Setting Analytical Priorities in US Intelligence - Essay Example

Name: Tutor: Course: Date: Setting Analytical Priorities in US Intelligence Introduction Intelligence can be referred to as the knowledge that has been collected and prepared to cover a specific circumstance. Intelligence is produced by human beings while the intelligence collection systems produce the necessary data (Christopher 12). The analysis and verification of information enables one to understand the core problem and the end result is referred to as intelligence. Traditionally, intelligence falls under the government organization although it has lately expanded into the private sector. Private firms that deal with intelligence adapt the model used by the national security intelligence. Conversion of information into intelligence is very important as the government uses intelligence in policy making. Information in general might not be of any use good in policy making as it requires to be evaluated and analyzed so as it can have any value. Current intelligence can inform the decision makers of any developments in any sector (Odom 16). In the case of estimative intelligence, the policy makers are informed of what is likely to happen within a specified time. This enables the government to deal with such outcomes as security threat of any kind. Warning intelligence makes the policymakers understand the issues that need to be addressed urgently. These might address a political scenario in a country where the head of state or the convened bodies are supposed to make the specific decision relating to the intelligence gathered. The national intelligence community has an executive branch that deals with classified studies in order to gather classified intelligence that is later handed over to the president, military leaders or other senior individuals in the government. Private sector establishments may source for information then analyze it to get intelligence in similar ways as it is done by the national authorities. By performing thorough analysis of the available information, private bodies may produce intelligence that can assist their leaders in planning and executing decisions that might improve their corporate image in the highly competitive world. In US intelligence plays a vital role in the support of the policy making process. Intelligence bodies gather information and then process it and then provide the intelligence to the federal government. Policy makers may make use of intelligence while making their decisions on important matters affecting the government. Before the Persian Gulf War of 1991, the US Intelligence organizations gave a lot of intelligence about Iraq to policymakers who included the Congress. Most of the intelligence was gathered through satellites, intercepted signals, and agent reports (Odom 18). The intelligence that was used is constantly criticized as if failed to get the crucial information from the close associates of Saddam Hussein. Human intelligence (humint) was therefore not used appropriately leading to a situation where policymakers acted on intelligence that was not very accurate. Intelligence is also applied in the business field. An entrepreneur in the telecommunications market may find it challenging to predict the future of an existing technology (Naftali 49). Analysis and data evaluation is the only way that the future of a business can be estimated as it involves deducing the factors that can influence the future market. These possibilities are however analyzed by experts in technology sector who provide a detailed analysis of how the future of the business is likely to be. After the intelligence officers and the entrepreneur agree on the nature of the intelligence to be conducted, the intelligence requirements are then drafted and put into n action plan. The relationship between the customer and the intelligence team at this stage determines the outcome of the whole process. Customers require intelligence to guide them in deciding on the suitable policy for implementing their decisions. The final intelligence provided may be used by the entrepreneur to introduce sustainable policy for the business. The role of the intelligence is to tell the customer about the facts of the matter without suggesting to the customer on the decision to make. Intelligence may not be framed in a way that the customer understands it easily. It therefore calls for the intervention of the intelligence officers so as to carry out the relevant interpretation of the intelligence provided. Intelligence officers are supposed to always remain independent advisor to the client who in turn makes the final decisions. The use on the intelligence in implementation of policies depends on whether the intelligence provided is tactical or strategic (Odom 21). Strategic intelligence provides the policymaker with a broader picture of the issues affecting an organization while tactical intelligence is based on the current situations in an organization and may be used by marketing executives or trade negotiators. Since the strategic intelligence is based on the future of an organization, it can be used by corporate executives, military commanders, senior diplomats, and presidents. For any intelligence to be considered worthy, it must adhere to intelligence values of accuracy, objectivity, usability, relevance, readiness, and timeliness. Accuracy implies that all the data sources must be evaluated for technical error. Objectivity is about ensuring that the intelligence is not distorted to fit self-interest. To ensure that the value of usability is followed, the intelligence produced should be compatible for customer use. To be relevant the intelligence should be significant to the client’s initial requirements (Naftali 44). The value of readiness implies that the intelligence systems should be on standby to deal with any requirements that might be raised by customers. Any intelligence that is produced late might not be acted on by the customer. Intelligence officers should therefore ensure that schedule of operation is followed. Information analysis is done to illustrate the problem that is being scrutinized for the gathering of intelligence. Intelligence is analyzed in order to let the policy maker understand the importance of the targeted information. It is through intelligence analysis that the outcomes in a particular scenario are estimated. Various analysis result to conclusions that are related to intelligence food chain. The intelligence food chain is based of facts, findings, forecasts, and fortunetelling as a way of analyzing the validity of intelligence. Effective analysis of information depends on the relationship between the customer and the intelligence officer. Government analysts are normally at an advantage because they have closer relationship with the government who are the policymakers (Harold 69). This is however different with the private analysts who may not be closely associated with the US government. The US intelligence system can be said not to have been very successful in providing intelligence about the operations of the Al-Qaeda group. US intelligence system does not support unsubstantiated reports about the dangers or threats facing US (Odom 17). The US intelligence community is also affected by the federal government bureaucracy and demands which at times lead to the delay in matters that require the attention of the intelligence community The office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) is also a member of the national Intelligence Community (IC) in US. This intelligence body is mandated to provide security intelligence to the US Secretary and other federal government officials. It does so by analyzing and disseminating any information that might be related to the homeland security threat, and then presenting the intelligence to the selected federal officials and the IC. The I&A organizations works closely with private sector intelligence organizations to ensure that any non-traditional form of information is combined with the traditional source from the IC to provide appropriate assessment of any threat that the country might be facing.I&A deals with five main threats that US is vulnerable to. One of them is the threats related to border security. This organization assesses all the border entries to the US, including air and sea. Drugs and narcotics are the main threat that can easily get into the US through the borders. Human trafficking and money laundering are also likely to take place through the American borders. Any foreign government that interferes with the normal operations at the border, are also closely monitored by I &A. The other objective of I&A is to curb the threat of violent extremism. In order to understand the internal threat of extremism this intelligence body works together with FBI and Intelligence Community with an aim of identifying the possible risks and share the intelligence in time.I&A is also mandated to analyze any threat from specific groups entering the United States. Such groups may be used or funded by terrorists or other criminal gangs, to cause harm in United States by interrupting security. The fourth agenda for I&A is to provide intelligence on threats to the homeland’s critical infrastructure and key resources. All the intelligence gathered from IC is incorporated with the information from the infrastructure operators. Intelligence touching on cyber crime and domestic terrorism is closely monitored and evaluated, and if it is noted early enough, the relevant authorities are informed. Intelligence touching on weapons of mass destruction and health threats is also evaluated by I&A. This enables the relevant authority to control the entry of radiological, biological, or chemical nuclear material that might threaten the security of Americans. For many years consumers of intelligence have realized that analysis is very significant in gathering information. All the consumers in US demand for analysis of intelligences. Some of these consumers include the White House, Congress, DOD, and army commanders (Odom 19). In 1990 some policies touching on analytical support of intelligence gathered by various organizations. During the same period, there were debates on the need to downsize the Intelligence Community unit in US. Decisions made by leaders concerning priorities are of vital importance to intelligence analysts. The recruitment of analysts and their rewards remains a prerogative of the Director of Intelligence. Factors that affect leadership in the intelligence department include policy issues and the funding from the Congress. With appropriate guidance from their managers, analysts have to be ready for any changes that might be implemented in the management of national intelligence. In the early 1990’s, the US government realized that the expertise in analysis was declining to unsatisfactory level. The decline in the analytic strength was attributed to the downsizing of the personnel in the security department (Clark 26). This affected the issues of national security in US and triggered the government’s attention towards the need for training intelligence analysts. There were suggestions that more resources needed to be allocated towards the development of analytical skills. There were others who supported the idea of investing more in research and development of security issues in order to boosts the skills of the intelligence analysts. A report that was prepared by the Task Force on the Future of Intelligence, 1996, suggested the need to increase the national budget on security so that the salaries of the analysts would be increased. As a result most of the intelligence analysts supported the national security policy that emphasized that the need to invest in analysts was a national priority. Another report that addressed the US Intelligence performance on the Indian Nuclear tests was presented in 1998 by David Jeremiah. It called for more analytic coverage on nuclear developments in South Asian countries (Naftali 52). The failure to anticipate the repeat of the Indian nuclear test in May 1998 was attributed to the lack of expertise in intelligence analysis. Failure of the intelligence analysts to anticipate missile threats to Unite States was further confirmed in the Rumsfeld Commission of 1998 that was formed to assess the ballistic missile threats to the United States. Another commission that was formed in 1996 to investigate the capabilities of US Intelligence Community recommended a promotion and specialization of intelligence analysts (Clark 27). This could be done through specialized trainings that are specially designed to fit the analysts’ requirements. Also in the recommendation was that analysts needed to be given more opportunities to travel to countries that they are expected to gather intelligence from.To ensure that analysts deliver their services effectively, the US government should encourage them to take university courses both locally and abroad in their areas of expertise. They should also be allowed to interact with other experts from the private sectors or from other countries. If intelligence analysts are encouraged to remain in their areas of specialization without being moved to other areas or managerial positions, they are likely to grow through experience. Career incentives that encourage people in the managerial positions to be flexible should be adjusted to include the intelligence analysts. All the best analysts in the US government should enjoy similar benefits enjoyed by their counterparts in other countries by being given opportunity to study foreign languages and foreign cultures. A report on the task force formed in 1996, making intelligence smatter, also gave recommendations that priority should be given to managerial skills and analytic specialization as fundamental principles for quality intelligence analysis (Clark 65). Career personnel in intelligence should be rewarded for their good performance and those targeted for promotions should be taken through formal leadership training. More investments should be directed towards the supports of in-depth analysis. Threats such as weapons of mass destruction require to be accorded priority and their intelligence analysis should be on long-term basis. Some more measures regarding analytical priorities included the categorizing of analysts according to their areas of specialization such as military analysis, leadership analysis, and economics analysis. This was later extended to the Sherman Kent School of Intelligence Analysis after the school was started in the year 2000. As part of its expansion plan, the school launched a Career Analyst Program that was to provide intensive training to the new students. With the growth in technology, the analytic career seems to be changing in policy priorities and leadership strategic planning (Naftali 47). Intelligence analysts should extend their responsibilities towards a broad range of analytical tasks. Analysts should also have the passion to uphold a distinctive in-depth expertise in their intelligence analysis. Analyst career planning should be based on improving the skills and standards that are associated with quality intelligence analysis. When analysts are given a specialized task should strive to develop analytical tasks that have a broader perspective. In addition, when intelligence analysts are involved in research, they should invest in self training to acquire specific skills that can be applied in other forms of intelligence analysis. The self training prepares an analyst for future redeployment in a different analytical assignment. Analysts taking part in a specialized assignment should be keen to sharpen skills in helpful management of intelligence gathering. It is also necessary for the analyst to acquire skills for critical evaluation of any information presented including human intelligence (Harold 24). Efficient intelligence analysis involves making sound judgments concerning the identification of any variables and assumptions. It is also of great importance for the analysts to understand their policymakers and how they operate. Conclusion In conclusion analysts should take complex assignments as personal motivation for their career development. To be able to engage in such a task an analyst should embark in conducting thorough research to advance his skills. To understand the underlying political, economic, and cultural factors, an analyst should learn to seek for assistance from the colleagues who are more experienced. In addition, an analyst should develop a habit of reading books and journals that contain relevant issues related to intelligence analysis. Works Cited Christopher, Andrew. For the President’s Eyes Only: Secret Intelligence and the American Presidency from Washington to Bush. New York: Harper Collins, 2005. Naftali, Timothy. Blind Spot: The Secret History of American Counterterrorism. New York: Basic Books, 2005. Michael A. Turner a“Journal of Intelligence and counterintelligence" Harold, Ford. CIA and the Vietnam Policymakers: Three episodes 1962-1968. Washington DC: CIA, 2004. Clark, R. Against all Enemies: Inside America’s War on Terror. New York: Free Press, 2004 Odom, W. Fixing Intelligence. New Heaven: Yale University Press, 2003. Michael A. Turner Read More