Intelligence Cycle Essay Example

Intelligence Cycle Essay Example Intelligence Cycle Essay Intelligence Cycle Essay INTELLIGENCE CYCLE Name: Institution: Date: Intelligence Cycle The intelligence cycle is the process through which information is collected and disseminated for use by policy makers. Ordinarily, intelligence results from a series of several activities that are interrelated and some times carried out at different levels, adding up to a cycle. The six activities or phases of the intelligence cycle include direction and planning, collection, processing and exploitation, production, dissemination and integration and finally continuous evaluation. The series, however, do not always occur sequentially. Although this is the cycle, it does not always happen as so and neither does it work all the time. It is not a very good description of the ways in which the intelligence process works. Additionally, it ignores two main parts of intelligence work, counterintelligence and covert action[1]. This brings the question of how intelligence cycle should work. One way that the intelligence cycle should work is through allowing the intelligence gaps to drive the intelligence collection. The intelligent managers are usually aware of the intelligent gaps that exist[2]. Therefore, intelligence managers should, â€Å"determine how the information required for the production of intelligence is collected†[3] at the planning stage. Currently, intelligence collection is guided by policy makers. This is an incorrect way of starting the intelligence process. Policy makers often do not know what gap exists within the intelligent database. In simpler terms, policy makers are not aware of what they do not know or rather the gap existing in the intelligence. Therefore, they are in no circumstance to guide the intelligence process. On the other hand, intelligence managers are aware of what intelligence is available and what is not available[4]. Thus, they are aware of the gaps existing from the collectors as well as analysts. Therefore, the intelli gence gaps identified should guide the intelligence process and not the policy makers although they can raise the specific topic of their concern. Another way that the intelligence cycle should work or one would expect it does is ensuring that intelligence collectors and analysts work together towards the same goal. Unfortunately, this is not the case and the two departments work independent from each other[5]. This happens because of various concerns about intelligent information such as security concerns, sources that are compromising and other issues that prevent the two departments from sharing information freely. Considering that intelligent collectors are deployed at the field gathering data while analysts analyze the data to make better judgments, feedback is required in order to know what information is valuable and what needs to be collected. This presents a major problem that needs to be changed to allow information sharing between the intelligence analysis and intelligent collection. After the analysis of information from the intelligence analysts, the analysis or intelligence is passed to policy makers who use such information for making decisions concerning the issues at hand. In many cases, the Directors of National Intelligence are kept out of deliberations concerning policy matters. It is crucial to note that none of the policy makers could understand the intelligence better than the Directors of National Intelligence. â€Å"It is the DNI, responsible for and knowledgeable of the intelligence judgments on major issues†¦[6]† Therefore, DNI should be included in the policy making as advisors since they have a better understanding of the intelligence used to make such policies. Additionally, the DNI should be working with other departments that are responsible for developing security programs in order to make full use of the intelligence gathered as well as get a better feedback about success of intelligence gathered[7]. As discussed, intelligence is quite important to policy makers for making decisions concerning national matters. However, the current intelligence cycle is not working as it is explained in reality. One of the ways it should work is ensuring that the first stage is not driven by policy makers who only have an idea about intelligence gaps. Rather, it should be driven by intelligence gaps as identified by the intelligence managers who are aware of the gaps. Secondly, intelligence collection and analysis should work in a parallel way where both share information as opposed to working in sequential as well as independently from each other. Finally, DNIs should be included in the process of policymaking since they have a better understanding of the intelligence and can help in achieving full benefit of the intelligence to the country by advising policymakers. Bibliography Blair C. Dennis. â€Å"Ten Years after 9/11: Is Intelligence Reform Working? Part II.† U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. May 19, 2011. Hulnick S. Arthur. â€Å"What’s Wrong With the Intelligence Cycle?† Praeger Security International. 2013. http://psi.praeger.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/doc.aspx Keithly M. David. â€Å"Intelligence Fundamentals.† Homeland Security and Intelligence. June 15, 2013. http://site.ebrary.com/id/10399189?ppg=54 [1] Arthur S. Hulnick, â€Å"What’s Wrong With the Intelligence Cycle?† Praeger Security International, 2013, http://psi.praeger.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/doc.aspx