The art of Counter Intelligence is a framework of a spy network whose purpose of existence is to obtain intelligence data for analysis pertaining to national security . This structure and purpose of this paper is to conduit two contrasting objectives to the Counter Intelligence framework. Counter Intelligence of national government against national government and counter intelligence of citizenry against government are the objectives to be examined. The purpose of the examining these two contrasting objectives is to render whether counter intelligence measures are inherently damaging to either the citizenry of a national government or damaging to the national government(s).
Counterintelligence (CI) is defined as, “information gathered and activities conducted to identify, deceive, exploit, disrupt, or protected against espionage, other intelligence activities, sabotage, or assassination conducted for or on behalf of foreign powers, organizations or persons, or their agents, or international terrorist organizations or activities. ” The citizenry of the United States on the U.S. Government is the focus of the examination of counter intelligence of citizenry on its national government. Data collected and research performed by James Riedel seeks to establish the citizens as a network of spies on the U.S. Government. The spying of citizens on the government is referred to as “espionage” . Counter Intelligence as acts of espionage committed by U.S. citizens is described by Riedel as short in duration and “poorly paid” .
Compare & Contrast CI Objectives
The act of espionage is as a facilitator of sensitive information that may compromise the operations of the U.S. government. The citizen, who may also be a government employee ...
... middle of paper ...
...telligence measures deemed necessary to infiltrate the espionage network and determine the actors responsible for committing the counterintelligence.
The CI has been a means to determine the presence of espionage by citizens of domestic as well as foreign countries. Whether the citizens are private or military has been rendered as immaterial for purposes specific to CI. The implementation of counterintelligence by either by acts of espionage from a citizen source acting on their own or via a government entity can either hurt or help a foreign country or a private citizen. Espionage by a government entity on another government entity via the infiltration of an agent network will likely be of benefit to the underlying national population and in contrast, should CI fall into the wrong hands, may be of potential danger to a underlying national population as well.
Guilford, CT: Dushkin/ McGraw-Hill, 1997. Chiatkin, Anton. A. Treason in America. Washington DC: Executive Intelligence. Review, a review of the book, Divine, Breen, Frederickson, and Williams. America Past and Present.
With the ideals of the government on the war growing in the nation, Congress passed the Espionage Act of 1917. After a joint session of Congress, where President Wilson reported on relations with Germany, the first of three bills that would create the Espionage Act of 1917, was introduced. The Congr...
The pros of electronic surveillance are extensive. The ability for agents of the United States Intelligence Community (IC) to intercept and process communications and information from foreign powers, agents of foreign powers, international terrorist organizations, and others who seek to engage in activities with such groups, provides the ...
Sulick, Michael J.. Spying in America espionage from the Revolutionary War to the dawn of the Cold War., Georgetown University Press, 2012
In times of great terror and panic, the citizens of a nation must decide what they value most: their right to privacy or the lives of the innocent. Government surveillance is criticized, however there are times in a nation’s history where, in order to ensure the safety of their citizens, they must surveill the country for potential hazards that might exist in the world. The government-issued program, COINTELPRO--a series of illegal projects during the twentieth century organized by the Federal Bureau of Investigation--while heavily criticized for its unconstitutional grounds--was justified because it benefitted the nation during a period of upheaval. COINTELPRO is popularly condemned by historians and professors such as Brandeis University Professor of Sociology, David Cunningham, who asserts that the FBI counterintelligence program was only a form of repression that allowed for the government to suppress matters that they consider bothersome (234) This however was not the case. COINTELPRO was necessary because of the great social unrest, individuals posed threats to society, and creating operations that were beneficial to the United States.
With the introduction of the internet being a relatively new phenomenon, the act of cyber espionage is not something that has been properly acknowledged by society. The American Government has done a stand up job of keeping its methods in the shadows and away from the eyes of its people since its documented domestic surveillance began on October 4th, 2001; Twenty three days after the Twin Towers fell President George Bush signed an order to begin a secret domestic eavesdropping operation, an operation which was so sensitive that even many of the country's senior national security officials with the...
Dissatisfied with the scope of the Espionage Act, Congress was compelled to add an amendment to further penalize “crimes of disloyalty” against the United States (James and Wells, 71). Congress enacted an amendment that would be known as the Sedition Act which broadened the scope of what would be considered disloyal to the United States.
Nedzi (D-Mich.), Luclen N. “Oversight or Overlook: Congress and the US Intelligence Agency.” A Congressman talk to the CIA senior seminar, November 14, 1979, https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/kent-csi/vol18no2/pdf/v18i2a02p.pdf (accessed January 7, 2014).
Throughout the years most country's governments have established some sort of secret police. No matter what the government called it, whether it is the United States' Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) or her Majesty's secret service (MI6), whatever name the government used, the international term of "secret police" could always be applied. Many agencies of secret police have had their success and failures, some more than others. The KGB, which in English means "the Committee of Public Safety," has had their share of both successes and failures. Most secret police agencies have been used primarily to obtain information from other countries. This was also a primary goal for the KGB, but one of their other goals, which was just as important, was to keep unwanted outside information from the Russian people. This was only one out of many the KGB's objectives. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to prove that the actions of the KGB were, all in all, a success.
Domestic Surveillance Citizens feeling protected in their own nation is a crucial factor for the development and advancement of that nation. The United States’ government has been able to provide this service for a small tax and for the most part it is money well spent. Due to events leading up to the terrifying attacks on September 11, 2001 and following these attacks, the Unites States’ government has begun enacting certain laws and regulations that ensure the safety of its citizens. From the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978 to the most recent National Security Agency scandal, the government has attempted and for the most part succeeded in keeping domestic safety under control. Making sure that the balance between obtaining enough intelligence to protect the safety of the nation and the preservation of basic human rights is not extremely skewed, Congress has set forth requisites in FISA which aim to balance the conflicting goals of privacy and security; but the timeline preceding this act has been anything but honorable for the United States government.
Tidd, J. M. (2008). From revolution to reform: A brief history of U.S. intelligence. The SAIS
Hulnick, A. ‘What’s wrong with the intelligence cycle’, Intelligence and National Security Journal, Routledge Publications, Volume 21, Issue 6, dated 1 December, 2006, pp 961.
United Sttes. Central Intelligence. Operations. By Richard Helms. United States Government. 14 Apr. 2013 .
Espionage is defined as the act or practice of spying.1 The term ‘industrial espionage’ , also known as ‘corporate espionage’ or ‘cyber espionage’, is the act of stealing trade secrets through the removal, duplicating or recording of highly confidential or valuable information in order to gain a competitive advantage. It is defined as the use of illicit means by more aggressive competitors to disrupt their rival’s operations or gain access to their sensitive information for a better competitive edge.2 While industrial espionage involves the theft of information for commercial purposes, which is obviously illegal, competitive intelligence is the legal gathering of information through conventional practices such as picking up scrap information through attending trade shows or through sources readily available i.e. corporate publications, patent filings and websites.3 Trade secrets are a form of intellectual property thus industrial espionage is most commonly linked with technology-heavy industries, especially in the computer and auto sectors where a great deal of money is splurged on research and development since technological change in this modern era has become a growing importance to business performance.
A universally agreed definition of the word “intelligence” is yet to be adopted. Nonetheless, a common element of intelligence operations, as evident in most conventional definitions of the phenomenon, is secrecy (Dupont, 2005; Cogan, 2004; Scott & Jackson, 2004). However, with technological advances, information can now be accessed from sources the intelligence community views as open (Rolington, 2013). As seen later, this has its own advantages and disadvantages. Some contemporary definitions are firmly emphasising that the traditional concept of secrecy is increasingly becoming less useful as the need for information sharing becomes imperative to intelligence operations (Scott & Jackson, 2004; Cogan, 2004; Warner, n/d). On the other hand, it is argued that as long as it is open, it cannot be secretive (Lowenthal, 2009). Certainly, big data holds a huge promise for intelligence, but whether or not the line between intelligence and information is disappearing is a two-sided c...