Download in PDF (2MB) here - Foreknowledge

● Analysis and collection are
functional areas of activity
performed within all three
principal disciplines and as
part of the collective all-discipline
process. Notwithstanding
obvious
similarities, there are simultaneously
significant differences
in emphasis and
methodology in the manner
in which these functions are
executed within the respective
primary disciplines. In
comparison with positive
intelligence, counterintelligence
analysis for one is
more diverse in its scope,
methodology and techniques.
Cognisance is taken
of the fact that some practitioners
may categorise collection
and analysis as
‘disciplines’ or ‘subdisciplines’.
If so, then they are
functional, not primary disciplines.
Be that as it may,
functional areas are not limited
to analysis and collection.
The identification of
further functional areas
would require dedicated research
and only ‘intelligence
management’ is proposed as
an addition here.
● The intelligence process is
performed by means of a
multi-directional activity flow.
The latter applies to the respective
principal disciplines,
the functions and the
combination thereof in the
all-discipline process.
The contour provided above clearly
requires considerable refinement
and substantiating research. Notwithstanding
its cursory nature, the
nexus holds out against one of the
litmus test for theories, namely conceptual
clarification. The notional
‘uncluttering’ of the relationship
between counterintelligence and
transnational security concerns
such as counter-proliferation (of
Weapons of Mass Destruction –
Conceptual nexus towards an all-discipline intelligence process: Duvenage & Hough
WMD), organised crime and counterterrorism
serves as an example.
While some scholars consider counterterrorism
as part of counterintelligence,
others assert
counterterrorism to have “developed”
into a “separate intelligence
discipline.” Counterterrorism is neither
a separate intelligence discipline,
nor is it part of
counterintelligence. It is a security
concern that involves facets of positive
intelligence, covert action as
well as counterintelligence. The
same applies to counter-proliferation
and organised crime.
Is this really helpful?
This three part contribution demonstrated
an abundance of fragmented
knowledge of ‘what we know’ and
‘what we think we know’ in as far
as the intelligence process is concerned.
What counterintelligence
practitioners and scholars ‘do not
know’ is how to structure these
multi-facetted processes in a manner
that satisfactorily meet model
construction’s demand of reflecting
this reality in a simplified notional
construct with real explanatory
power.
Similar to other contemporary models,
the nexus above neither attains
this evasive goal, nor does it escape
several deficiencies cited in respect
of other existing postulations. It
should thus be viewed as part of
the gradual progression towards to
a viable intelligence process model.
insight
Who knows perhaps it will be
found to be a circle after all?
1 Nolan, J A. 1997. “Confusing Counterintelligence with
Security Can Wreck Your Afternoon” Competitive
Intelligence Review, 8(3)
2 Article based on Petrus Duvenage and Mike Hough,
2011, The conceptual structuring of the intelligence
and the counterintelligence processes: enduring holy
grails or crumbling axioms – quo vadis? Strategic
Review for Southern Africa, vol. 33, no. 1, pp.29-77.
Download here. (10MB pdf)
3 The axiom of intelligence consisting of the four principal
disciplines is thus contested. It is unclear how
the common acceptance of ‘analysis’, ‘collection’,
‘counterintelligence’ and ‘covert action’ as the principal
intelligence subdisciplines originated or evolved.
Future studies by Intelligence Studies’ historians and
historiographers might well find that it was influenced
by the organisational structuring of some post-World
War II, Western statutory intelligence services.
Whatever the reason, this axiom is incongruent with
reality.
International specialists with a proven
global reach in intelligence research, risk
analysis, strategic assessment, classroom
& distance education.
*****
Client list of over 90 agencies globally in
twenty years of active operation.
*****
Production of analysis programs designed
to suit individual client agency concerns
and needs, and delivery anywhere in the
world.
*****
Publishers of benchmark texts on
intelligence and risk analysis research
methodology and application, with more
than 50 articles, manuals and books
written on intelligence.
www.intstudycen.com
www.intelligencecollege.com
October 2012 Foreknowledge 19