Introduction
Domestic intelligence involves activities or conditions within the United States that threaten internal security and that might require the employment of troops. Homeland security enterprise, on the other hand, safeguards the American citizens against terrorism with integrated results-based operations. The research will illustrate the capabilities and limitations of both the domestic intelligence and the homeland security enterprise. Additionally, the paper will address the various elements that comprise US local intelligence efforts and also the emerging trends and patterns in the security of America.
Capabilities and limitations of the Domestic Intelligence
Domestic intelligence has illustrated some efforts which show skills of supporting the Homeland Security Enterprise. The information has a reliable source-able knowledge through the continued adoption of Fusion Centers and the ITACG promoting the strategic goals of the Department of Homeland Security through its support of national and departmental missions by achieving its objectives (Jackson, 2016). The IC and NCTC have embedded that the only useful technique to ensure that a significant mass casualty event does not occur is that Federal, local, state, and tribal homeland security elements must integrate and collaborate (Homeland Security, 2015).
The NSA gathers intelligence, and there are several cases that the limitations are illustrated. For instance, during the Boston Marathon bombings, the intelligence gathering was missed even though the bombers left a trail and the older brother was among the terrorists (Sims, 2017). Additionally, during the Cold War, the CIA had lost some vital information that could have been essential for more investigations and protection of citizens. The data does not always guarantee that the government will engage in actions. There is a limitation of costs, budget, and other issues. For instance, in the year 2013, the value that was spent for the national intelligence was estimated to be worth 52 billion dollars (Jackson, 2016). Such limitations may prevent the Homeland Security from achieving their objectives of ensuring the protection of the American citizens.
Structure and resources of the US for providing Domestic Intelligence
The US is not appropriately structured and resourced to adequately offer domestic intelligence that would support the customers from the federal government. For instance, the attacks of September 11, 2001, illustrated the vulnerability of the US to terrorism (Coats, 2018). The challenge that was experienced by our nation was the ineffectiveness of intelligence where the signs of an impending attack were not identified which would have assisted in preventing the disaster. According to Tromblay, 2015, the Al Qaeda had conducted a devastating strike by adopting airliners as weapons of mass destruction. The close examination of the Federal Bureau of Investigation illustrates the inappropriate structure of our country. Most of the FBI field offices had not prioritized counterterrorism, and they had little information about the terrorists. The FBI also did not inform the "policymakers" of the extent of terrorist activity in the United States (Coats, 2018). The FBI's decentralized structure and inadequate information technology resulted in Bureau inability to correlate the knowledge possessed by its components.
Elements that comprise the US domestic Intelligence Community
The factors that comprise the U.S internal intelligence efforts from the local law enforcement to national agencies contribute to the development of homeland security intelligence. According to Bamford, 2018, the local law enforcement is a dimension of community policing, developing tactics and techniques during years of community monitoring examination. The intelligence-led policing can be adopted for combating terrorism (Bamford, 2018). The ILP and community guarding obtain information from the American citizens thus assisting in identifying the community challenges experienced. Two-way communication with the public as information is sought from the public about the offenders is also another element. Communications from the public can enhance valuable data for the intelligence cycle thus able to enhance crime prevention and fear reduction (Tromblay, 2015). Communicating critical information to citizens can also assist in preventing a terrorist attack.
Scientific data analysis in community policing is also an element that adopts crime analysis as a critical ingredient in the process. Additionally, the problem-solving reconciles community conditions that are precursors to crime and disorders (Bamford, 2018). ILP passes the same process for intelligence to reconcile factors precedent to a terrorist attack. The State Fusion Centers occur at the state level and serve as primary focal points within the local environment for the receipt, gathering, analysis, and sharing of threat-related data among the federal, tribal, and territorial partners. The centers are situated to empower front-line law enforcement, public health, and private sector security personnel to gather and share threat-related information lawfully. The State Fusion Centers provide to the Homeland Security the interdisciplinary expertise and situational awareness to inform decision-making at all levels of government and respond to crime and terrorism (Bamford, 2018).
The Interagency Threat Assessment and Coordination Group assist the FBI and other agencies to produce federally coordinated, terrorism-related information products tailored to the requirements of the local and tribal governments and private sector partners (Jackson, 2016). The ITAGG-coordinated products disseminate through existing federal agency channels. The element consists of a team of analysis which is led by a senior intelligence officer and composes of fire, tribal, law enforcement, health first responders assigned to NCTC, and investigative which ensure the protection of the American citizens (Ginbar, 2017).
9/11 Commission Recommendations
The IC and the LE can be gauged by the lessons learned from the 9/11 commission on the intelligence sharing and how those teachings and recommendations are implemented as it relates to the Homeland Security. The recommendations outline the essential alterations in the organization of the government and state that improvement in the "unity of effort" is required in future collaborative efforts (Bullock, Haddow, & Coppola, 2013). The 9/11 commission offered recommendations such as unifying strategic intelligence and operational planning against Islamist terrorist across the foreign-domestic divide with a National Counterterrorism Center. The NCTC celebrated its tenth anniversary and had mitigated and prevented a large scale 9/11 attack, with determination, organization, and communication (Ginbar, 2017).
Additionally, the commission recommended the unifying of the participants in the counterterrorism effort and their knowledge in a network-based information sharing system that transcends traditional governmental boundaries. The intelligence community with a National Intelligence Director should also be incorporated. Jackson, 2016, illustrates that the congressional oversight should be strengthened and integrated to improve quality and accountability to enhance continuity of the evolving monitoring in the protection of the rights of the US citizens with regards to counterterrorism operations. The commission also advocated for the strengthening of the FBI and Homeland defenders which assist in preventing the terrorist attacks (Jackson, 2016).
Capabilities of the Homeland Security Enterprise to Address Future Challenges
The continued Defense Department participation in the future homeland security events is paramount to a viable strategy in risk mitigation. The internal directives are clear in instructing that in the event of a natural disaster or other domestic emergency, state resources must be exhausted as a precondition to providing federal military funds (Sims, 2017). Concerning continued homeland security threats, Human Adversarial is one factor through proper vigilance that the Homeland Security can prevent and pre-empt through appropriate reporting and dynamic and swift actions against individuals who would attempt to attack our country. The homeland security manages and promotes a skilled and professional intelligence workforce that will continue to integrate the intelligence process and provide adequate tools to equip the homeland security enterprise (Bullock, Haddow, & Coppola, 2013).
Additionally, the homeland security enterprise can share the necessary information for standardizing the data sharing policies across the organization and deploy technology to disseminate intelligence and information products (Homeland Security, 2015). The strive to mature the homeland security collection architecture and expand the homeland security collection plan is also a technique for addressing the future security challenges that the citizens might encounter. The enterprise also promotes an understanding of threats by providing relevant intelligence analysis to partners that address high-priority issues (Homeland Security, 2015). Continued warning of impending dangers and responding to incidents with timely and detailed analysis can assist in resolving the future challenges that may occur.
Challenges for providing for homeland security while maintaining civil liberties
American Homeland Security experts are challenged by some issues such as defining terrorism and labeling individual suspects while preserving civil rights. For instance, defining terrorism can be an exercise in semantics and can be determined by personal political or cultural biases although certain fundamental elements are objectively accepted (Ginbar, 2017). Standard features of the most formal definitions include the adoption of illegal force, subnational actors, political motives, attacks against passive civilian and military targets, and acts aimed at affecting the audience. Official designations adopted to confer special status on captured insurgent and terrorist suspects have been controversial as it has been a critical legal, political, and security issue (Sims, 2017).
Sims, 2017, illustrates that America has had some emerging trends and patterns such as homegrown terrorism and the proliferation of communication encryption technologies that have affected the security of the citizens. For instance, people have been distressed for the privacy of their communications as many consumers fear that there is no privacy online (Sims, 2017). Such concerns have developed a market for products with greater encryption. America has also been experiencing or immune to terrorism committed by its residents and citizens which is referred to as homegrown terrorism.
Conclusion
The paper attempted an examination of the various elements that comprise the US domestic intelligence and how they contribute to the development of Homeland security intelligence. The research also analyzes the capabilities and limitations of private information. Additionally, the paper illustrates the emerging trends and patterns occurring in the US and which can affect the security of the citizens. The study addresses the capabilities and challenges of the Homeland Security Enterprise while maintaining civil liberties.
References
Bamford, J. (2018, March 19). Anti-Intelligence. The New Republic. Retrieved from New Republic: https://newrepublic.com/article/147366/anti-intelligence
Bullock, J., Haddow, G., & Coppola, D. P. (2013). Introduction to Homeland Security : Principles of All-Hazards Risk Management (Vol. 4). San Diego: Elseivier Science & Technology.
Coats, D. R. (2018). Worldwide Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community. National Intelligence, 7-19. Retrieved from https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/Newsroom/Testimonies/2018-ATA---Unclassified-SSCI.pdf
Ginbar, V. (2017). Civil Rights and Securing the Homeland. Foundations of Homeland Security, 73-88. Retrieved from https://us.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/76594_Chapter_4.pdf
Homeland Security. (2015, September 11). Homeland Security Enterprise Overview. Retrieved from Homeland Security: https://www.dhs.gov/homeland-security-enterprise-overview
Jackson, B. A. (2016). The Challenge of Domestic Intelligence in a Free Society: A Multidisciplinary Look at the Creation of a U.S. Domestic Counterterrorismin Intelligence Agency. California: Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corp.
Sims, J. (2017, March 15). Intelligence to Counter Terror: The Importanace of All-dource Fusion. Intelligence and National Security, 22(1), 38-56. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/02684520701200772
Tromblay, D. E. (2015, August 5). The U.S. Domestic Intelligence Enterprise: History, Development, and Operations. (Taylor & Francis Group Productions) Retrieved from CRC Press: https://www.crcpress.com/The-US-Domestic-Intelligence-Enterprise-History-Development-and-Operations/Tromblay/p/book/9781482247732
