The first step toward the correct utilization of intelligence consists of understanding it to the full extent. In the current complex landscape, terrorism poses one of the primary threats to the well-being of communities across the globe. Evidently, intelligence agencies conduct rigorous analysis of both domestic and external threats attempting to forecast and prevent violent acts of terrorism. In fact, according to Sanyal, prevention is the crucial element of intelligence work, which is why it is vital to enable the full understanding of acquired data (2020, p. 3). Every event exists in a broader context, which enables the correct interpretation of it. This stage defines the way in which national security frameworks are built and adjusted to respond to both existing and emerging threats.
Unless the data is understood in the appropriate and informed manner, communities will not be prepared for upcoming attacks. Blackbourn et al. suggest that this idea corresponds with the possession of sufficient background knowledge on behalf of intelligence agencies (2019, p. 183). In other words, those in charge of data acquisition and interpretation should understand the underlying motives and objectives of the enemy. Knowing the forces that drive terrorism enables a better degree of national preparedness. Furthermore, the contextual knowledge allows agencies to make quicker decisions, thus leaving less room for potential attacks. This way, national security frameworks gain an advantage through the correct understanding of otherwise vague data.
Correct Acquisition of Intelligence
In order to enable the proper understanding of intelligence, this data should be gathered in the appropriate way, as well. As stated by Ronczkowski, “the ability of law enforcement agencies to manage and act upon intelligence s the key to countering terrorism (2017, p. 1). Therefore, all stages of intelligence work are to be executed with due diligence and precision. These steps are inherently related and flow naturally into one another, meaning that disruptions and indeterminacy at prior stages will have adverse implications during the following ones. In this regard, the process of data gathering holds pivotal importance, serving as the cornerstone of the entire paradigm. Agencies are to utilize the most appropriate, reliable, and precise methods of intelligence acquisition in order to enable further success in understanding, interpretation, and analysis of the data. As a matter of fact, Ronczkowski notes that the true duty of law enforcement is to transform information into intelligence, which is only possible through correct acquisition.
As discussed above, the methods of data gathering should be adequate to the magnitude of the situation. Accordingly, in the 21st century, law enforcement agencies are to follow the global pattern of progress. In other words, the time has come to acknowledge the potential of modern digital means of data acquisition, applying them in intelligence work. Jibril et al. propose a social-media-based approach to counter terrorism analytics (2017, p. 33). According to them, the contemporary digital environment presents law enforcement with sufficient opportunities to distinguish and trace potential attackers. Overall, if national security agencies rely on up-to-date and precise channels of data gathering, the obtained intelligence will facilitate further prevention and countering of terrorist activities.
Perception of Intelligence
Perceptions of an entity are a matter of pivotal importance, capable of becoming either impediments or facilitators of the process. In the case of intelligence, this tendency may be observed on various levels that shape the understanding of the discipline. First of all, it is important how responsible law enforcement institutions perceive their own intelligence work. All agents involved are required to understand fully the extent of their responsibilities entailed by the noble duty of national security. This level of understanding can only be attained through the adequate perception of the task. In other words, law enforcement personalities should take into account the value of executing their duties, as well as the costs of subpar performance (West and Campion 2020, p. 79). This way, the perception of responsibility will serve as the primary incentive for the work.
At the same time, the range of stakeholders involved in intelligence work, both directly and indirectly, extends beyond people working in law enforcement. The primary goal of intelligence activities is to mitigate the threats to society and protect communities against hostile actions. Accordingly, residents of these communities form another major stakeholder group, and their perception of the discipline is highly important, as well. In this regard, people should have a clear understanding of how and for which purpose the intelligence work is conducted. This way, communities will become more cooperative, thus helping to prevent attacks and respond to them through better awareness and willingness to work together (Xi et al. 2019, p. 253). Major intelligence failures, such as the one exhibited in Mumbai, entail negative perceptions, thus undermining the public trust in the system.
Value of Intelligence to Society
As can be inferred from the previous discussion, society plays a role of paramount importance in intelligence work. The entire discipline revolves around the effective means of protecting the public against violence and hostility through prevention. In this context, public support is essential as it facilitates the process. According to the data presented by Sun et al., “the majority of surveyed Chinese people do not favor aggressive law enforcement actions even when a terrorist attack is imminent” (2020, para. 1). Such a situation appears to stem from the lack of the public understanding of intelligence work’s value to society. Therefore, this value should be correctly evaluated and broadcast to all stakeholders. With social and security policies overlapping in the current environment, this understanding becomes crucial (Ragazzi 2017, p. 164). The value of intelligence for today’s society consists of its ability to fulfill the ultimate purpose. Overall, this idea implies that the value depends entirely on saved human lives as opposed to major intelligence failures.
Contemporary Evolution of Intelligence
Society and the world, in general, remain in the state of continuous evolution. Therefore, in order to remain relevant and effective, all major disciplines are required to maintain a similar pace of development. The external processes that occur in the contemporary environment inevitably introduce new conditions, to which intelligence work should adapt. First of all, the 21st century can be characterized by the relentless globalization that permeates all spheres of human activity. Intelligence work is not an exception, as the number of global threats is equally on the increase, replacing domestic terrorism (Asongu and Biekpe 2018, p. 87). In other words, security hazards have transcended the limits of separate nations and isolated conflicts, having an adverse impact on the world’s security framework.
As the threats transitioned from a local to global status, a similar change is expected from intelligence work. Today, law enforcement agencies of various counties are expected to from a united front against hostile intentions. Thus, the understanding of intelligence analysis as a matter of national importance is replaced by the necessity of global cooperation. Furthermore, along with the digitalization of society, certain threats emerged in the digital space, as well (Marsili 2018, p. 172). Ultimately, as per modern perceptions, intelligence agencies cannot afford to remain behind the global development pace, as their actions must correspond to the challenges of the time.
References
Asongu, Simplice A., and Nicholas Biekpe. 2018. “Globalization and Terror in Africa.” International Economics. 156: 86-97.
Blackbourn, Jessie, Nicola McGarrity and Kent Roach. 2019. “Understanding and Responding to Right Wing Terrorism.” Journal of Policing, Intelligence and Counter Terrorism 14(3): 183-190.
Jibril, Muhammad Lawan, Ibrahim Alh Mohammed and Atomsa Yakubu. 2017. “Social Media Analytics Driven Counterterrorism Tool to Improve Intelligence Gathering towards Combating Terrorism in Nigeria.” International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology 107: 33-42.
Marsili, Marco. 2018. “The War on Cyberterrorism.” Democracy and Security 15(2): 172-199.
Ragazzi, Francesco. 2017. “Teaching Terrorism and Practitioners: Context, Capabilities, and Connectivity in Counter-Terrorism Knowledge and Networks.” Countering Terrorism and Radicalisation: Securitising Social Policy? 37(2): 163-179.
Ronczkowski, Michael R. Terrorism and Organized Hate Crime: Intelligence Gathering, Analysis, and Investigations. CRC Press, 2017.
Sanyal, Shubhra, and Mahboob Hussin. 2020. “Understanding Terrorism and Its Dynamics – A Holistic Approach.” Agni Studies on International Strategic Issues 23(1): 1-17.
Sun, Ivan Y., Yuning Wu, Ruth Triplett and Rong Hu. 2020. “Political Efficacy, Police Legitimacy, and Public Support for Counterterrorism Measures in China.” Terrorism and Political Violence. Web.
West, Levi, and Kristy Campion. 2020. “Teaching Terrorism and Practitioners: Context, Capabilities, and Connectivity in Counter-Terrorism Knowledge and Networks.” Journal of Policing, Intelligence and Counter Terrorism 16(1): 75-91.
Xi, Meng, Nie Lingyu and Song Jiapeng. 2019. “Research on Urban Anti-Terrorism Intelligence Perception System from the Perspective of Internet of Things Application.” The International Journal of Electrical Engineering & Education 58(2): 248-257.