Circles of intelligence
Are challenges to other state institutions driven by assumptions of autonomy within intelligence circles?
DESIGN: SUNARA NIZAMI
Most intelligence agencies operate in complex circles. These circles are the building blocks which create, re-create, design and re-design innovative streaks and synthesise information discharge.
Different information techniques are therefore used in different calculations and measurements for calibration and control on a certain issue, incident or activity. Synergy in intelligence circles is also aptly symbolised with accuracy, unity and cohesion of an organisation, entity or a country.
In the developing world, intelligence circles become more prominent. They set the things in motion and maintain an artificial equilibrium among various organisations and sections of society. As any one of these circles loses its strength, incidents of lawlessness take place which require immense fire-fighting measures by law enforcement agencies (LEAs) to curtail and minimise its fallout.
Each circle of intelligence has its own mandate and scope which is essential to judge its efficiency and performance. In certain cases, the boundaries of these circles are quite blurred, thus providing them a kind of flexibility and mobility in terms of their operations and range of activities. In this way overlapping of actions in intelligence collection become frequent.
As the circles of intelligence converge in various areas, they also support each other when an activity is generated by a circle in the physical or cyberspace. Sometimes a counter-activity is launched to neutralise an action produced by a particular entity or various entities, specific actor(s), either intentionally or unintentionally on a rational spectrum.
Since a counter-activity or a fresh action is produced by a circle of intelligence, it is raised gradually to higher levels through complementary assistance of other circles so that it can match the intensity and quality of an external action(s) until these are counterbalanced comprehensively.
At times the activity or a string of activities created by an intelligence action and duly supported by other circles may have unintended consequences which have the potential to seed lasting animosity among a particular group, sect, or a segment of society.
Moreover, individual antagonism in the age of digitalisation has also far-reaching consequences since cyberspace is not properly regulated in underdeveloped and developing countries. Hence, significant psychological ripples can be created by anyone anytime.
In many instances, the circles of intelligence compete with each other. Such a contest though produces duplication of work and also generates an environment wherein each intelligence circle or elements therein assume a semblance of partial or limited autonomy to challenge other state institutions or take independent decisions to initiate an activity.
It not only causes surprise to other intelligence circles but also makes them wry about the level of independence and freedom of action of selective circles or elements operating in it.
In the cyber sphere, these independent actions are more difficult to detect as the cyber operators, hired for the very purpose, are unaware of their input system and in majority of the cases they like creating cyber crests on their own with an unusual sense of elation and emotional exuberance.
Wherever these cyber workers have the idea of their feeding lines, the mode of their activities is targeted, focused and selected for multiple purposes which often create deception and duplicity in the public sphere.
In an acute situation, two or multiple circles of intelligence or elements therein pitch against each other and intentionally block intelligence-sharing among them to gain an edge over the other. This engenders uncertainty and ambiguity in the intelligence landscape of an institution, entity or a country and creates bottlenecks in the achievement of critical sub-national, national or regional objectives.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 8th, 2019.
Different information techniques are therefore used in different calculations and measurements for calibration and control on a certain issue, incident or activity. Synergy in intelligence circles is also aptly symbolised with accuracy, unity and cohesion of an organisation, entity or a country.
In the developing world, intelligence circles become more prominent. They set the things in motion and maintain an artificial equilibrium among various organisations and sections of society. As any one of these circles loses its strength, incidents of lawlessness take place which require immense fire-fighting measures by law enforcement agencies (LEAs) to curtail and minimise its fallout.
Each circle of intelligence has its own mandate and scope which is essential to judge its efficiency and performance. In certain cases, the boundaries of these circles are quite blurred, thus providing them a kind of flexibility and mobility in terms of their operations and range of activities. In this way overlapping of actions in intelligence collection become frequent.
As the circles of intelligence converge in various areas, they also support each other when an activity is generated by a circle in the physical or cyberspace. Sometimes a counter-activity is launched to neutralise an action produced by a particular entity or various entities, specific actor(s), either intentionally or unintentionally on a rational spectrum.
Since a counter-activity or a fresh action is produced by a circle of intelligence, it is raised gradually to higher levels through complementary assistance of other circles so that it can match the intensity and quality of an external action(s) until these are counterbalanced comprehensively.
At times the activity or a string of activities created by an intelligence action and duly supported by other circles may have unintended consequences which have the potential to seed lasting animosity among a particular group, sect, or a segment of society.
Moreover, individual antagonism in the age of digitalisation has also far-reaching consequences since cyberspace is not properly regulated in underdeveloped and developing countries. Hence, significant psychological ripples can be created by anyone anytime.
In many instances, the circles of intelligence compete with each other. Such a contest though produces duplication of work and also generates an environment wherein each intelligence circle or elements therein assume a semblance of partial or limited autonomy to challenge other state institutions or take independent decisions to initiate an activity.
It not only causes surprise to other intelligence circles but also makes them wry about the level of independence and freedom of action of selective circles or elements operating in it.
In the cyber sphere, these independent actions are more difficult to detect as the cyber operators, hired for the very purpose, are unaware of their input system and in majority of the cases they like creating cyber crests on their own with an unusual sense of elation and emotional exuberance.
Wherever these cyber workers have the idea of their feeding lines, the mode of their activities is targeted, focused and selected for multiple purposes which often create deception and duplicity in the public sphere.
In an acute situation, two or multiple circles of intelligence or elements therein pitch against each other and intentionally block intelligence-sharing among them to gain an edge over the other. This engenders uncertainty and ambiguity in the intelligence landscape of an institution, entity or a country and creates bottlenecks in the achievement of critical sub-national, national or regional objectives.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 8th, 2019.