To
address the challenges facing the U.S. intelligence community in the 21st century, congressional and executive branch
initiatives have sought to improve coordination among the different agencies
and to encourage better analysis. In December 2004, the Intelligence Reform and
Terrorism Prevention Act (P.L. 108-458) was signed, providing for a Director of
National Intelligence (DNI) with substantial authorities to manage the national
intelligence effort. The legislation also established a separate Director of
the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Making cooperation effective presents
substantial leadership and managerial challenges. The needs of intelligence “consumers”—ranging
from the White House to Cabinet agencies to military commanders—must all be
met, using many of the same systems and personnel.
Intelligence
collection systems are expensive and some critics suggest there have been
elements of waste and unneeded duplication of effort while some intelligence “targets”
have been neglected. The DNI has substantial statutory authorities to address
these issues, but the organizational relationships remain complex, especially
for intelligence agencies that are part of the Defense Department. Members of
Congress will be seeking to observe the extent to which effective coordination
is accomplished.
International
terrorism, a major threat facing the United States in the 21st century, presents a difficult analytical
challenge, vividly demonstrated by the attempted bombing of a commercial aircraft
approaching Detroit on December 25, 2009. Counterterrorism requires the close coordination
of intelligence and law enforcement agencies, but there remain many
institutional and procedural issues that complicate cooperation between the two
sets of agencies. Particular challenges relate to the protection of civil
liberties that surround collecting information about U.S. persons.
Techniques
for acquiring and analyzing information on small groups of plotters differ significantly
from those used to evaluate the military capabilities of other countries, with
a much higher need for situational awareness of third world societies. U.S.
intelligence efforts are complicated by unfilled requirements for foreign
language expertise.
Intelligence
on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction was inaccurate and Members have criticized
the performance of the intelligence community in regard to current conditions
in Afghanistan, Iran, and other areas. Improved analysis, while difficult to
mandate, remains a key goal. Better human intelligence, it is widely agreed, is
also essential, but very challenging to acquire.
Intelligence
support to military operations continues to be a major responsibility of
intelligence agencies. The use of precision guided munitions depends on
accurate, real-time targeting data; integrating intelligence data into military
operations challenges traditional organizational relationships and requires
innovative technological approaches. Intelligence agencies will continue to be
challenged in discriminating between legitimate targets and innocent
bystanders. The effort to reduce government expenditures has not neglected the
intelligence community. The Administration is considering long-term reductions
with an emphasis on potentially redundant information technology systems. There
is great concern, however, that any reductions be carefully made to avoid
curtailing capabilities that have become integral to military operations and to
policymaking in many areas, including counterterrorism and cybersecurity.
Source: US Congress 2011
Comments