Intelligence agencies and the war on terrorism: International models

The mission of intelligence agencies is changing with the terrorist threat growing and terrorist organizations proving more capable of crossing the borders of states. Intelligence agencies are reconsidering their traditional jobs and the way they deal with information. The priorities of these agencies are also changing. The same agencies are reformulating their relations with intelligence agencies in other countries.

These changes are turning counterterrorism into a main mission for intelligence agencies. This priority change is clear in the ongoing war on terrorism. The war included strong cooperation between intelligence agencies in almost all countries. Some countries within the US-led international coalition against terrorism contributed nothing to the coalition more than intelligence.

The role intelligence agencies play in the war on terrorism is expected to grow even more in the future with this terrorism becoming a continual threat to the security of countries. This threat keeps changing as information and communication technologies change and become more sophisticated.

International efforts

The presence of enough or advanced arms is no longer a decisive element in the war on terrorism. Information is continually proving to be the most important factor in this war, given the nature of the war itself. When fighting terrorists or terrorist organizations, states usually do not know the limits of the fight. This is why helping intelligence agencies carry out their mission in this war is becoming something of extreme importance.

Here are examples of states where intelligence played a decisive role in the war against terrorism:

United States

The 9/11 attacks prompted the formation by the US Congress of a commission to study the reasons behind the attacks. The commission was also assigned the mission of recommending action to avoid a repetition of the attacks in the future. The commission also recommended the following:

·       Founding a national counterterrorism center to address the structural problems of the intelligence community, especially the lack of a specific agency for the fight against terrorism. The commission treated the proposed center as a section of the intelligence agency. The center's mission was to fight terrorism and also concentrate the counterterrorism abilities of the intelligence agency on this fight.

·       Removing barriers between security and intelligence which ended the lack of coordination between law enforcement agencies and the intelligence agency. The lack of coordination in this regard hindered the fight against terrorism becoming effective. The United States introduced many changes to the security establishment by merging it into the national intelligence agency. It created the post of the director of national intelligence whose job was to coordinate the work of all security agencies.

·       Creating the post of director of national intelligence whose job was to include all intelligence agencies in one network that receives information and resources freely.

British intelligence

The UK witnessed a series of terrorist attacks, amid demands for bettering coordination between intelligence agencies in the light of growing challenges. Demands were also made for increasing supervision on terrorists, fighting electronic crime and combating human trafficking. The UK introduced the following changes for a more effective fight against terrorism:

·       Integrating intelligence agencies, especially after the June 2005 attack at a train station in London. The foreign intelligence agency was incorporated into the homeland intelligence agency.

·       Intensifying the verification of information to help intelligence agencies make a better assessment of the enormity of the terrorist threat.

·       Expanding the mandate of the intelligence agency in November 2016 when the British parliament approved a bill in this regard.

·       The Investigatory Powers act was issued in November 2016 to expand cooperation between law enforcement agencies and the intelligence agency.

·       The UK declared its new counterterrorism strategy in June 2018. The strategy strengthened cooperation between the British intelligence agency, MI5, on one hand, and police, local authorities and the private sector on the other.

Outstanding international efforts

Expanding the counterterrorism role of intelligence agencies

Intelligence agencies were given the mandate to monitor electronic communications, hack sites and eavesdrop on phone conversations. Intelligence personnel were allowed to carry unreal identification documents to disguise themselves and be able to get the information they want. In May 2015, the Canadian parliament approved a new anti-terrorism bill that entitled the Canadian intelligence agency to a more robust role in the fight against terrorism.

Removing barriers between security and intelligence

The lack of proper coordination between law-enforcement agencies, on one hand, and intelligence agencies, on the other, is a major stumbling block on the road of effectively fighting terrorism. The US intelligence agency started to play a bigger role in the fight against terrorism, especially after the 9/11 attacks.

Common features

Each country reformulated its intelligence agency in its own manner in order to make this agency more capable of carrying out their new mission of fighting terrorism. Nonetheless, there are common features in the actions all states took in this regard. These common features include the following:

1 – Determining the danger

Specifying the danger took center stage in the counterterrorism strategies of most countries. This was one reason why terrorism occupied a top priority in the security strategies of most Western states. This affected the job of the intelligence agencies in these states.

2 – Precautionary measures

Counterterrorism strategies cannot succeed in the absence of clear goals. Preventive measures are of extreme importance. They are the most effective tools of security agencies in the fight against terrorism.

3 – Emergency preparedness

This preparedness is achieved by boosting the capabilities of security agencies.

4 – Legal framework

Most countries created a legal framework for the job of intelligence agencies as far as the fight against terrorism is concerned. This was why some countries drafted new laws and others introduced amendments to ones already in effect in them.

5 – Flexible policies

The reformulation of intelligence agencies focused in most cases on the ability of these agencies to adapt to their new roles. The work of the intelligence agencies was also assessed from time to time to address problems.

Challenges

Most intelligence agencies faced the same challenges. These challenges prevented these agencies from playing an effective role in the fight against terrorism. These were the most outstanding challenges faced by these agencies:

·       The lack of cooperation and coordination between intelligence agencies and law-enforcement agencies.

·       The lack of direct involvement for intelligence agencies in the fight against terrorism.

·       The slow flow of information deprived counterterrorism operations of an important tool in the fight against terrorism.

·       The limited mandate given to intelligence agencies in the fight against terrorism made these agencies less capable of carrying out their job in this fight.

·       The complicated nature of terrorism renders the fight against it a lot difficult.