Ethical intelligence may appear to be an oxymoron to some. But in today's digital environment, agencies can no longer hide behind the veil of secrecy that once covered Cold War spy versus spy activity, even if much still remains off limits to the public. To complicate matters, while state-centred spying remains important, the demise of the Soviet Union saw what CIA Director James Woolsey once described as 'a jungle filled with a bewildering variety of poisonous snakes': terrorism, serious organized crime, and proliferation of chemical, biological, radiological and nucleal weapons. In the 'war on terror', modern-day agencies are also increasingly asked to move from just collecting intelligence. 'Intelligence is information and information gathering, not doing things to people', former chair of the Joint Intelligence Committee Michael Herman once argued, but some agencies are now tasked with implementing policy through covert (or special) operations and targeted drone strikes. Edward Snowden's disclosure of sensitive National Security Agency/Govern-ment Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) files on the work of the US and UK signals intelligence agencies did huge damage to US intelligence capabilities and resulted in public discussions on the balance between modern-day collection methods and online privacy. But should agencies cross ethical red lines to get results? And how do you create rules to guide national security intelligence without undermining the very freedoms it is there to defend?
展开▼
