Our agencies should have a more organic relationship
India faces complex security challenges, which have the potential to derail its economic and social progress. But there does not seem to be any broad-based exercise to reform the country’s intelligence apparatus and make it more pro-active and in line with the pursuit of the nation’s internal and external policies. Whatever piecemeal restructuring has been attempted from time to time, have mostly been crisis-driven and not a comprehensive needs-based attempt to address the structural flaws in the intelligence set-up. So even while we have been eviscerating our intelligence institutions over the decades, the recent attempts to ‘monitor’, ‘coordinate’ and ‘oversee’ this largely dysfunctional apparatus have only created even more layer upon layer of meta-institutions.
Let's take the example of some of those countries which are known for their intelligence-gathering prowess. The UK has just one intelligence agency, the MI-5 that oversees both internal and external intelligence operations. France has four and China one (Ministry of State Security). The US has the highest number of investigation agencies among the developed nations, but even its overall number does not exceed 15. In contrast, India has more than 25 internal and external intelligence agencies -- most have been found of working at cross-purposes instead of complementing each other. As a result, despite their numbers, Indian intelligence is proving to be the soft underbelly of the country with each agency functioning in self-created silos.
The failure of our intelligence agencies to provide for real-time intelligence and advance warnings of developing situations cannot be overstated. But this can happen only by sharing and using multiple databases, including those maintained by the National Intelligence Grid, NATGRID, the Crimes and Criminal Tracking Network and System, CCTNS, and the Intelligence Bureau-run intelligence sharing hub, the Multi-Agency Centre, MAC. Instead, what we get is nebulous intelligence analysis provided by the different agencies that are often in the dark about the investigations carried out by their peer agencies. The sorry outcome of this kind of haphazard sleuthing is that Indian intelligence agencies have time and again failed to perform by producing meaningful, actionable and timely internal and external intelligence.
Even in those cases, where Indian intelligence apparatus has succeeded in busting terror and espionage rings, it has not been able to provide accurate information which could be developed into concrete evidence that stands judicial scrutiny (as was the case with MI-5’s unearthing of the plot to blow-up trans-Atlantic flights over American cities).
Read more....
IIPM’s Management Consulting Arm-Planman Consulting
Professor Arindam Chaudhuri – A Man For The Society….
IIPM: Indian Institute of Planning and Management
IIPM makes business education truly global
Management Guru Arindam Chaudhuri
Rajita Chaudhuri-The New Age Woman
India faces complex security challenges, which have the potential to derail its economic and social progress. But there does not seem to be any broad-based exercise to reform the country’s intelligence apparatus and make it more pro-active and in line with the pursuit of the nation’s internal and external policies. Whatever piecemeal restructuring has been attempted from time to time, have mostly been crisis-driven and not a comprehensive needs-based attempt to address the structural flaws in the intelligence set-up. So even while we have been eviscerating our intelligence institutions over the decades, the recent attempts to ‘monitor’, ‘coordinate’ and ‘oversee’ this largely dysfunctional apparatus have only created even more layer upon layer of meta-institutions.
Let's take the example of some of those countries which are known for their intelligence-gathering prowess. The UK has just one intelligence agency, the MI-5 that oversees both internal and external intelligence operations. France has four and China one (Ministry of State Security). The US has the highest number of investigation agencies among the developed nations, but even its overall number does not exceed 15. In contrast, India has more than 25 internal and external intelligence agencies -- most have been found of working at cross-purposes instead of complementing each other. As a result, despite their numbers, Indian intelligence is proving to be the soft underbelly of the country with each agency functioning in self-created silos.
The failure of our intelligence agencies to provide for real-time intelligence and advance warnings of developing situations cannot be overstated. But this can happen only by sharing and using multiple databases, including those maintained by the National Intelligence Grid, NATGRID, the Crimes and Criminal Tracking Network and System, CCTNS, and the Intelligence Bureau-run intelligence sharing hub, the Multi-Agency Centre, MAC. Instead, what we get is nebulous intelligence analysis provided by the different agencies that are often in the dark about the investigations carried out by their peer agencies. The sorry outcome of this kind of haphazard sleuthing is that Indian intelligence agencies have time and again failed to perform by producing meaningful, actionable and timely internal and external intelligence.
Even in those cases, where Indian intelligence apparatus has succeeded in busting terror and espionage rings, it has not been able to provide accurate information which could be developed into concrete evidence that stands judicial scrutiny (as was the case with MI-5’s unearthing of the plot to blow-up trans-Atlantic flights over American cities).
Read more....
For More IIPM Info, Visit below mentioned IIPM articles
Professor Arindam Chaudhuri – A Man For The Society….
IIPM: Indian Institute of Planning and Management
IIPM makes business education truly global
Management Guru Arindam Chaudhuri
Rajita Chaudhuri-The New Age Woman
| ExecutiveMBA |
