The domestic intelligence services were developed and formed due to unique experience of each country and as a response to particular threats. Separation of Roles Differences between the domestic intelligence of United States and United Kingdom are explicit in terms of roles and responsibilities. United Kingdom organization that is mandated with functions of domestic intelligence (MI-5) has been separated from national police service. Subsequently, MI-5 has no powers to arrests or any other powers that are related to law enforcement agencies. In United States, domestic intelligence service roles and responsibilities are not separated from other mainstream law enforcement agencies such the police and FBI. In fact, United States has entrusted Federal Bureau Investigation (FBI) with the role of domestic intelligence maintenance and surveillance, that is, it combines both federal law enforcement and domestic intelligence within FBI (Vitkauskas, 1999). Execution of Roles and Functions / Effectiveness Due to role sharing, FBI has failed to perform its purpose of providing domestic intelligence more adequately. Since United States domestic intelligence is not separated from police, it has continued to perform dismally compared to other countries such as United Kingdom that has a domestic intelligence system that is separated from law enforcement (Posner, 2005). The decentralized nature of FBI coupled with inadequate information technology led to Al Qaeda attack since they were unable to gather comprehensive evidence across the nation. The clarity of roles in United Kingdom domestic intelligence service has contributed immensely to the enhancement of security due to minimal duplication of roles hence it as proved to be an effective intelligence arrangement. Since domestic intelligence service in United Kingdom has been separated from the police or law enforcement agencies and institutions, the role of MI-5 is limited to collection of information and it is not mandated to execute any measures but rather, it presents such information to the government either as analysis or advice. In United States, domestic intelligence service is entrusted to policemen who collect information and conduct executive actions and roles (Pasternak, 2010). Overally, MI-5 has greater strengths when compared to FBI due to its ability to function in clearly and well defined structures that put more emphasis on independent intelligence assessment that is based upon well understood rules and regulations. Consequently, MI-5 has had a long history of carrying out internal security functions and domestic intelligence roles, a factor that has contributed to its overall effectiveness (Burch, 2007). Information sharing in United States intelligence service has been hampered due to the existence of interagency rivalry between CIA and FBI. Foreign Intelligence The secret Intelligence Service or MI-6 is the agency charged with the role of supplying the British government with foreign intelligence. MI-6 roles and operations include the gathering of information across the globe that has the likelihood of impacting political and economic interests in United Kingdom. The major focus of MI-6 includes terrorism, weapon s of mass destruction and any other crimes that have potential effect on United Kingdom (George & Bruce, 2008). The historical motive for the formation of MI-6 was the need to stop the threat of invasive activities of the German military and its naval expansion and to stop Germany espionage activities in United Kingdom. MI-6 has proved to be an effective foreign intelligence agency for United Kingdom and it has earned respect in the prevention of information from leaking out to unauthorized individuals or entities. The oversight authority that is responsible for the assessment and analysis of information collected by MI-6 is the Joint Intelligence Committee. The Joint Intelligence Committee in turn distributes the intelligence reports to Whitehall departments, the Bank of England, large private banks and corporations (Posner, 2005). The Central intelligence Agency (CIA) is responsible for supplying the United States government with foreign intelligence. In addition to this role, CIA also conducts and engages in covert activities at the request and authority of the President of the United States. CIA collects information about foreign governments, corporations, individuals so as to offer advice to public policy makers (Burch, 2007). CIA has been restricted by law from operating inside United States although it has been granted the opportunity to collect intelligence from American visitors from oversees travel or people living in United States who have access to foreign intelligence. CIA is under the director of national intelligence and it gets its instructions from the white House through the National Security Council. It is important to note that, covet operations by CIA are authorized by the president. In comparison with United Kingdom MI-6, the members of the British national Security Council are the ones charged with the role of giving directives to the foreign intelligence service. The relationship of CIA and other intelligence agencies is evident in the joint use of surveillance satellites of the National Reconnaissance Office and surveillance aircrafts of United States armed forces (Pasternak, 2010). Apart from the above collaboration, CIA also operates alongside regular military forces by implanting its officers it special military divisions. United States foreign intelligence relies also on other foreign intelligence agencies by cultivating relationships with them and it has been indicated that CIA has other links with other foreign intelligence agencies such MI-6 from United Kingdom, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, Israel’s Mossad and the Australian Secret Intelligence Service (Pasternak, 2010). Collaboration between United Kingdom foreign intelligence and United States intelligence is also evident in foreign interrogations where the presence MI-6 officials at interrogations by United States CIA officials in Iraq, Guantanamo Bay and other countries have been reported. This clearly indicates that there is a degree of information sharing between the two foreign intelligence services agencies although each country has its own framework that establishes the extent to which information can be shared with other foreign intelligence agencies (George & Bruce, 2008). The historical mandate or reason for the formulation of CIA was to stabilize western politics and to skew it in favor of United States. This was particular evident after the post-war period where intelligence information from CIA was used to destabilize and remove any elements that threatened the political stability and economic reconstruction process. The objectives of both United States and United Kingdom foreign intelligence services are same as they strive to protect, safeguard and enhance foreign polices of both countries while at the same time safeguarding defence objectives, security and major economic and commercial interests. Foreign intelligence services in both countries have specialized agencies (CIA and MI-6) that are separated from other intelligence and they are responsible for the gathering of information in oversea countries. Conclusion Domestic and foreign intelligence services are important as they help governments to protect their citizens from security threats. It is evident from the analysis that the domestic intelligence service of United States is less effective when compared to that of United Kingdom. This has been majorly attributed to the lack of clearly defined roles and responsibilities and overlapping of functions. There is hence the need for the restructuring of the United States domestic intelligence service so as to separate information collection roles and executive functions. Foreign intelligence of United States (CIA) is one of the best intelligence services in the world and this is mainly as a result of its achievements and roles that extend beyond the region. The function of foreign intelligence in both countries is to promote and safeguard national interests by searching and anticipating potential events that are likely to impact on the their security and in turn take decisive actions and exploration of alternatives. However, the analysis is not comprehensive and in-depth due to the fact that intelligence remains the most secretive and closely guarded function of governments. References Burch, J. (2007). A Domestic Intelligence Agency for the United States? A Comparative Analysis of Domestic Intelligence Agencies and Their Implications for Homeland Security. Journal of the Naval Postgraduate School Center for Homeland Defense and Security , 3 (2), 1-26. Ehrman, J. (2009). What are we talking about when we are talk about Counteriltelligence? Journal of the American Intelligence Professional , 53 (2), 5-11. George, R. Z., & Bruce, J. B. (2008). Analyzing Intelligence:Origins, Obstacles, and Innovations. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. O’connell, k. m. (2004). Thinking About Intelligence Comparatively. Brown Journal of World Affairs , 11 (1), 189-198. Pasternak, A. (2010). U.S. Dependency on Foreign Intelligence: The Good and the Bad. Retrieved April 13, 2012, from http://www.policymic.com/articles/1266/u-s-dependency-on-foreign-intelligence-the-good-and-the-bad Posner, R. A. (2005). Remaking Domestic Intelligence. Stanford: Hoover Press. Vitkauskas, D. (1999). The Role of a Security Intelligence Service in a Democracy. Retrieved April 13, 2012, from http://www.nato.int/acad/fellow/97-99/vitkauskas.pdf Read More