The Role of Domestic Intelligence Agency in USA

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Advantages Of A Domestic Intelligence Agency
Limitations Of A Domestic Intelligence Agency
Comparison Of USA’s Domestic Intelligence With Other Countries
Conclusion
Bibliography
Footnotes

Introduction

The September 11 attacks had different implications on the security system of the United States of America. It was an attack that indicated flaws in the intelligence and law enforcement sectors. Prior to the attack, most Americans would not have imagined that such a terrorist act was possible against the world’s super power. With the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in full operation, it was unlikely that such a shocker would ever come to happen on American soil.

The occurrence of the September 11 attacks aroused mixed reactions among the American citizens as well as from the government. A major debate ensued as to whether the formation of a domestic intelligence Agency was what America needed to win the war against terrorism.

This research paper will look at the advantages and disadvantages of the formation of such an agency. The research paper will also seek to clarify that the disadvantages of such an agency surmount the advantages. Lastly, the research paper will look at some of the challenges to be faced as a direct result of the formation of a domestic intelligence agency.

Advantages Of A Domestic Intelligence Agency

The formation of a domestic intelligence agency is arguably the ultimate solution to America’s security threat. The FBI’s incapability to protect the nation from the September 11 attacks lends credence to the above statement. The most ironical fact is that the FBI agents were aware of the presence of two Al Qaeda suspects in America¹.

The FBI could have done a lot to prevent the attack had they taken this information with the seriousness that it deserved and pursued the suspects. However, their negligence is what cost the lives of innocent American citizens. A domestic intelligence agency, such as Britain’s MI5, would be the most effective agency to keep track of terrorists within the United States of America.

The formation of a domestic intelligence agency will also be a milestone in ensuring the security of Americans because such an agency will aim at dealing with security threats from the grassroots level. It is common knowledge that international terrorists have their own people at the base through which they perpetrate their crimes.

The possibility that the terrorism threats will be brought to a halt once the leaders of such terrorist gangs are caught is minimal. The most efficient course of action is to deal with the people on the ground. The arrest of such people will render their leaders less effective in accomplishing their terrorist acts.

This can only be done by a domestic intelligence that will keep important information about each and every American citizen. Therefore, the formation of a domestic intelligence agency is the best way to guarantee the eradication of terrorism threats from America.

In addition, another advantage of the formation of a domestic intelligence agency in America is that such an agency will be free from the overwhelming tasks of law enforcement. Before the September 11 attacks, the FBI was considerably successful in its operations both as an intelligence unit and a law enforcement agency.

It went a long way in keeping the United States under a stable security condition. However, the federal often tend to lean more on the law enforcement side and overlook various important aspects of its role as an intelligence unit. This pair of responsibilities is yet another reason why a domestic intelligence agency will do a better job.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has for a long time been associated with the occasional use of unconstitutional means to get at terrorists. For instance, the FBI has been known to indefinitely detain suspects of terrorism without a legal trial. This has raised alarm in the international community.

This negative publicity of the FBI is likely to hamper its intelligence efforts within the United States². For example, it is difficult for an American citizen to trust the FBI with his or her confidential information. However, the formation of a domestic intelligence agency with no past negative records will restore the confidence of many in domestic intelligence. The domestic intelligence agency will also have an easy time cooperating with the American citizens because of its adherence to the constitution.

The Criminal Intelligence Agency has also been known to be influenced by external political interests³. A good example was during the domestic intelligence operation in the 1960s and 1970s when the agency was in a position to access important information⁴. However, the information collected during this intelligence operation was politically used to trace the activities of political and human rights activists during that era.

Since then, the Americans have also been selective in the kind of information they offer to intelligence agencies in the event of a similar exercise. However, the formation of a domestic intelligence agency that solely bases its operation within the country is likely to restore the confidence of the public⁵. It is unlikely that the general public will fail to cooperate to the best of their capabilities when called upon.

A domestic intelligence agency that is only focused on intelligence activities is most likely to be less expensive to run compared to one that is both an intelligence agency and a law enforcement agency at the same time. The operations of a domestic intelligence agency will not need any supply of arms and ammunitions that form the bulk of a law enforcement agency’s budget. Instead, the agency will require simple equipment and transport means which cost less compared to what the country is currently spending on FBI operations.

Furthermore, the formation of a domestic intelligence agency will be advantageous to the United States because the agency will concentrate all its efforts on gathering intelligence information. The agency is best placed to succeed in intelligence because it will concentrate on the accomplishment of one task. Due to this, the agency is also likely to collect more helpful information compared to the FBI and CIA.

This is because the other two agencies carry out law enforcement measures as well. The agency will also be in a position to cover wider areas of intelligence compared to what the FBI and CIA have covered. This is because they have ample time to gather information pertaining intelligence.

Finally, the formation of a domestic intelligence agency will be of great advantage to the general American society because it will be more successful in operating incognito. Although the FBI undercover agents are masters of disguise, it is most likely that local terrorists having connections with international terror groups have learnt to identify them.

The chances that the FBI will manage to successfully gather intelligence about such criminals are minimal. On the other hand, the domestic intelligence agency will be successful because the terrorists do not have any experience with them. The lack of a face to face encounter with the terrorists is also an advantage to the domestic intelligence agency because the terrorists will never get to know and avoid them.

Limitations Of A Domestic Intelligence Agency

However, the formation of a domestic intelligence has its own disadvantages. First and foremost, the formation of such an agency will put civil liberties at a great risk. The fact that the domestic intelligence agency will operate in secrecy and privacy hinders congress the chance to put it in check.

No one will have an insight into what the agency will be up to except the very people in the agency. This will comprise the liberty of the American citizens. The agency will therefore be at a free will to abuse its power without the knowledge of other superior law enforcement authorities. Such a case will lead to a downright deterioration of intelligence in the United States and thus expose the country to even more severe security threats.

The formation of a domestic intelligence agency is also disadvantageous because it will form a barrier between the sharing of information with other law enforcement and intelligence agencies. It is possible that legal constraints will not allow the agency to share its intelligence information until the correct sanction procedure is undertaken.

Such bureaucracies may comprise the security of the country because they may cause delays giving the terrorists the chance to strike before the appropriate security measures can be taken based on the intelligence information gathered. Therefore, the formation of the domestic intelligence agency may expose the country to insecurity instead of salvaging it from the same.

Another disadvantage of the formation of a domestic intelligence agency is its inefficiency to eradicate terrorism from the United States when used alone. For the efforts of such an agency to bear much fruit, they need to be combined with other law enforcement measures. Intelligence information about terrorists is not enough to restore the security stability of the country.

That is why the domestic intelligence unit alone cannot suffice the security needs of the country. It will need the cooperation of other agencies which may not be certain. Unlike such an agency, the FBI and CIA are both intelligence and law enforcement units and can thus be self-reliant when it comes to dealing with terrorists.

In addition, the formation of a domestic intelligence agency is not the right decision because it portends the government’s mistrust on its own people. It is wrong for the government to generally group its citizens under the same category with international terrorists who are threatening the security of the country⁶. The government has a responsibility to treat its own citizens as such. It is therefore incumbent on it to take into consideration the constitutional rights of the citizens and only breach them when it is highly necessary.

The formation of a domestic intelligence agency is also inappropriate because its efforts are likely to be futile. It would be cumbersome for the agency to pick out a few individuals who are criminals from the whole American population. Therefore, keeping records about all the American population will not help to catch the terrorists in the country.

On the contrary, efforts should be made to trace those individuals who have past terrorism records and keep them under check. The formation of the domestic intelligence agency will therefore be unnecessary if all its efforts will not bring forth any breakthrough in the war against terrorism.

Although the operation of a domestic intelligence agency may be relatively cheap, there are instances when the expenses to be met will be extremely high. For instance, the agency will make use of data mining facilities. These facilities are very expensive. Furthermore, the domestic intelligence agency will have to employ more personnel compared to those employed by the FBI and CIA. These personnel will be in charge of collecting information from the citizens all over the country.

The equipment used in the process will also be equally expensive to acquire. Therefore, the formation of a domestic intelligence agency will mean more spending by the treasury on security maintenance. Coupled with the possibility of the futility of the agency’s operations, such extreme expenditures can be deemed as unnecessary.

The other limitation of the formation of a domestic intelligence agency is that it will create the impression that other intelligence units have failed in their duty to supply necessary intelligence information. It will also make the public think that their security instability is at an even greater risk than they had earlier imagined.

This domestic intelligence agency formation will make them think that the government is making frantic efforts to fight an already worsened situation. This perception by the public will lead to their lack of cooperation when gathering information.

In addition, the formation of a domestic intelligence agency may reduce the intensity of foreign intelligence. Domestic intelligence may get extra attention at the expense of foreign intelligence. This may happen in the case where sources indicate that the terrorists being pursued are situated inside the country.

This will have adverse effects on the security of the country if the sources are wrong. In fact, it will give the terrorists who are located in foreign countries the opportunity to orchestrate their terrorist plans. The aftermath will be a worsened security situation instead of the anticipated stability.

Comparison Of USA’s Domestic Intelligence With Other Countries

Currently, domestic intelligence in the United States is less intensive compared to other countries. In other countries such as Britain, domestic intelligence has received a lot of attention compared to foreign intelligence. The MI5 has been crucial in divulging information about terrorists based in Britain.

On the contrary, the United States has relied significantly on foreign intelligence to gather information about terrorists. The Central Intelligence Agency has been on the forefront in gathering foreign intelligence. However, there is also substantial domestic intelligence inside the United States which is mainly carried out by the FBI.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it can be seen from the above discussion that the formation of a domestic intelligence agency in the United States of America has its advantages as well as disadvantages. However, it is notable that the disadvantages of the formation of such an agency are weightier compared to its advantages.

This implies that the formation of the agency will not be effective in alleviating the security threats in the country. In fact, it may worsen the situation. Lastly, it can also be inferred from the above discussion that compared to other countries, the United States has not intensified domestic intelligence.

Bibliography

Blackstock, Nelson. Cointelpro. The FBI’s Secret War on Political Freedom. New York, NY: Pathfinder, 1988.

Davis, James. Spying on America: The FBI’s Domestic Counter-Intelligence Program. New York, NY: Praeger, 1992.

Donner, Frank. The Age of Surveillance. The Aims and Methods of America’s Political Intelligence System. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1980.

Kate, Martin. “Domestic Intelligence and Public Liberties.” ProQuest 24 (2004): 7.

Theoharis, Athan. The FBI: A Comprehensive Reference Guide. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press, 1999.

Theoharis, Athan. Spying on Americans: Political Surveillance from Hoover to the Huston Plan. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, 1978.

Footnotes

¹ Martin Kate, “Domestic Intelligence and Public Liberties,” ProQuest 24 (2004): 7.

² Athan Theoharis, The FBI: A Comprehensive Reference Guide (Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press, 1999), 21.

³ Frank Donner, The Age of Surveillance. The Aims and Methods of America’s Political Intelligence System (New York: Alfred A. Kropf, 1980), 2.

⁴ James Davis, Spying on America: The FBI’s Domestic Counter-Intelligence Program (New York, NY: Praeger, 1992), 5.

⁵ Nelson Blackstock, Cointelpro. The FBI’s Secret War on Political Freedom (New York, NY: Pathfinder, 1988), 3.

⁶ Athan Theoharis, Spying on Americans: Political Surveillance from Hoover to the Huston Plan (Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, 1978), 3.

Click Here To Order Now!