Intelligence

Military Intelligence Support To Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies: Rethinking The Way Defense Intelligence Combats Emerging Perils

 

CSC 1995

 

Subject Area Intelligence

 

 

MILITARY INTELLIGENCE SUPPORT

TO

CIVILIAN LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES

Rethinking the Way Defense Intelligence

Combats Emerging Perils

 

 

LCDR Stephen M. Vetter

Conference Group  #l

USMC Command & Staff College

17 April 1995

      

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

Title:                 MILITARY INTELLIGENCE SUPPORT TO CIVILIAN LAW ENFORCEMENT

                        AGENCIES: Rethinking the way defense intelligence

                        combats emerging perils

 

Author:             LCDR Stephen M. Vetter, United States Navy

 

Thesis: The majority of the emerging threats to our national

security, including: regional security danger the

proliferation of weapons of mass destruction; terrorism;

drug trafficking; and international crime; require

civilian law enforcement agency involvement in order to

combat them. Failure to develop a cooperative,

supportive intelligence-law enforcement agency

relationship will handicap both communities in their

attempts to most effectively engage these emerging

national security dangers.

 

Background:             In order to fully assess the need for military

intelligence support to civilian law enforcement

agencies, the role of the intelligence community,

including the military intelligence services in

combating both traditional and emerging threats

security threats is examined. Historic and current views

governing our military’s involvement in civilian law

enforcement activities are reviewed. Guidance from

civilian leaders, increasingly pushing the intelligence

community to assist in combating these emerging threats,

have laid the groundwork for a robust intelligence

community-law enforcement agency relationship to develop.

If specific criteria are met, then military intelligence

support to law enforcement will not only yield dividends

for these non-traditional clients, but also enhance the

intelligence support provided to the warfighter in these

uncertain times. An expanded role for military

intelligence in support of law enforcement means that

extra care must be taken to ensure the integrity of both

communities.  Specific steps to enhance this

relationship , without encountering potential pitfalls,

are presented.

 

Recommendation: To combat post-Cold War threats the intelligence

community, including the military intelligence services,

must overcome its traditional focus and aggressively

pursue the sharing of foreign intelligence with non-

traditional customers, especially, civilian law

enforcement agencies.

 

 

The Cold War is over, but many new dangers have taken its place

regional security threats; the proliferation of weapon of mass

destruction; terrorists who, as we have seen, can strike at the very

heart of our own major cities; drug trafficking and international crime.

The decisive advantage United States intelligence provides this country

is, therefore, as important as it has ever been...a challenge whose

difficulty is matched only by its importance.

       - President William J. Clinton - The White House - February 8, 1995 1

 

The United States employs its military forces primarily to combat national

 

security threats and advance vital national interests. In the case of many of

 

the dangers delineated above, the most valuable military response may not be the

 

deployment of front - line combat troops, but; rather the employment of the military

 

intelligence community. However, to effectively counter these "new dangers" the

 

entire intelligence community--including the military intelligence services--must.

 

overcome its traditional focus and aggressively pursue the sharing of foreign

 

intelligence with non traditional customers, especially civilian law enforcement

 

agencies. Just as the United States Navy has learned that no single military

 

service embodies all of the capabilities needed to respond to every situation and

 

threat,"2 no one governmental entity can single-handedly contain the threats to

 

our national security. The intelligence community must take a page from the

 

Navy’s Forward... From The Sea and provide its "decisive advantage" to those

 

agencies that can make the most effective use of it against these non-traditional

 

assaults on our national security.

 

Intelligence produced for its own sake is meaningless; it has no inherent

 

or intrinsic value, but must be acted upon to have significance. In the old

 

Cold-War days this meant putting intelligence in the hands of national policy

 

makers and military leaders. In the post Cold-War world, as the targets of law

 

enforcement and intelligence begin to merge, it increasingly means putting

 

information into the hands of law enforcement so that action can be taken to

 

maximize the impact of this intelligence. Failure by the intelligence community

 

to provide intelligence to customers who can make use of it will not only result

 

in our nation's inability to counter these emerging challenges;, but will also

 

call into question the relevance of the community itself.

 

In order to assess the need for the military to provide intelligence support

 

to civilian law enforcement agencies, this paper first examines the role of the

 

intelligence community, including the military intelligence service, in

 

combatting both traditional and emerging national security threats. A review of

 

historic and current views governing our military’s involvement in civilian law

 

enforcement activities follows. Guidance from civilian leaders, who are

 

increasingly pushing the intelligence community to assist in fighting these

 

emerging threats has laid the groundwork for a robust intelligence community-law

 

enforcement agency relationship to develop. Specific criteria for determining

 

if military intelligence support to law enforcement is appropriate  presented,

 

and if met, will not only yield dividends for these non--traditional clients, but

 

also enhance the support the intelligence community can provide to the warfighter

 

in these uncertain times. An expanded role for military intelligence in support

 

of law enforcement means that extra care must be taken to ensure the integrity

 

of both communities. Specific steps to enhance this relationship without

 

encountering serious drawbacks are presented.

 

As the 21st century approaches, vital U.S. interests are increasingly being

 

discussed in terms of their impact on our nation's economy and social stability.

 

Threats to the economy and societal fabric, ranging from depleted natural

 

resources to drugs and crime, have in many cases displaced military threats in

 

their relative importance to our national well-being. As a result, our military

 

is being asked by both the executive and legislative branches of government, to

 

contribute more frequently in these new arenas.  This trend appears likely to

 

continue.  Since civilian law enforcement agency involvement is essential to

 

oppose the majority of these emerging treats, failure to develop a cooperative,

 

supportive intelligence community-law enforcement agency relationship will

 

handicap both sides in their attempts to lessen the danger from these perils.

 

 

The Intelligence Contribution

 

Intelligence--the gathering, analysis, and dissemination of information in

 

order to gain a decisive advantage over adversaries--is critical to the economic

 

and political well-being, as well as the security, of our nation.  Strategic

 

intelligence helps provide the United States with the wherewithal to be a world

 

leader.  For the military, understanding the threat environment and determining

 

enemy centers of gravity and critical vulnerabilities are crucial to success

 

on the battlefield.  Carl Von Clausewitz, in his seminal work On War, recognized

 

the vital role intelligence could play in military operations,  "By 'intelligence'

 

we mean every sort of information about the enemy and his country--the basis, in

 

short, of our own plans and operations."3  The problem, of course, is getting

 

objective,  "Many intelligence reports in war are contradictory; even more are

 

false, and most are uncertain...In short, most intelligence is false."4  Although

 

no intelligence service will be "right" 100 percent of the time, the collection

 

of intelligence and the caliber of the community have matured significantly in

 

the almost two centuries since Clausewitz formed his view of intelligence.

 

The challenges that face our nation have also evolved, however, especially

 

over the last decade.  The intelligence community is being asked to evolve as

 

well in order to help prepare the United States to deal more effectively with

 

these problems. A recent nominee to the position of Director of the Central

 

Intelligence Agency, General Michael Carns, delineated these new

 

responsibilities:

 

The Cold War may have passed into history, but regional

instability, terrorism, drug trafficking, crime, and

the proliferation of nuclear weapons all loom large as

threats to our interests and to our people.5 

 

Intelligence can play a critical rote in combatting these threats. For

 

example, in the counterdrug arena Congress, in passing the Defense Authorization

 

Act of 1989 (P. L. 100-456), emphasized that, "intelligence is the key to a

 

successful drug interdiction program."6  Following more extensive hearings the

 

following year Congress concluded, "Agencies involved in drug interdiction

 

programs at all levels of government--international, national, and local---agree

 

that accurate and timely intelligence is the key to successful drug

 

interdiction."7

 

Just as the support of the intelligence world has been crucial to law

 

enforcement in the realm of counternarcotics the savvy use of intelligence

 

capabilities can be crucial to countering other non-traditional threats. This

 

potentially vital contribution was almost certainly a factor in President

 

Clinton’s recent decision to give a CIA Director, nominee John M. Deutch, cabinet

 

rank for only the second time in U. S. history, thus granting him a broad role in

 

setting national security policy.8

 

Intelligence becomes even more critical as the federal budget becomes

 

tighter and the size of our nation's military is reduced. With a reduction in

 

the scope of U.S. presence in foreign lands, the number of units forward

 

deployed, and the sheer quantity of forces available to respond to developing

 

crises, timely strategic indications and warning (I&W) is essential to enable our

 

national command authority to position forces to respond effectively to these

 

crises. Naval forces, because of their forward presence in areas of  potential

 

crisis, have always relied heavily on intelligence for operationally- and

 

tactically-oriented I&W. Similarly, intelligence an also enable civilian law

 

enforcement agencies to position their limited assets to maximize their mission

 

accomplishment.

 

The nation’s future intelligence needs and the intelligence community

 

structure required to meet them are undergoing a scrutiny rarely seen since the

 

Central Intelligence Agency was created in 1947 and wars became chilled. No

 

fewer than two major assessments of intelligence community structure and missions

 

are underway. A congressionally-mandated bipartisan panel chaired by Les Aspin

 

has been commissioned by the President to study intelligence community roles and

 

missions for the post-cold war world and make a "thorough assessment of the kind

 

of intelligence community we will need to address the security challenges of the

 

future."9  Rep. Larry Combest (R-TX), new Chairman of the house Permanent Select

 

Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), has also launched a comprehensive review of

 

U.S. intelligence agency needs entitled "Intelligence Community for the 21st

 

Century."10  Additionally, a presidential directive issued in early March set

 

formal intelligence collection priorities and created a high-level committee to

 

oversee intelligence community performance in meeting them.11 One of the core

 

issues of this debate is the role of the intelligence community in supporting

 

non-traditional customers. The part the military intelligence community will

 

play in supporting non-military customers will be central to the debate.

 

 

Why Military Intelligence?

 

Military intelligence has quite naturally focused on military threats to our

 

national security. From the beginning, the primary raison d’être for military

 

intelligence has been to enable military forces to prepare for and win wars.

 

Intelligence tailored specifically to the needs of the warfighter has

 

traditionally focused on information about the enemy that is timely, accurate,

 

and relevant. The goal is to produce actionable intelligence, to disseminate it

 

to commanders where and when needed and to package it in a form that allows for

 

immediate exploitation and mission accomplishment. Indeed good intelligence is

 

a highly effective, force multiplier.

 

No one would disagree that the first responsibility of our military

 

intelligence organizations is and will continue to be ensuring that our military

 

forces have at their disposal the very best available threat information and

 

analysis on potential adversaries. However, military intelligence organizations.

 

also have a duty to contribute when possible to the fight against, other national

 

security threats, especially when important contributions can be made merely by

 

providing information and expertise that already exists within the services. For

 

example, Naval Intelligence has developed some of this nation's premier maritime

 

expertise. This know-how can be of immense value to law enforcement agencies in

 

combating maritime drug trafficking, alien smuggling, international weapons

 

shipments and the maritime components of terrorism and international crime, as

 

well as assisting these civilian agencies in monitoring treaty compliance in the

 

areas of fishing, radioactive waste disposal, the movement of radioactive

 

materials, and the migration of displaced peoples, to name just a few Federal

 

agencies with a primary focus on law enforcement like the Coast Guard, Customs

 

Service, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Drug Enforcement Administration

 

have extensive international roles that affect our national well-being and can

 

be enhanced by the intelligence community. In fact, some military intelligence

 

support is already being provided to select federal agencies.

 

This duty--to be met on a not to interfere basis with the primary mission

 

of the military intelligence community--should apply to national security threats

 

even when U. S. military forces are not specifically engaged against them by way

 

of example, the primary responsibility of the naval intelligence community is to

 

prepare U.S. naval forces to counter adversarial threats and to provide all U. S.

 

military components with the maritime intelligence they need in order to fulfill

 

their missions. Naval intelligence has as a result developed some of the

 

nation's most extensive maritime knowledge and databases. This knowledge should

 

be (and is) available to all elements of government involved in combatting

 

international security threats and in promoting national interest.  Military

 

intelligence not only has a responsibility to ensure that this information is

 

available, but an obligation to seek out the agencies that can best put this.

 

knowledge to use in attacking national security threats.  When the groups that

 

pose these threats begin violating U.S. laws, then civilian law enforcement

 

agencies must step in and take charge. Since the intelligence community may not

 

arrest criminals, it must work with the appropriate law enforcement agencies that

 

can. In military parlance, the military intelligence services will be acting as

 

supporting CINCs to the nation's law enforcement agencies.

 

Given the dramatic shift that has occurred in the world's balance of power

 

over the last decade, it is not surprising that the Defense Department has

 

recognized that these "new dangers" cannot be confronted with old, Cold War

 

intelligence structures. Secretary Perry's recently released Annual Report to

 

the President and the Congress acknowledged that "changing world

 

conditions. demand different types of intelligence support."12 This realization

 

has prompted the Defense Intelligence Agency to embark" upon the most profound

 

changes in its history.   The service intelligence organizations have so

 

originated efforts to improve their capabilities to support new military

 

missions.

 

Effective intelligence support to traditional military customers enhances

 

operational capabilities and mission success and serves as both a force and

 

combat multiplier; the same can be said for the non-military customer. Why,

 

then, isn’t military intelligence support to civilian law enforcement agencies

 

being more aggressively pursued?

 

 

History

 

There has been a strong, well-founded tradition of keeping the military and

 

the intelligence community separate from our nation’s domestic law enforcement

 

activities. The American experience has been marked, according to former Chief

 

Justice Burger, by a traditional and strong resistance...to any military

 

intrusion into civil affairs. That tradition has deep roots in our history."14

 

Given the increase we have seen in the use of active duty military forces

 

on the domestic scene in the l990's (e.g. riot control in Los Angeles, fighting

 

forest fires in Oregon, disaster relief for Hurricane Andrew in Florida, etc.),

 

it is appropriate to examine two of the most important underpinnings of this

 

strong tradition of keeping the U. S. military and the intelligence community out

 

of domestic law enforcement pursuits: the Posse Comitatus Act and the

 

Intelligence Community’s mission of gathering foreign intelligence.

 

Posse Comitatus (or "Can'ta Posse Helpus") Act

 

The Posse Comitatus Act , Section 1385, Chapter 67 U. S. Code Title 18, was

 

created for important, valid reasons to guarantee non-interference by the

 

military in legitimate, domestic civilian affairs. Unlike the separation of

 

church and state, however, the genesis of this concept does not begin with the

 

Constitution, but rather dates from post-Civil War America. The Posse Comitatus

 

Act was passed in 1878 in order to end the use of federal troops to police state

 

elections in ex-Confederate states where civil power had been reestablished.15

 

Congress’ purpose in passing this act was to preclude the direct, active

 

participation of federal troops in law enforcement activities; Congress did not.

 

intend, however, to ban the involvement of federal troops in a passive role in

 

fulfilling law enforcement activities.l6 In fact, military personnel swear an

 

oath to protect the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

 

Despite clear Congressional intent to allow the military to assist civilian

 

law enforcement agencies, this well intentioned concept has, in practice however,

 

been used to limit perfectly legitimate assistance that the military can

 

provide.17 It has sometimes inadvertently resulted in tying the hands of law

 

enforcement entities by not giving them access to all of the potential tools at