WebSeitz/wikilog
z2004-07-28- Lind Intelligence Reform
Whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

(backlinks off) (map off)
(search off)
last edited by BillSeitz on Aug 8, 2008 12:19 am

on the needs for true reform of the intelligence system, and why the recommendations of the commission won't help. When bureaucracies fail, one of their favorite ways to deflect demands for reform is to offer instead. That appears to be what has happened in the report of the 9/11 commission and Washington's response to that report. Worse, the reorganization envisioned is to further centralize intelligence by establishing a national intelligence director and creating a counterterrorism center. One is tempted to ask, if centralization improves performance, why didn't the Soviet Union ("democratic centralism") win the ? What American military and national intelligence really require is that bureaucratic anathema, reform. And reform in turn means not centralization and unification, but and internal competition.

[Bill Christison] (ex-) is also a skeptic, and places the challenges in the greater . Nothing we could do in expanding or reorganizing the intelligence apparatus would have as much effect on reducing the terrorism threat as would changing policies that intensify hatred of the around the world. But the striking similarities between Republicans and Democrats on foreign policy issues work to prevent change.

makes a similar argument for . So, some other kind of connectivity, along with a more creative approach, is required - one that incorporates not only the sharing of information across agency boundaries (a recommendation of the commission's that has received relatively little attention), but active collaboration, joint training, and the development of long term personal relationships between agencies as well. Creative intelligence analysis has a lot in common with other kinds of problem-solving activities: thinking outside the box, challenging deeply held assumptions, and combining different, often seemingly unrelated, kinds of expertise and knowledge.


 




Bill Seitz, fluxent at gmail dot com, Weblog