Intelligence has come a long way since the time around 1,000 B.C. as Egyptian hieroglyphs have revealed and will only continue to grow far into the future. The Intelligence community (IC) will run into challenges far into the future but over the next several years it will be budgetary restructuring/cuts, cyber security implementation, and preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction because a transitional phase within the United States will impact intelligence operations. The intelligence community is likely to transition back to its pre-9/11 requirements thus hindering or withdrawing post 9/11 implementations and requirements.
The intelligence community has been the number one priority since 9/11 and has received the most in budgetary support but is likely to face a cut back due to the end of operations in Iraq and the dwindling operations in Afghanistan. According to the Washington Post, Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper is worried that a rerun of federal budget cuts will hinder overall intelligence operations as it did in the 1990s. This is in reference to sequestration and for the intelligence community it is more common to send employees on Furloughs to save money versus letting them go due to budget cuts (Davidson April 9, 2013). In 2010 the IC received $86.63 billion and over the last three years they have seen a decrease in support by $13.47 billion and does not take into account sequestration. This same decline occurred in the ‘90s just as indicated by DNI James Clapper and was cut from about $45 billion to about $37 billion and then took a significant spike during the time of 9/11 (Erwin, & Belasco). Also, Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn testified to the House Armed Services Committee...
... middle of paper ...
...pril 27, 2014).
Erwin, Marshall, & Belasco, Amy. "Intelligence Spending and Appropriations: Issues for Congress." Congressional Research Service: Informing the Legislative Debate Since 1914. https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/R42061.pdf (accessed April 27, 2014).
Pellerin, Cheryl . "United States Department of Defense." Defense.gov News Article: Officials: Cuts, Unstable Budget Threaten Intelligence Mission. http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=119404 (accessed April 27, 2014).
"The Global Challenge of WMD Terrorism." The Whitehouse. http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/65477.pdf (accessed April 27, 2014).
Wilshusen, Gregory. "Cyber Security: A Better Defined and Implemented National Strategy Is Needed to Address Persistent Challenges." United States Government Accountability Office. http://www.gao.gov/assets/660/652817.pdf (accessed April 27, 2014.
For the American intelligence community, George Washington is considered the father of intelligence. The introduction of the intelligence concept and its application in some missions during the early days of America helped America’s Founding Fathers to succeed against t...
and their use. In Committee on Deterring Cyber attacks: Informing Strategies and Developing Options (Ed.), Proceedings of a Workshop on Deterring Cyber attacks: Informing Strategies and Developing Options for U.S. Policy. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
The legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA, is a novel written by Tim Weiner which the author discusses how the CIA had started and how the CIA have managed to hide all the horrific failures from the world’s knowledge. I thought that this novel was going to be jaw dropping and catching your attention at every page, but unfortunately that was not the case. Tim Weiner had provided a decent amount of information about how the CIA had failed the citizens of America as well as destroy the reputation and left the agency in worse shape than when each leader had obtained it in.
...e community have had conflicting views and opposing agendas. Lack of cooperation and communication between intelligence agencies; such as the FBI and the CIA refusing to share information prior to the terrorist attacks of 2001, resulted in limited information and failure on the part of the intelligence community and policy decisions regarding US safeguards against terrorist.
The military budget alone has increased by about four hundred and ten billion dollars since 2001. That is about fifty billion dollars per year. That money has been put to use, however. A lump sum of
According to one source, after September 11, 2001, intelligence budget grew more. But now we are in another cycle of budget cut again. It is said President Obama proposed the budget amount of $52.6 billion for fiscal year 2013 to fund the National Intelligence Program. This budget amount is said to be less than the $55 billion sought last year. The unstable budget is believed to be hampering U.S. intelligence missions. As the budget pressure mounted, the redundancy in US intelligence increased too, according to the same source. With the budget deficits, the DIA budget didn’t authorized to expand its payroll. It is said DI...
Whitman, M., & Mattord, H. (2010). Management of information security. (3rd ed., p. 6). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
Petallides, C. J. (2012). "Cyber Terrorism and IR Theory: Realism, Liberalism, and Constructivism in the New Security Threat." Student Pulse, Vol 4, No 3 Accessed online http://www.studentpulse.com/a?id=627> on 12/03/14
Throughout history there are multiple intelligence failures such as 9/11 and Pearl Harbor. These failures are due to intelligence collected which was either delayed or misdirected to the rest of the intelligence community. Both events had catastrophic consequences and yet these tragic events has allowed the intelligence community to develop better security like warning signals and combat readiness to protect the United States. Pearl Harbor is still considered one of the worst intelligence failure in the history of the United States to date. During the upcoming months before the attack the U.S Naval Fleet intercepted and deciphered vast amounts of encrypted messages from Japan’s Imperial Navy. Due to manpower and at the time Japan being perceived as not a threat intercepted messages were disregarded or were delayed in being read. “The United States did not perceive the Japanese ability to attack the United States Naval Fleet at all and thus to bring the U.S into war- a step in which logically appeared to be a gross strategic miscalculation, as it indeed was” (Grabo, 2004). But ...
Of this total, around $500 billion comprises the base budget which “includes funding for the procurement of military equipment and the daily operations costs of U.S. bases” (Gould & Bender, 2015). Basically, home defense measures amount to over eighty-percent of the nation’s defense budget. With these astronomical figures, one may question whether or not these types of expenditures are excessive when considering the infrequency of attacks on U.S. soil. To further break down this nearly $500 billion base budget, roughly $200 billion is allotted for operations/maintenance, $135 billion for military personnel, $90 billion for procurement, and $65 billion for research/development (Gould & Bender, 2015). In a world where people rush to purchase lottery tickets at the hopes of hitting a jackpot worth a few million, these expenditures are incomprehensible and may seem excessive; however, not everyone feels this way. In an article found on the U.S. Department of Defense’s website, the “DoD has done its best to manage through this prolonged period of budget uncertainty, the secretary said, making painful choices and tradeoffs” and that in “today’s security environment we need to be dynamic and we need to be responsive. What we have now is a straitjacket” (Pellerin, 2015). At the end of the day, it is all about who is being asked whether the defense
Intelligence collection and apprehension of criminals have occurred for many years; however, with the exception of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, these actions were performed by different organizations. Nonetheless, roles and responsibilities have changed since the attacks on September 11, 2001. Intelligence-led policing and the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing program were incorporated, and fusion centers were established to help gather intelligence from different levels of the government. Although law enforcement at the local, state, and tribal levels aid in intelligence collection, it is important to ensure that intelligence gathered to protect national security and law enforcement intelligence are kept separately. Even though law enforcement operations can strengthen intelligence operations and vice versa, complications can arise when the two actions are combined. Government agencies must also ensure that sensitive and secret information does not leak or is not compromised when sharing intelligence. Therefore the purpose is to describe intelligence and law enforcement operations, discuss the expectations of prevention and punishment, and discuss the benefits and consequences of combining law enforcement and intelligence operations.
In recent years, many possible plans to enact government regulation to improve cybersecurity have been suggested. Most recently, in 2017, then U.S. president Barack Obama implemented the Cybersecurity National Action Plan (CNAP). The plan would have invested $19 billion in cybersecurity by gathering experts to make recommendations in regards to cyber security, help secure the government IT group, and encourage more advanced security measures (Daniel 1). However, while CNAP does present a way to solve the problem, it just adds another program that attempts to enhance cybersecurity: “It is the multiplicity of programs and division of responsibility that diminishes their effectiveness. At least eleven federal agencies bear significant responsibility for cybersecurity” (Cohen 1). Every so often, another cybersecurity program will be established, but former plans are seldom removed. This leads to a large amount of departments to share responsibility, which creates general confusion and limits each department’s power. Furthermore, widespread government regulation may weaken cybersecurity. Many fear that any regulation would not be flexible enough and would instead allow easier hacking (Ridge 3). If every system in the entire nation had the same security measures, it would be much easier to break into as by breaking into one system, a hacker a could break into everything.
The nation has become dependent on technology, furthermore, cyberspace. It’s encompassed in everything we deliver in our daily lives, our phones, internet, communication, purchases, entertainment, flying airplane, launching missiles, operating nuclear plants, and implicitly, our protection. The more ever-growing technology empower Americans, the more they become prey to cyber threats. The United States Executive Office of the President stated, “The President identified cybersecurity as one of the top priorities of his administration in doing so, directed a 60-day review to assess polices.” (United States Executive Office of the President, 2009, p.2). Furthermore, critical infrastructure, our network, and internet alike are identified as national assets upon which the administration will orchestrate integrated cybersecurity policies without infringing upon and protecting privacy. While protecting our infrastructure, personal privacy, and civil liberties, we have to keep in mind the private sector owns and operates the majority of our critical and digital infrastructure.
Thomas, Teka. "Cyber defense: Who 's in charge?" National Defense July 2015: 21+. War and Terrorism Collection. Web. 28 Oct.