GOA FOCAL POINT 4: Intelligence methodologies/models, and their development
GOA FOCAL POINT 4: Intelligence methodologies/models, and their development
Adam Svendsen, PROJECT GOA Editor-in-Chief
Introduction:
Any consideration of intelligence methodologies/models, and their development should first consider a definition of ‘intelligence’.
How ‘intelligence’ is defined then helps to determine how it both could and should be best used in various contexts in which it has a generally-accepted role to perform, such as in finitely configured counter-terrorism (CT) and counter-insurgency (COIN) enterprises.
The ‘puzzle’:
The word ‘intelligence’ in the security context has been subject to much definition and still remains somewhat contested. By 2011, ‘intelligence’ has also been much ‘theorised’, with several prominent works being published on this last theme – for some of these efforts and the approaches towards their ‘framing’, see, e.g. from 2005, http://www.rand.org/pubs/conf_proceedings/CF219.html.
Where should we go next?
Many questions emerge, which are now worth being considered:
- What definition of ‘intelligence’ do you think is most appropriate for the early twenty-first century and during an era of enhanced globalisation?
- What role should ‘intelligence’ perform in CT and COIN operations – e.g. should it merely ‘warn’ and ‘inform’ (in more of a ‘passive’ manner) or should it increasing ‘lead’ and ‘direct’ (in more of an ‘active’ way)?
- Do you think ‘intelligence’ should be used more or less?
- How ‘open’ or ‘secretive’ do you think the ‘intelligence world’ should be?
- Where do you think ‘intelligence transformation’ or ‘intelligence reform’ and ‘intelligence change’ efforts should be most concentrated?
Leave your views below!
*** All content is subject to PROJECT GOA terms & conditions – read here >>>
2009 Videoconference Report
