This paper addresses two related questions in international relations and national security. The first examines the distinctions between nation-state actors and non-state actors, using Super PACs, multinational corporations, and violent non-state actors such as ISIS as illustrative examples. It explores how non-state actors can transition into positions of political legitimacy and how violent groups differ fundamentally in their methods and goals. The second question traces the evolution of the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) from its post-World War II origins through the Cold War era and into the internet age, analyzing how technological advances have dramatically increased the complexity of intelligence work and the threats that the IC must confront.
There are varying definitions for a nation-state and a non-state actor. It is important to understand what each term signifies before examining the differences between them. The nation-state is a kind of unit that may join a political entity of a country, and from such alignment it aims to gain political legitimacy. As Cedric Ryngaert notes, "the nation-state is a recent creation originating in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The nation-state can be seen as a construct formed by non-state actors to further specific group interests."1
A nation-state actor can take certain actions because they are working on behalf of a government. They can compromise or disrupt target environments, persons, or organizations in order to gain access to important intelligence or information. They can also generate incidents of global significance. They work toward the goals of a government and may be semi-hidden or visible. Alternatively, they can be organizations that seek to advance a political agenda through specific actions.
A non-state actor may wield considerable political influence, but it is not affiliated with or linked to any state or country. Multinational corporations, for example, are non-state actors that operate as for-profit companies across multiple sovereign states. Violent non-state actors, such as drug cartels, can influence politics through bribery and similar means, allowing their crimes to go unnoticed by the general public while gaining protection from legal accountability. The existence of non-state actors conflicts with realism's assumptions as well as other "black box" theories of international relations.
A good example of a nation-state actor is a Super PAC. A Super PAC is an organization with the ability to raise unlimited funds from corporations, individuals, and other groups in order to defeat or support a political candidate. The United States government allows them to donate a limited quantity of money to candidates, particularly presidential candidates. Republican candidates often rely on these Super PACs to raise the funds necessary to run a successful campaign. As Dowling and Miller observe, "Restore Our Future raised $18 million from about 200 donors. For comparison, the Romney campaign would have needed to collect the maximum donation of $2,500 from 7,200 individuals to raise that amount."2
Non-state actors can gain legitimacy by creating Super PACs that fuel the selection of key political candidates who will pass legislation aligned with their goals. A notable example involves the Trump administration and its cabinet appointments. Some cabinet members lacked traditional political experience, yet held powerful positions within the United States government. These individuals were once non-state actors who transitioned into nation-state actors and achieved political legitimacy.
Trump's pick for Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, was the president and chief executive of Exxon Mobil. As The New York Times reported, he "would oversee a department that has centered on alliance building and globalism, which Mr. Trump has said he would dismantle."3 Tillerson had donated to political candidates over time until eventually the right candidate — Trump — was in a position to grant him a legitimate government role carrying significant power.
"VNSAs, ISIS, and the boundaries of state authority"
The present world has its challenges. With continual influxes of technology and the proliferation of all forms of media — including social media — it can be difficult to understand the nature and scale of existing threats and how to respond to them appropriately. While things have changed for better or for worse since the Cold War, it is safe to say that the United States government has had to adapt significantly. These changes have driven the evolution of the Intelligence Community and created a complex environment from which to assess national security.
Intelligence played a key part in the Cold War. The Cold War lasted decades and created a pressing need to collect information quickly and effectively. With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the fall of the Berlin Wall, the Cold War ended with the United States on the winning side. The Intelligence Community (IC) played a central role in achieving that outcome, allowing for the prevention of a "hot war" and preserving hope for those who struggled for liberty. But with victory came fundamental change in both the world and the country for which the IC was created.
The Intelligence Community exists as a federation of executive branch organizations and agencies whose foundations were established through the National Security Act of 1947. As one account notes, "A U.S. intelligence capability in peacetime reflected a commitment to prevent another surprise like Pearl Harbor by keeping an eye on developments like the continuing Soviet military build-up after World War II. The Act recognized the need for both civilian and military intelligence elements."5 The IC served its purpose repeatedly, especially during the 1950s and 1960s when Cold War tensions — fueled by Soviet leader Joseph Stalin and the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis — dominated American public consciousness.
"Internet era forces major IC adaptation"
"Modern surveillance complexity and IC challenges"
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.