U.S. intelligence community reforms and national security restructuring post-2005

Foreign and Domestic Intelligence

The intelligence system of the United States is the most capable one assembled in the history of man. This intelligence community (IC) has undergone reforms since 2005 after President Bush signed the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act. However, transformations of analytical initiatives have constantly reduced the barriers between individuals and organizations across the IC and have prioritized missions effectively. A window of opportunity was evident in the 1990s that reexamined the existing structures and processes of intelligence. Emphasis for the intelligence community included, downsizing, streamlining, and consolidating, which forced them to prioritize on resources scarce to the environment. Members of Congress, think-tank analysts, and executive branch senior officials are a community growing interest of the U.S. government organization on how to apply all national instruments of power, and thus calls for the reexamination of national security activities. After the World War II, frameworks were established to support the budget, decision-making process of the president, mission planning and execution, and strategy formulation procedures and organizations to-date. The designed framework intended to address a different strategic global context, the Soviet Union, with a bipolar world having a single peer state competing. This move was driven by an expansionist while the force of the military backed the ideology.

Operational experiences catalyzed include Operation Enduring Freedom, Hurricane Katrina responses, and Operation Iraqi Freedom are security challenges of the 21st century that showed the inadequacy of the system. These operations revealed the deep flaws of the U.S. government that affected deleteriously on mission success and reliability of having the U.S. As a partner. As a result, debates on 'national security reform' continue to gain momentum and the hearings by Congress aim to clarify the problems identified. Additionally, proposed solution risks and advantages are also considered in the development of legislation for a novel National Security Act that specifies executive branch changes in terms of organization, authorities, and resourcing.

The United States of America has been able to imprison many individuals who conspired with terrorists with the aim of causing war on American soils. Foreign nationals intend to use ethnicity as an avenue that creates tension among people and this approach is destructive and is unconstitutional of liberty. In addition, attention and resources were driven towards the political system yet this cost valuable workforce and direct harm the people of America. As a result, the state becomes insecure (Salinas, Samuel & White, 2012). Furthermore, the number of claims received by the U.S. On claims of abomination due to the passing of harmful Acts to the political arena is outstanding. Reforms are instituted in cases where the measures existing create more problems than resolve their issue. As a result, this has caused tremendous weakness to the national security of U.S. This has pushed them to invest resources in order to have the capability.

The purpose of this proposal is to be able to identify the differences between objectives (near and long-term). The distinction clarifies those objectives that need to be handled during the first term and those that can be prioritized for the second term. Secondly, foreign and domestic intelligence policies and operations are addressed separately. Consequently, recommendations are given on how all these can be changed in the existing laws and specifications will be made on those that can be accomplished with the directive of the President. Lastly, the new President is given the task of weighing what he needs to look for when it comes to appointing a DNI and FBI Director. Research conducted indicates that the U.S. IC face extensive and major challenges including the lack of confidence to carry out missions legally and competently.

The intelligence community aims at collecting, producing, and disseminating information of critical facts that include rogue terrorists and states, the unconventional proliferation of weapons, the disposition of military-forces who are potentially hostile. All these can be identified, monitored, and measured through the service of a dedicated intelligence system, which is an asset to the U.S. government. It is worth noting that the purpose of the intelligence community in the U.S. is to be able to enhance national security by supporting the operations of the military force and policymakers. Therefore, the intelligence community provides gleaned analysis from sources and packages them in a manner that is timely and useful. Often, policy failure is attributed to poor intelligence. The U.S. will need to continue devoting a significant amount of resources to achieve significant capability of reform processes. Leadership is an aspect that plays a crucial role in promoting a culture. Rewards are extended to excellence, development of talent is encouraged, value is accorded to quality, risk-taking is a legitimate encouragement, and respecting the law is an unquestionable fact. Differences in Objectives

An overhaul is warranted for the process of intelligence priorities and requirements. Therefore, it is the work of the DNI to communicate to the intelligence community the intelligence priorities through the National Intelligence Priorities Framework (NIPF) system. Collection and analysis requirements are heavily influenced by the need for policymakers to have an imperative that argues against the suggestions that further isolate agencies of collection or increase their autonomy. Moreover, some market constraint needs to be introduced since consumers receive their intelligence freely and the need arises to discover resources that support greater intelligence efforts.

For the intelligence community, prioritization is a must and their highest priorities of intelligence collection for the U.S. government and, analysis- for the near future. The priorities include the status of nuclear weapons and former Soviet Union materials; Iraq, Iran, and North Korea developments and the continental overseas and United States potential terrorism targets against the U.S. It also includes China's military and political developments and unconventional proliferation of weapons. The intelligence community should also consider undertaking covert action capability as the highest priorities since it is an important national security tool. This tool is capable of providing policymakers an alternative that is valuable and complements all other policies. This is inclusive of sanctions, diplomacy, and military interventions.

The nurturing of such clandestine capabilities makes the building of this capacity an espionage and covert action. Additionally, it requires time and resources to be able to ensure all capabilities are monitored. Nevertheless, the priorities of the intelligence community need to reflect on the opportunities and threats anticipated including the military, political, and economic constraints. Intelligence priorities reflect on both national interests and border policies, but need to be based on other priorities. From the above, it is evident that the near objectives look into aspects that reflect on the economic intelligence of the country.

The emphasis on the economic aspect is whether the priorities stipulated reflect on the competition aspect of winning contracts. This is used to defend and ensure that policymakers are alert on cases of bribery and unfair practices used against most American firms. These firms considered the use of counterintelligence, espionage efforts from foreign, and government firms that protected them appropriately. Near-term priorities are known to change at any moment and thus, need to be addressed in the first term since they can interfere with developments. This is evident in recent experiences that have shown unexpected developments (Greenberg & Haass, n.d).

Near objectives of the intelligence community also look into the need arising to insulate intelligence from political pressure in order to maintain strong and centralized capability. This move enables them not to leave bearing of intelligence on national concerns to the departments concerned with individual policymaking. Through competitive analysis, politicization is guarded against by looking into areas where being on the wrong has major challenges. The highest priorities and first term achievements by the President and Congress are those aspects that delve into issues affecting the smooth running of day-to-day activities of the country. They are done during the first term because they're urgent matters and alter the economic balance and power of leaders in position.

Instability in neighboring countries can also spill over to the United States and thus, the intelligence community categorizes them as the first and near objective. To some degree, the objectives affects the decision making process of some issues in the second term and hence, they first need to be solved in order to pave a way for the other problem to be addressed clearly. These priorities look into the impacts to the people of America. This means that they need be addressed to reduce the chances of tension among individuals, parties, and organizations in America. The big issue presenting itself is the fact that these priorities are related mostly to other countries, but in a way relate directly to the people of U.S..

The second category of intelligence priorities includes transnational terrorism; Russia's political developments and their relations with former Soviet republics; the stability of Mexicans; Egypt and Saudi Arabia's stability; relations between Indonesia and Pakistan; negotiation developments affecting the peace of the Middle East; and international criminal organization's activities. These are long-term objectives and are assigned by the President elect for the second term. Since they are matters that majorly concern other countries, the President and Congress will first concentrate on issues that affect U.S. directly. Evidently, the long-term objectives indirectly face the smooth running of the U.S. government. Priority should be given to those aspects that will pull the resources of the country to extreme levels. The U.S. As a super-power is privileged when tackling issues affecting other nations; it is mandated to help developing long-term solutions.

Long-term also implies that the impacts and effects need to be widespread in order to maintain balance and ensure the prosperity of all sectors is recognized. The above long-term objectives are issues that need time and resources in order to be able to resolve the issue that affects the stability of these countries among other issues. The Soviet Union, for example, is crying to have political relations with Russia. This means that the military forces will be deployed to this country. However, the negotiation process is hefty and requires time and adequate resources in order to meet the requirements of both parties. This is a long-term objective and will be handled in the second term in office because they need analysis and collection of data. This ensures that dissemination of information is not bias, but fair to all involved parties. Therefore, it is vital for leaders to specify the near and long-term objectives of Office in order to allocate duties to officials in a manner that meets all their educational credentials and areas of specialization. Furthermore, this gives the team time to compile the information investigated without hurrying and hence, all corners of the problem will be weighed and solutions integrated will incorporate all corners of discussion.

For the Balkans and Bosnia military and political developments, this would be categorized in the higher priority section only of the U.S. military were significantly involved. Other priorities include growth of population, environmental protection, political and economic developments. These subjects are categorized alone because they have open sources hence, not sufficient. In addition, other priorities need to be looked into before bringing them forth for discussion since they have no weight. Additionally, the priorities may lack grounds of arguing and are not prioritized because they wasteful and valueless.

The basic aim of prioritizing is to be able to share resources and ensure that all government departments have their roles well played. This technique saves on time and acknowledges the areas deemed to be weak. Therefore, the state will look into these issues later after completing those of the first and the second term. For instance, President Obama made the health reform as his priority because he saw the need to look into the health sector. His main concerns were for the poor, underprivileged member of the society cannot afford insurance, and this has forced them to stealing drugs in order to survive and restore their health. This will mean that some individuals will engage in corrupt deals in order to supply drugs to these individuals at a smaller fee. This act of humanity is unwarranted, but the procedure brings harms to the resources of the hospital. As such, many parties are involved in the failure of the reform system. It is necessary for these groups to ensure that all their needs, goals, and objectives are met.

The differences in these objectives enable analysts to have easy ways of tackling existing problems. Decision makers are also in a position of dwelling on issues that need urgent attention, which shows organization and this leads to effective results. Furthermore, the supplications and plights of the individuals in lower class will be adhered to with no much strain on resources and hence, leaders and government officials will be able to allocate time to investigate and interact with citizens on how their rights are being met. This method is suitable because it enables the widespread of resources and talents in meeting the objectives of their citizens. The truth of the matter is that, without such prioritization, many government officials will lack direction and resources distributed will be depleted due to the inability to plan for future expectations. Forecasting on the future is also attainable due to the ability to read previous patterns of events and this shows that they are keen and recall their past, which contributes to the future.

Evidently, it is imperative for the Office of the President and Congress to prioritize their issues. This enables them run the government smoothly while the organization is maintained and upheld at all times. Policymakers will also be integrated in the process, which shows co-operation and promotes unity in Congress. Isolation possibilities are also minimized because both leaders and citizens press forward to attain their organizational goals and objectives. These aspects also contribute to sharing of information, which is the central part for such organizations to live without fear. Analysis and collection of information are the key proponents of such objectives. The stages help leaders in categorizing their priorities into efforts that are highest in rank to those in the lower rank of items or issues.

Foreign and domestic intelligence policies and operations

According to Burnett (2007), domestic terrorism is a planned act by a group of people with evil intentions aimed towards the government or citizens of the nation with the imposition of foreign force. For example, the bombing of the Olympic and Oklahoma City are illustrations of domestic terrorism. International or foreign terrorism, on the other hand, is a plotted plan by groups of individuals against the government under the influence of foreign basis since their intentions, deeds, and motivators are foreigners outside the United States. The report of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) classifies the various terrorist attacks based on technological advancements in possession by the terrorist group, weaknesses available on the terrorist subject, and the surrounding political issues.

These intelligence agencies also use other methods like the use of chemical and biological agents, attack of public services and/or utilities, and attacking transport facilities. Concerning the policies and procedures of domestic intelligence, their activities are limited only to one country. Since the motives are limited, their platform settings are on a smaller one as compared to those of the foreign intelligence group. Furthermore, the policies stipulate that the alliances formed by the domestic terrorist group are also allowed to liaise with foreign states even though they are their global enemy. However, their main target in all this is both national and sub-national.

For domestic intelligence, the complication comes in when different hosts of organizations fragment off their different fractions. The existing diffusion in this group or organization does not imply that they cannot be organized. On the contrary, they bear the characteristics and styles of lone wolves and leaderless operations under resistance. The procedure of dealing with most domestic intelligence groups employed is the use of methods that encompass informants and infiltration, which have succeeded. Questions and concerns rising are whether law enforcement and federal domestic intelligence efforts are going to be integrated and enforced.

The solution to this dilemma is the need for both organizational and management systems succeeding the national and local levels in presenting blueprints. These are going to expand, modify, and improve the nation's domestic intelligence and capabilities of counter-terrorism. The barriers associated to this intelligence system include institutional values, budgetary and legal. Further exacerbation is brought about by the lack of sufficient integration methods into local efforts of law enforcement. The 'ears and eyes' must be the first respondents acting on national effort to bring cohesion in the country.

Therefore, the federal capability ascribed to domestic intelligence systems is insufficient. Foreign intelligence is organized and funded by the international network of terrorists like the use of religion pretexts directing them to United States. In foreign countries, political involvement is the presence of radical Islamist parties. In addition, there is a growing interlink of different groups of terrorist, which may involve the combination of technology transfer, military training, or political advice. The notion of many people is that the reformed FBI should lead the nation by coordination efforts with leaders of the domestic intelligence agency. However, others contend that the FBI is not an entrenched law enforcement agency and thus, this responsibility is not within their scope of duty. The critics of the new domestic intelligence agency argue that ignoring the laws of federalism is unavoidable. The carte blanch should be granted the federal government for intruding into the private lives of American citizens. The worry of having a domestic intelligence reform is the possibility of violating national power balance and federalism laws.

Evidently, the federal government is not in a position to dictate to states what they can do and hence, national standardization is not required. In this case, communication becomes a vital tool for the agency in order to share information with other intelligence community that promotes state rights by overseeing the spying of U.S. citizens. Opponents' view of such agencies is an infringement on state rights, but is an avenue for the federal government to destroy the civil liberties of the U.S. citizens.

The intelligence groups are given the task of bringing together federal and state efforts in a way that will not undermine privacy or federal laws (Dahl, 2011). Domestic intelligence is formed within the FBI umbrella and thus, few changes were made to the rest of the intelligence community, but the whole organization was uncoordinated, which contributed to its ineffectiveness. Domestic intelligence lacks centralized structure, output, management, and leadership. However, this organization is most effective than many American systems. The fact that it is a local agency, it ensures that all activities affecting the rights of human beings are maintained because standards need to be upheld to reduce pressures and tensions. The policies and procedures of both foreign and domestic intelligence agencies gear towards integration efforts of their targeted groups. These groups want to take over their counterparts adopting all means and avenues to reach their target even if it means impinging on the rights of others.

The procedures for each group varies because their approach differs due to the circumstances in question. The domestic intelligence group uses the available techniques at hand because they are domestic in nature. This is an advantage to them since they are familiar with all loopholes of the government and will use them to gain an advantage and win the confidence of their rivalry group. This will eventually mean that information will be handed to them. These groups of people are good negotiators because they have an agenda of attacking the government. For the foreign intelligence group, the use of sophisticated techniques is promoted because they are walking on international waters. They have to input all their resources to the project in order to get insights on how to attack their enemies. This means going to the extremes: the risk is high for this target group. However, the reward of achieving the information is great and immeasurable because their plans of attack will succeed and they will come out victorious.

This group needs to apply caution in all their moves to reduce the chances of licking information to the wrong people or groups (Tussing, 2008). The difficulty of domestic procedures and policies is the inability of members to embrace technology. Majority of people are reluctant in using new technology because of the perceptions and instigations of others concerning the new equipments. They also argue that they can be able to read signs using their feet, but in essence, their need to change their mindset before it is too late. Its limitation to the local country is also a hindrance because they are not exposed to certain things that bring about development. Domestic intelligence being a local group organization aims at promoting domestic tourism, but a majority of the people who travel are not vigilant of their surroundings.

This is a failure to the group and country since they are not appreciating the beauty of nature. On the other hand, foreign intelligence is different from domestic because it moves to boarders in search of information. Foreign intelligence is more sophisticated and deals mainly with issues in the foreign markets, which means that it looks into bordering nations or states in order to acquire information or the government concerning the other state. The intelligence of the foreign states looks into an aspect that furnishes their country with reliable information concerning their attackers. In addition, the intelligence of foreigners is educative in a way because these individuals will teach others moves on how to outmaneuver and avoid being caught.

Training and recruitment of new agents is also promoted under foreign intelligence. This is an advantage to the agency because their agents will learn from the best. Questions arising from foreign and domestic intelligence must be addressed because they affect the decision making process and slows down policymaking. Furthermore, these barriers are a hindrance to the development of the intelligence community that looks into adhering to policies and procedures stipulated. In conclusion, domestic and foreign policies and procedures differ, but their intention is to promote peace among their states.

This can be achieved through communicating and sharing vital information in order to avoid being under attack. The other issue being raised under this section is the barriers faced by each intelligence groups. In this century, many changes are evident while leaders of both groups need to be alert in order to incorporate the changes in their managerial skills that help them in attaining organizational goals and objectives. These agencies enjoy full support from different organizations; this helps them attain goals and objectives without straining much.

Foreign procedures are more complicated and their channels of passing information and complex. This makes the system sophisticated since it utilizes recent technology. In addition, the leaders of this group are vigilant and ready to listen to all parties and team members in order to foster an environment that is reach in terms of unity and togetherness.

Appointing a DNI and FBI Director

The ODNI (Office of the Director of National Intelligence) was created in 2004 and in its accomplishments has demonstrated great promises. They postulated that knowledge translates to power as stipulated within the intelligence community. This is evident in organizations with highly developed and focused mission cultures (law enforcement, intelligence, and the military), which become impervious to outside reforms. However much the DNI tries to meet intended reform of the intelligence community, it is notable and lacks the executive authority, and a mission-space in place is not adequate or exclusive. In such circumstances, there is a need of updating the EO 12333 and IRTPA (Rettig, 2013). Upon appointing the DNI, the President needs to look into the possibility of elevating the DNI into a cabinet position, granting this body more management and budgetary powers over the intelligence community, in terms of operational matters, and the DNI needs to have better clarified and more exclusive mission-space. Furthermore, the institution of streamlined rules is required, which means the collection and integration with regard to domestic and foreign intelligence.

This ensures that the intelligent integration and civil liberties defense have sensible and clear rules that dictate how the intelligence is collected from these two spheres. This means that it looks into the way and levels of integration and dissemination. The President elect needs to look into such issues and revisions made will strengthen the office and thus, make possible the streamlining of intelligence analysis, collection, and dissemination. The most important aspect to note is that the DNI is the "head" of the intelligence community and as such, is the principal advisor to the Congress and President (Rettig, 2013). The DNI appointed needs to overcome the independence agency by creating a culture that boosts on cooperation. Daunting challenges face the DNI: the intelligence community is resistant to reform since it is a secretive organization; its position has not been instituted despite the numerous recommendations since DCI's power was limited.

It is seen that three things determine the ability of DNI effecting transformation and reform that include authorities that are linked to span control (over resources and budget) of DNI, its ability over an extended time to sustain transformation, and the bipartisan support politically (Burch, 2008). The FBI Director appointed operates only domestically. Therefore, they cannot share information with elements of the foreign intelligence because they have no access to the broader intelligence community. The FBI Director needs to use intelligence in pursuing investigations and should have greater awareness of the threats placed to the national security system and to the environment. The Director should look into the information and predict value then share the information that is not proscribed for release to law enforcement partners and the intelligence community.

The FBI Director is also prescribed the duty of protecting their information source, methods, and other sensitive operation details. Additionally, the FBI must enhance its efforts on counterterrorism in the domestic realms and institutional changes. FBI is tasked with the responsibility of sharing budget between other activities that are domestic and foreign counterterrorism. Under the Justice Department, the FBI is the traditional agent dominant for conducting domestic intelligence.

The FBI is also mandated to act through courts when it wants to conduct an electronic surveillance on a U.S. individual (Tussing, 2008). However, the DNI and FBI Directors will work together in gaining greater value for intelligence of information disseminated by their partners. Intelligence gathered by the FBI is shared at home and abroad in order to provide strategic and tactical responses to threats that are coordinated. Moreover, only those programs of the FBI funded under NIP (National Intelligence Program) are the ones considered as part of the IC (intelligence community). National Intelligence is the arm of the FBI, and it ensures that set objectives are met without fail.

Existing conflict of the FBI of crime finding makes the organization uncomfortable in the role of a domestic intelligence officer and this has enabled it serve as an investigator of crime. The Office of intelligence Director has the capacity of leveraging cultural opportunities by enforcing the law. The achievement of this step has been possible due to the dedication of facts and source-based analysis (Jordan & Jordan, 2009) while still ensuring that the walls between collectors, analysts, and actors of intelligence for the good of people are still the motto. The FBI Director stipulates that future attacks by terrorists are preventable and critical because it helps in enhancing the capabilities of intelligence for any country. As such, this increases the possibility of establishing important aspects of information relating to terrorists and relayed to intelligence agency for action (Smith & Hung, 2009).

Consequently, the FBI has seen a great need to combine criminal operations and programs of intelligence in order to curb any future attacks. The DNI has certain authority over the FBI. For example, there are those concerning the budget over activities of national intelligence for the FBI. These authorities take effect at headquarters level and in field environments. All this is through the NIP budget and with the authority of the EAD-NSB over the whole intelligence, WMD (weapons of mass destruction) programs, counterintelligence, and domestic terrorism. DNI has collaborated with other agencies and staff members across the intelligence community in looking at areas like the human resources, policy and legal, performance metrics, communications, budget, information technology, and training. Before an FBI Director is appointed, his/her application goes through the DNI who gives his concurrence, which are procedures concurrent with IRTPA.

Conclusion

At the end of the discussion, it is worth asking whether or not the United States could be well prepared for future attacks. This will be weighed down on the intelligence failures expected like the Iraq WMD and 9/11. Intelligence reforms should not be limited to widely lessons learned and accepted, which includes the improvement of sharing intelligence information, under the DNI there should be a coherent enterprise, better discipline while evaluating information credibility and evidence basis analysis. The persistence of such issues will lead to the failure of reforms. Leaders must also accept that intelligence cannot provide certainty in the issues being addressed. The intelligence community gives priority when equipping them with important information that will help them in supporting their decision making process. This leaves the community anticipating events, maintaining a strategic initiative and avoiding surprises from the ever-changing world. The intelligence community must adopt the recommendations provided in fostering the reforms in its systems.

The recommendations are a guide for the Congress and President elect to look into and investigate the possibility of having success in attaining reforms, which is still a debate in Congress, but are in favor of attaining reforms. The major examples researched on by many scholars are the Iraq WMD and the 9/11 attacks that caused havoc to the state. The 9/11 attacks disabled the operations of America for a while. This made them re-think the recommendations stipulated in order to avoid future attacks from happening to a developed state and nation. The U.S. is one of the super powers and by terrorists penetrating their 'wall', is a sign of weakness in some areas that need tightening in order not to lose future clientele and reputation. This measure also aims at protecting the nation from external pressures that want to invade the state with ill motives that bring harm to its people.

The United States of America has been able to imprison many individuals who conspired with terrorists with the aim of causing war on American soils. Foreign nationals intend to use ethnicity as an avenue that creates tension among people and this approach is destructive and is unconstitutional of liberty. The notable mistakes that the U.S. government faced taught them lessons and are examples to other states seeking to undertake reforms.

The information on FBI and DNI Directors illustrates the duties and responsibilities ascribed to these individuals. The information gives the President an overview of what to consider when appointing two individuals playing a significant role in ensuring that the rights of individuals are respected. Furthermore, these two individuals will work together with the intelligence community in bringing about reforms and fostering habits that engage agency in enhancing peace within the state. In all these issues, the main of reforms in the intelligence department is to be able to curb the occurrence in the future. As such, individuals are left with the sole responsibility of working together. Sharing of information is very vital because it necessitates the formation of organizations that are geared towards building each other through working in an environment coherent to organizational goal, missions, and objectives.

Besides, organizations must work together in attaining country's objectives towards its citizens in a manner that satisfies the human rights enforced by law. The mandate of such organizations is to ensure that all individuals are well catered for and isolation should be encouraged because this disrupts the balance within the community. Ecological concerns also contribute to the attainment of such balance because they are part of the stability required in an ecosystem. They give natural resources grounds, and without balance in the ecosystem, resources will be scarce: people will start fighting for the few resources available. Reforms of the intelligence community will still hold grounds and debate will continue to escalate.