Comparison between the Director of National Intelligence and Director of Central Intelligence - Assignment Example

Military Sciences Question Comparison between the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) and Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) The president established the office of the DNI in April 2005 to replace the office of the DCI. The DCI’s fifty-seven years of existence ended at that time. The creation the DNI followed the enactment of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 currently known as the Intelligence Reform Act. The achievement of the DNI against the former Director of DCI is that the responsibilities of the Director DNI are clear (Richelson, 2012, p. 23). The former Director of DCI was accused of leading a loosely attached group of fifteen separate intelligence entities. The National Security Act outlines the responsibilities formerly assigned to the intelligence. To begin with, it was the duty of the DCI to give the President and other senior officials in the government national intelligence. His duties extended to providing the same information to the Congress when the institution felt necessary. However, his successor provides tactical military intelligence to the military commanders in addition to the other duties. The National Security Acts identifies the second role of the DCI to be in charge of intelligence. Powers conferred to the DCI as the head of intelligence include establishing priorities for analysis. The Director also prepares the budget for the President that covers all the intelligence programs. Other duties include transferring funds and staffs across the NIP. However, his authority on this duty was limited. The DCI also headed the CIA Director oversaw collection of information by the human resources department, supervising the analysis of collected information, and undertaking secret actions with instructions from the President. The 9/11 commission’s recommendations replaced the DCI with the DNI to run the affairs of the national intelligence programs and overall management of affiliated bodies. The intelligence reform act allocates two of the three duties that the National Security Act had assigned to the DCI to the DNI. The DNI’s new roles will include among others giving intelligence to the President and other senior state officers. The Director also has the responsibility of providing intelligence information to the Congress whenever the Congress deems it appropriate to receive the information. Additionally, the DNI also heads the Intelligence community. Among the DCI roles, taken away from the DNI is the authority to head the CIA. The Intelligence Reform Act has the office of the Director Central Intelligence agency (DCIA). The DCIA heads the CIA but reports to the DNI as he gives him security briefings. While undertaking his duties the DCIA gathers intelligence using the human resources and other means that are right (Richelson, 2012, p. 29) . While discharging these duties he cannot use the police or any other law enforcement officers. The Director evaluates and correlates collected intelligence and disseminates the same information when appropriate. The DCIA coordinates and controls processes that entail collection of intelligence outside the US by human resources. He also takes instructions from the President and the DNI on matters regarding intelligence. He also coordinates the intelligence services between the US and other countries. It is clear that there are three formal differences between the DCI and the DNI. First, the DNI has oversight and authority to coordinate both domestic and foreign intelligence. However, the DCI did not have the legal mandate to supervise domestic intelligence. Formerly, the DCI and the DCIA were two offices held by one person as the law stipulated. The Intelligence Reform Act currently separates the holders of the two offices and establishes DCIA and the DNI with the DCIA reporting to the DNI. The staff working under the DNI is bigger than one directed by the DCI because surveillance of domestic intelligence is under him. The National Intelligence Council gives the DNI powers to do analysis of intelligence. However, the DNI retains the duties of the DCI as the primary intelligence adviser to the President; he enjoys greater authority on budgetary and personnel decisions involving the entire fifteen member intelligence communities in the US (Richelson, 2012, p. 77). The DCI had limited authority on these matters. The DNI has new roles added to him after 2009. Financially, the DNI’s personnel in the US government got authority on reimbursable and non-reimbursable foundations for a period of two years. The DNI also has authority to address pay issues for sensitive positions in various parts of the Intelligence Community. He is only allowed to do this duty where the formal contracts do not exist. The DNI also delegates authority of approving specific travel allowances to common carriers relating to the head of individual Intelligence Community elements. In all this endeavours however, the DNI needs to conduct accountability reviews where there are deficiencies and failures on the part of intelligence community. Question 3 Using the Foreign Intelligence Service to fight Asymmetric Warfare The United States faces the most complex foreign intelligence threat than any other country in the world. To fight the Asymmetrical warfare, the US employs the services of the Foreign Intelligence Service (FIS) because of various success reasons. The foreign threats are increasingly becoming asymmetrical as it comes from traditional foreign intelligence services, non-state actors operating within decentralized organizations, and non-traditional intelligence threats. Asymmetrical threats entail armed conflicts in pursuit of political goals. The war involves distribution of power in an impropriate manner. The side that feels weaker starts the war in most cases. The foreign intelligence service helps the US in maintaining a unique and superior capacity in the wake of increased and complex foreign threats. The FIS guides the US in projecting the global power, enhancing the deep strike capacity, developing high capacity and performance combat units, preparing joint and combined doctrine, and having superior knowledge, planning, and data dominance on security matters (Richelson, 2012, p. 123). The foreign intelligence service is successful because it operates on particular fundamentals to combat the foreign threats. The FIS has a strategic vision and plan that is multi-faceted. The structure of the FIS counters the multi-faceted and international appearance of asymmetrical warfare. The FIS pulls together various capabilities that originate from multiple sources. This includes among others the public, private, military, and civilian. FIS’s organizational vision is grand, comprehensive, and well coordinated. The program is international but controlled from the US with designated officers in charge of regional control. Proper coordination makes sure that human resources are organized and work as a unit. The FIS leadership eliminates any overlapping duties and duplication of duties. Agencies are assigned specific chores all under the overall mission of the intelligence. The Director National Intelligence (DNI) has powers to summon and direct the Director Central Intelligence Agency (DCIA). This creates single line of power with respective officers having authority in their area of jurisdiction. The coordination and control runs both vertically and horizontally in the chain of command (Richelson, 2012, p. 131). This enhances operational coordination within the FIS and eliminates bureaucratic overlaps. The foreign intelligence service is very flexible and this helps in countering the highly evolutionary asymmetrical threats. The counter mechanisms by the FIS are accurate, specifically designed for particular operations, and appropriate. Success actions by the foreign intelligence service include getting information to the US security agencies on the operation Anadyr. This was a military advancement ideology by the Soviet Union to deploy medium-range ballistic missiles (MRBM). This was in addition to using the intermediate-range ballistic missiles. Te FIS gathered information pertaining to the Soviet Union as well as Cuba’s tactical nuclear weapons in 1962. This information was essential for the US any of the adversaries could apply them in attacking the US during the Cold War and after. The US relies on the FIS to counter several actions of terrorism by proxy aimed at the US and United Kingdom. Several Islamic States feeling disillusioned by the US do this. Using the FIS, the US discovered the Serbs were taking UN staff and holding them hostage to force NATO from escalating the war against them. The most successful and outstanding work of the foreign intelligence service is the Operation Desert Storm (Richelson, 2012, p. 112). Using the information gathered by the FIS, the fourth largest army in the world was defeated within four days. To the US, it was bloodless as the nation lost one hundred and forty-seven soldiers only leaving four hundred and sixty-seven others wounded. The US victory in the operation desert storm looked easy but it came on the backdrop of well-orchestrated plans by the FIS that gathered adequate information that the military and the government used in execution operations. The war by Taleban’s in Afghanistan could be at high rates currently. However, the US uses the foreign intelligence services to map out the hideouts of the militia groups and help keep the legitimate government in power. The Islamic groups have their plans for raids and attacks quashed before execution courtesy of the foreign intelligence service. The suicide bombers can kill multitudes if they not nipped in the bud. Al-Qaida is the biggest asymmetric warfare group in the world today. Among its terrorist activities, the network masterminded the September 11 attack on the Pentagon and the World Trade Organization head offices bombed the US embassy in Kenya and Tanzania on 7 September 1998. After carrying out these heinous activities, the foreign intelligence helps fight them with several of their planned attacks discovered before execution. Containing this network could be a bigger problem without the services of the foreign intelligence group. Through coordinated efforts of the SEAL and the FIS, Osama was gunned yet it had taken the world time to hunt for him. Works Cited Richelson, Jeffrey. The Us Intelligence Community. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2012. Print. Read More