Capabilities and Limitations of Domestic Intelligence Efforts

Domestic Intelligence
Name
Institution:
Course Code:
Date:
What are the capabilities and limitations of domestic intelligence efforts in supporting the homeland security enterprise? The intelligence community has been very effective in keeping the homeland safe. Every day they avert different types of crimes (cyber, terrorist, gang, economic, etc.). They also continually develop tools and procedures and conduct research to find new ways to detect, monitor, and avert threats to homeland security (Wray, 2021). Over the years, domestic intelligence has led to the arrest of gang members and other high-profile criminals, some of whom are in the government. It has also averted many cyber-related attacks that can pose a significant threat to the American public. Therefore, they have managed to keep the homeland relatively safe. The intelligence community has also continually developed tools to help them fight crime. While some of these tools have been contentious, it is undeniable that they have been effective in helping find people of interest and monitoring their activities till they are apprehended. The mass surveillance programs have effectively collected data points and aroused interest in certain individuals. However, though these technological tools have been largely condemned for infringing on people's rights, they have helped the intelligence community to find people of interest, monitor their activities and communication, and foil their plans before they pose a danger to the American public. However, it is important to note that all the mass surveillance tools developed have been effective in fighting crime, albeit not being constitutional, according to different legal scholars (German, 2014). The challenge of deploying and using these tools are the fundamental principles that this nation was built upon. The challenge is finding a balance between this complex and evolving domestic terrorism threat landscape with an approach that honors and protects both America’s security and America’s values, especially civil rights and civil liberties (National Security Council, 2021).  The efficacy of these tools and procedures employed by the domestic intelligence community to fight crime cannot be understated. Since 9/11, the government has remained relatively safe despite many lone and group actors who purposed to threaten public safety. Many actors (individual, group, and governmental) have sought to threaten the safety of the American public, and they have not been successful. The efficacy of the intelligent community foiled their plans before they could threaten public safety. Therefore, this shows that the current domestic intelligence efforts are capable and effective. On the other hand, homeland security matters have run into a new problem mainly emanating from the evolving nature of crime and things that threaten the security of people and property within the borders. One of the major failures of the domestic intelligence efforts has been the politics that come with the subject. Privacy is a contentious issue, and politicians have politicized the subject making it difficult to pass enabling laws to help intelligence officers use it to avert danger (German, 2014). The Achilles heel of the intelligence collected by the intelligence community fails to protect the security enterprise because of the limiting legal framework to empower agencies and law enforcement units to take action on some intelligence. Severally, the government has claimed they had data points of some individuals who did mass shootings but could not apprehend them or take away their guns because they would be breaking the law. President Obama once pointed out that there are individuals the government knows are dangerous or have been associated with terrorist activities (White House, 2016). Still, the government cannot bring them in or deny them the right to own and carry guns. Thus, the intelligence may be effective, but it does not support the security enterprise completely as threats to homeland security keep evolving, and the legal framework does not reflect that. For example, the many cases of mass shootings in the country for which the intelligence community has been unable to root out completely show the shortcomings of the current intelligence approaches. The politics of gun ownership is particularly concerns in the United States' ultra-polarized political climate (Jones, Doxsee, Hwang, Suber, & Harrington, 2020). The politicization of gun ownership in the country and lack of a proper legal framework to ensure safety and or they do not reach terrorists and other mentally ill people have made intelligence almost unusable to avert dangers. Therefore, intelligence has been effective, but the regulatory framework has stifled how it can be used. Secondly, the intelligence community is also struggling to find ways to lone net actors. Because they operate individually, they move from extremism to action very fast. Some do not leave a lot of trail and evidence to help investigators piece together their intentions and with whom they may have worked together. They have remained elusive for the intelligence community to detect ...