Neither glamorous nor deadly

Intelligence is the first line of defence in today’s world and India lags behind

By Anand Verma
Courtesy: GfilesIndia

(June 17, New Delhi, Sri Lanka Guardian) Over 50 years after gaining independence from the British, Indian Intelligence continues to operate within the framework left by them. The system was created to deal with problems andrequirements of a different age. But we have moved into a new era where the national security architecture of the world keeps changing in a kaleidoscopic pattern, creating new axes of conflicts and conciliations. Times have changed enormously and the world has become far more complex.

It is high time an Indian Intelligence Reforms Commission is appointed on the lines of the Administrative Reforms Commission to overhaul the old system. There are a number of new paradigms requiring consideration. If in today’s world Intelligence has become the first line of defence, there is no time to lose.

The very first reform should be to give Indian Intelligence the backing of legislative enactments. The laws should provide a degree of autonomy which frees Intelligence from all bureaucratic restraints and controls relating to financial management, administrative functions, pay scales, recruitment, postings and promotions, hire and fire policies, and enforcement of discipline. The laws should spell out the charters and authorize the Central Government to fix broad targets within the charter. This will prevent the misuse of institutions by those in authority. The laws should hold Intelligence accountable to the Cabinet or its Committee for National Security but also create a Parliamentary committee for overseeing. Detailed rules can be worked out to determine the parameters of overseeing and areas of Intelligence work over which it will be exercised.

Absence of legislative cover is a serious lacuna. All Intelligence work is carried out under executive instructions but operations abroad would involve breaking of local laws of the country concerned. Neither those who give instructions for such operations nor those who carry them out are protected legally under the Indian laws. Contrast this with the US. Institutions like the CIA are created by laws of Congress. All activities that the CIA may be required to carry out are directly or indirectly identified in the charter legally given. Their operations are thus safe under US laws. No such protection is available to Indian operatives carrying out Intelligence tasks abroad.

Autonomy is essential for non-conventional organizations to do their jobs. They should be free to hire the best talent available which will be possible only if a very superior compensation package is on offer to the recruit. Today’s Intelligence needs require engineers, management specialists, economists, scholars, scientists, and sociologists, among others, of supreme quality. But only the inferior type wants to make a career in Intelligence because the better type finds the existing compensation packages unattractive. In other countries, Intelligence services are usually the best-paid organizations in those countries. This is the reason why the CIA serves as a magnet, attracting large numbers of doctorate holders from the best schools in the US.

In recent years, the international terror threat has grown exponentially. There are threats of mass destruction of population and property through use of weapons of mass destruction, mass disruption of communications through manipulation of cyberspace and of mass doctrinal madness through clever selective religious indoctrination. Such a range of offensive tactics cannot be countered by keeping intelligence on the defensive. Intelligence has to be provided teeth to bite with. It should therefore develop its own cadre of offensive operators or learn to do so in the company of select uniformed services. While major countries have for long practised the offensive mode of Intelligence work, India has lagged behind. Intelligence reforms should open up the possibilities of covert actions. Use of non-state actors by state actors effectively takes away India’s options to stay neutral to covert operations. A redefinition of the nation’s security interest will demand India meets challenges boldly.

Intelligence has to acknowledge the appearance of new perspectives following globalization. Fast-moving technologies have rendered borders meaningless. There is a new competition for economic penetration. Because of these trends, sovereignties of nations are at a discount. In times ahead India will face acute competition from the other two rising powers of Asia, China and Japan. There are issues of land, water and climatic changes, all of which singly or together lead to mass migrations, creating demographic imbalances. Who else should study such phenomena holistically if not Intelligence? Their database and sharp analysis can contribute to keep nations’ interests secure.

The increasing complexity calls for another reform – the operations and analysis cadres in Intelligence should be made distinct and separate. When Intelligence needs were few, there may have been a justification for the two streams to flow as one, but not any longer. Indian Intelligence has to grow much larger than what it is today. The value of an analyst lies in the depth of his studies of his field. The longer he specializes, the greater the intuitive insight he acquires. Such knowledge will go waste if he moves to operations. Naxalism has been identified as the nation’s most serious problem in the field of national security. Starting from a single village, Naxalbari, in West Bengal in 1965, Naxalism is now present in 16 states, affecting 160 districts. In the context of Intelligence reforms, one must examine why such growth has occurred. It would seem that our Constitutional scheme, by dividing powers between the states and Centre, has prevented the latter from formulating and executing a cohesive policy for the country to battle this problem. If this situation is not rectified, mere reforms in Intelligence will not do.

-Sri Lanka Guardian