Contents: (1) Recent Develop.; (2) Background and Analysis: Intell. Community (IC); The ¿INTs¿ -- signals intell., imagery intell., and human intell.; Intell. Disciplines; Integrating the ¿INTs¿; Intell. Budget Process; The 9/11 Invest. and the Congress. Response; Oversight Issue; (3) Congress. Concerns; Collection Capabilities; Analytical Quality; The IC, Iraq and Afghanistan; Intell. Support to Mil. Forces; (4) Issues in the 111th Congress; Quality of Analysis; Implementation of the Intell. Reform Act; ISR Programs; Terrorist Surveillance Program; NSA Electronic Surveill; FISA; Role of the CIA; Role of the FBI; Role of the Under Sec. of Defense for Intell. Paramil.; Oper. and Defense Humint ; Regional Concerns; CIA and Allegations of Prisoner Abuse; 109th and 110th Cong. Legis.
Amy Zegart examines the weaknesses of US intelligence oversight and why those deficiencies have persisted, despite the unprecedented importance of intelligence in today's environment. She argues that many of the biggest oversight problems lie with Congress—the institution, not the parties or personalities—showing how Congress has collectively and persistently tied its own hands in overseeing intelligence.
U.S. intelligence relations with foreign counterparts offer a number of benefits: indications and warning of an attack, expanded geographic coverage, corroboration of national sources, accelerated access to a contingency area, and a diplomatic backchannel. They also present risks of compromise due to poor security, espionage, geopolitical turmoil, manipulation to influence policy, incomplete vetting of foreign sources, over-reliance on a foreign partner's intelligence capabilities, and concern over a partner's potentially illegal or unethical tradecraft. Because intelligence failures involving a foreign partner sometimes become public, the risks to the IC of cooperating with a foreign intelligence service are more easily understood. Nevertheless, the persistent cultivation of intelligence relations with foreign partners suggests that the IC remains confident that the benefits outweigh the risks. These benefits are not always widely recognized due to their sensitivity and the potential for compromising the scope and details of what amounts to intelligence collection. The best known of these intelligence relationships are the decades-long ties to America's closest allies, who have shared history, values, and similar perspectives on national security threats. Such ties are often one component of a broader security cooperation arrangement. Less well known are liaison relationships with U.S. adversaries over a particular issue of mutual concern, or relations with non-state foreign intelligence organizations such as Kurdish groups. Regardless of the partner, the U.S. Intelligence Community's aim is to enhance national intelligence resources and capabilities and to further U.S. national security by better understanding the threat environment and thereby enabling informed strategic planning, better policy decisions, and successful military operations. Thus, U.S. foreign intelligence relationships can be an overlooked component of public discussion of various aspects of international cooperation. Foreign intelligence agencies with ties to U.S. intelligence have often escaped the reach of congressional oversight. Yet Congress, at various times, has been interested in both the benefits and the risks of foreign intelligence relationships to U.S. national security. While sometimes extolling the value intelligence foreign partners can provide, Congress has also been critical of occasions when the IC has become too dependent on such partners at the expense of IC investment in its own intelligence capabilities. Congress has also been concerned with the IC's ability to independently assess the credibility of foreign intelligence sources, as well as the vulnerability of a foreign intelligence partner's telecommunications infrastructure to compromise by a hostile foreign intelligence service. Of particular sensitivity to Congress has been the poor record of human rights by certain foreign intelligence agencies and the potential for foreign intelligence partners to collect and share with the United States information on U.S. persons.
Unauthorized disclosures of classified intelligence are seen as doing significant damage to U.S. security. This is the case whether information is disclosed to a foreign government or published on the Internet. On the other hand, if intelligence is not made available to government officials who need it to do their jobs, enormous expenditures on collection, analysis, and dissemination are wasted. These conflicting concerns require careful and difficult balancing.Investigations of the 9/11 attacks concluded that both technical and policy barriers had limited sharing of information collected by different agencies that, if viewed together, could have provided useful insight into the unfolding plot. A consensus emerged that U.S. intelligenceagencies should share information more widely in order that analysts could integrate clues acquired by different agencies in order to "connect the dots." This report focuses on information acquired, analyzed, and disseminated by agencies of the U.S. Intelligence Community, but these concerns also affect classified information outside the Intelligence Community. Contents: (1) Background; (2) Changes Undertaken in Response to 9/11: The Information Sharing Environment; (3) Limitations and Risks of Information Sharing: Detroit Bomb Attempt; Fort Hood Shooting; WikiLeaks; (4) Conclusion. This is a print on demand report.
Contents: (1) Intro.; (2) House and Senate Select Committees on Intelligence; (3) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy as a Model; (4) Proposed Joint Committee on Intelligence Characteristics: Methods of Establishment; Jurisdiction and Authority; Membership; Terms and Rotation; Leadership; Secrecy Controls; Pros and Cons; (5) Alternatives to a Joint Committee: Changing the Select Committees¿ Structure and Powers; Concerns about Restructuring the Intelligence Committees; Constraints on Coordination; Increasing the Use of Congressional Support Agencies; (6) Observations on Oversight of Intelligence: Obstacles to Oversight: Secrecy Constraints. This is a print on demand edition of an important, hard-to-find publication.
