Why state Intelligence agencies engage in international intelligence liaison?
9/11 terrorist attacks, 7/7 terrorist attacks, Paris attacks are the implementer of what is called international intelligence liaison. These major terrorist attacks have put intelligence agencies in a place where they need liaison to face the problem. 21st century is witnessing the increase in globalization of intelligence. The phenomenon of international intelligence liaison is central to this process, it is an area where intelligence and international relations come in to connect. This article highlights the key themes that are currently developing within international intelligence liaison relationships. International intelligence liaison which may be defined as the the process of communication or cooperation which facilitates a close working relationship between intelligence organizations and law enforcing agencies of many states and countries. Intelligence agencies act as frontline of homeland defense and security. Right now, no any single state or country is facing the challenge of terrorism. These days international intelligence liaison is occupying space in academic research, political discourses and in state matters. As Adam Svendsen says: ‘Liaison today represents the most significant dimension of intelligence.’
It is high time for world to recognize and realize that existentialist issues such as, pandemics, overpopulation, climate change and now terrorism, are of global level. Therefore, no single country, state, nation can control over any of them individually, but transnationally combined efforts are needed for the solutions of these catastrophic issues. Post 9/11 events did not have that it took to create space for international intelligence liaison but others factors also drove the development of international intelligence liaison as globalization increasing and tightening social, economical, political ties among countries. Changing socio-economical political conditions have brought up such new dimensions to world security and human development. We can observe different international liaison and cooperation on various areas and factors as business, trade, sports, reducing pollutants and such other things. The international intelligence liaison can be the part of such agreements looking at the current global situations. International intelligence liaison is not a new term or phenomenon. Historically many states and countries, in different periods of history, as world war, had implemented this policy of sharing informational for mutual benefit and interests. Some countries simply denied to be the part of such liaison processes. But this is different moment different period of time and very different circumstances. At given time and situation new perspectives over on such process are required. The new definitions procedures, policies, analysis are required. Views should be reformulated policies should be revisited as conditions are different .This time global peace is under attack, the massive terrorist attacks have left world at the point of taking extraordinary measures to tackle the highly dangerous situation. Massive terrorist events as 9/11 7/7 and Paris attack have made the need of global collaboration, communication and intelligence sharing inevitable. These are the greatest examples of why international intelligence liaison is so much necessary. There are clear reasons why international intelligence liaison is the need of this time as, terrorism is no more a national problem, terrorism is not against particular nation, country, group or government, terrorism is a transnational and international threat, peace is not wanted by single national or country but by all, transnational terrorism requires transnational efforts and strategies and transnational cooperation to eradicate. At this moment, global intelligence liaison seems to be the most effective operational strategy in these serious global security situations. Terrorism should no more be considered as a regional problem because its influence has reached from every government, country to the individual level. The terrorism has clearly become a global phenomenon and global threat, the counter efforts and strategies should be, likewise, made. In the case of lack of intelligence sharing may lead to frequency of such violent incidents. The current peace situation is beyond the control of on state. The terrorist groups have expanded their network influence over many countries. International intelligence liaison has always been the need of the modern world that has been severely realized at this moment. There are primary secondary and tertiary sites of such attack panning and sites as they are planned at one country, prepared and practiced and second country and carried out at third country. Such kinds of situation logically and necessarily require same kinds of actions as intelligence shared by particular country or state and operation carried out by another country based on intelligence sharing. If terrorists are making transnational efforts for violent attacks why efforts for the sake of peace cannot be made?
Ivanovo Katrina has illustrated in her article ‘Global intelligence liaison is the best strategy in fighting against terrorism. Global peace has already suffered the consequences of poor intelligence liaison as weak international intelligence liaison is understood as the leading cause of letting attacks happening in past. Those attacks would have been avoided if international intelligence liaison was full functional. International intelligence liaison may be different nature and different types of cooperation.
In this regard Westerfield offered the first taxonomy of intelligence cooperation, identifying at least six possible forms, which were:
1 fully fledged liaison
2 intelligence information sharing
3 intelligence operations sharing
4 intelligence support
5 crypto-diplomacy
6 the intrinsic risks of liaison.
There are many advantages and disadvantages as well to international intelligence liaison. The advantages can range from financial, economical, organizational, and operational to accessibility speed and ability.
Below are given the principle reasons as to why state Intelligence agencies engage in international intelligence liaison and what its advantages are.
The advantages of international intelligence liaison:
The primary reason intelligence liaison is the increasing need of international efforts to face the challenges of expanding transnational terrorism.
The state intelligence agencies need broad information and analysis to understand the nature of terrorism.
State agencies may suffer from insufficient data for effective operational actions that why they attempt to make information sufficient enough to take successful actions.
International intelligence liaison is vitally important as the borderless terrorism has been unleashed and by this process collected material is increased and more broadly analyzed and assessed. There are, then, very less chance of informational gaps. Data, information collected by different sources fills the voids.
There is advantage of international intelligence liaison, for example during a military confrontation, is that the actors involved can exchange information, assessments, and products for understanding and responding more efficiently against a particular terrorist threat. International intelligence cooperation can help the actors involved to understand and more efficiently manage their troops and resources in responding to a specific threat or enemy.
Stéphane Lefebvre states that ‘no intelligence service has all the resources - financial, human, and technical - to be entirely self-sufficient in all areas.’ Therefore, working with partners on similar matters, the resources will be increased.
Intelligence liaison collaboration can help identifying organizational deficiencies and better manage its activities and sources as EU’s Counter-Terrorism Coordinator, Gilles de Kerchove, has emphasized: ‘The key to counter-terrorism is the global [intelligence]liaison between actors”
No matter how capable is one intelligence agency it stills lacks something. No single intelligence can have all the capabilities. As U.S intelligence agency may have the high ability of SIGNINT. SIGNINT cannot be the most powerful part of intelligence network, unless it is supplemented by other sides as HUMINT. There are various areas of specialties of each individual agency. When all such capabilities are combined then certainly it is really can be hoped for perpetual peace and effective measures. International intelligence liaison may be important in the terms of speed of actions as it can enable to gather and disseminate crucial data, giving the actors the ability to respond to time-sensitive threats.
International intelligence liaison can insightfully important as well because liaison may have greater cultural understanding into a particular issue that the another actor may otherwise misinterpret.
Bill Duff argues that: ‘Nowadays, in a globalized world, local expertise has become one of the most important components in producing the accurate intelligence product for dissemination.’

In a public declaration of the former head of MI6 (Secret Intelligence Service) Sir John Sawers stressed the importance of sharing intelligence may yield, these days, within the realm of cyber-security and changing social, economical and political settings. Sawers highlighted the advantages of intelligence liaison by declaring that: ‘Cooperation in technology and in communications are vastly advantageous to our economies and to our way of life and to family cohesion.’ That is the reason that global intelligence cooperation is the main imperative for assuring security, protection, and integrity.
There is cost benefit of international intelligence liaison that is data which can be achieved by high expenditure on the use of latest technology can be saved. Professor Barry Buzan has states in his works: ‘In todays’ context, it is impossible to talk about a hegemon [as USA has proved to be] that can intervene everywhere and at any time across the globe. [More precisely,] the world nowadays is composed of regions with specific actors [states] within those regions that can influence the interactions, events, or respectively the dynamics of a particular region.’
The above analytical statement concludes that combined efforts of these actors may surely yield to high results by forming single international law enforcing attempt. International intelligence liaison becomes the combined single force dedicated to protect global peace. However, there are some are some risks involved in this process and potential negative sides and disadvantages of international intelligence liaison. The collaborative intelligence is not actually as self-evident or as straightforward in practice as might first appear to be the case.
(Warren Tucker, New Zealand Director of Security, 23 May 2007)
On another place he says:
‘Co-operative Intelligence. It seems intuitively obvious that it ought to be a ‘good thing’ to co-operate in the collection, analysis, and dissemination of intelligence ... But intelligence by its very nature is secret. It is collected covertly from those who do not wish us – the authorities –to know of their intentions or capabilities. This applies whether the subject of the intelligence collection activity is an individual or small group of individuals (as is the case with the terrorist cell), or whether it is the intentions or attitude of a foreign government. So, given the inherently secretive character of secret intelligence, there is immediately a tension between the need to maintain the secret, on the one hand, and sharing the secret – or operating in a more open and collaborative manner – on the other.’
Along with these potential advantages and benefits there is another side of the coin as well.
The risks and disadvantages are mention below;
Conflict of Interests: Liaison may provide one country/state with critical sensitive information about the interests, strategies and plans another country/state.
Hostile Collection: Liaison may attempt to gain insight into one state`s/country`s intentions, sources and methods through overt or covert means.
Disagreement: The bilateral cooperation is diminished if one party defects from the agreement.
Priority issue: There is always war of interests. At this point bilateral cooperation may come in to conflict as priorities may arise one party finding one issue more important than other`s. Michael Warner writes in one of his article, “Intelligence Transformation and Intelligence Liaison”, “the primary mission of any intelligence structure is to defend its population and vital interests.”
Moral Hazards: Members of state/country intelligence services may be involved in unethical or illegal activities, or utilize illegal methods to obtain intelligence. Human rights, democratic values and other ethical standards should not be violated. All the actors involved should respect the general human laws and there is also need for human rights enforcing mechanism that ensures that all the principles are respected and maintained to fullest effect.
Third party entrance: Third party may involve chances are of the unfair use of information by third party penetration. As expert Jennifer E. Sims argues: ‘The most important aspect for the actors involved in intelligence liaison is security.’ In other words, the actors involved are never sure about the effectiveness of their counter-intelligence measures and operations. As Stéphane Lefebvre has argues in his writings ‘[…]there is a ubiquitous fear among the participants that the intelligence exchanged, or knowledge acquired, through intelligence liaison can be compromised or passed on to a third party without the originator’s consent.”
History holds many such examples of third party penetration and the results were dangerous. Moreover, H. Bradford Westerfield, an expert in intelligence liaison, explains the fear of third party penetration,
“The risk is not just that one’s people who are conducting the liaison may become vulnerable, and end being recruited as ‘moles’. The other service can also work through its liaison partner connections for extending its information-collection goals but also for extending its influence goals.”
The risks become high after, third party penetration, of using information in wrong way.
Sharing intelligence is like losing control of it that is okay if it goes to a trusted partner where it is subject to the prohibition on being shared further with any third party. Eliza Manningham M15 Director General spoke after the July 2005 bombings in London.
“….We have a very strong interest in international cooperation, in all similar services having both the full legal powers to collect intelligence and the skill and experience to handle it carefully but if we splash it around carelessly we shall soon have none of it. So I could never agree to a compulsory exchange of intelligence as that would risk compromising valuable sources of intelligence. There would soon be little to exchange”
The disclosure policy of classified liaison material may pose serious threat to partners involved in international intelligence liaison. The risk is because of different domestic legislation and legal intervention compared to those of its liaison partners. Each country/state has their own legal status on such matters. There exists no common legislation on the matters of international intelligence liaison. This is part of the international intelligence liaison that most countries are unaware and unprepared. The trust issues are born here and many states hesitate to liaise. The disclosure of sensitive information of transnational scope may jeopardize not only national security also international security comes at point of risk and future of relationship is also badly damaged. This all may lead to severe consequences. There is very famous example of information leakage incident called WikiLeaks. This website released world sensitive information that caused many problems and created threats. The leaks information included military, political war and intelligence information. Another famous case is of Edward Snowden who made sensitive information public. His disclosure of information caused serious problems. The sharing of information is if beneficial it is dangerous as well at the same moment. There is strong and urgent need to make policies at government level for the security sensitive information. At this point broader considerations and more serious thoughts are called for to understand the transnational security matters its benefits potential negative and adverse effects. Because here it is not matter of one country and its security but of global peace security. The actors need to more responsible and serious. It is also required that actors that previously or at this time have political or border or other tensions between them, should take extraordinary efforts to maintain health relations to meet the global challenge of terrorism. There should new beginning made of international relations, minor state or other priority matters should be replaced with counterterrorism objectives.
Organizational behavior: organizational behavior can be the disadvantage of intelligence liaisons. Regarding this, Talcott Parson puts the argument that: ‘organizations are social units (or human groupings) deliberately constructed and reconstructed to achieve specific aims’
Parson explains that organizations consists of individuals with different background, nature and such organizations have their own aims and objectives.
Transparency and accountability: These both terms are of great significance. The involved actors (states and countries) have their own way of dealing with prisoners and use of their operational methods. Some countries respect ethical and democratic values. There is contradiction and gap of different views and methods over the human rights issues and ethics. Studies show that properly designed training and aid can enhance the accountability and efficiency of more illiberal security services. Jennifer E. Sims argues in her article that: ‘[Another disadvantage or risk] regarding intelligence liaison is related to the transparency and accountability from the actors involved’ On 10 of the March 2009, a new thematic report on intelligence was discussed at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. Martin Scheinin, the UN Special Rapporteur on the protection of Human Rights while countering terrorism, presented his report with the emphasis on the role of intelligence agencies in the fight against terrorism and the accountability problems that arise from the cooperation between these agencies. He showed his grave concern that” intelligence cooperation might lead to international crimes.”
The supervisory mechanism should be put in effect to ensure international intelligence liaison is going in the way as desired. This supervisory mechanism would also ensure that no human rights violation are practiced. Such effective mechanism would guarantee that underlying principles and rules are being followed and that can surely yield maximum positive results. International intelligence liaison is an emerging phenomenon that is why there have not much literature created and legislation done. There are no universally agreed objectives and functions upon which to evaluate such processes and operations. However, there can rules and regulations formed on the basis of which such kind of combined can be hold accountable for. The Venice commission has studied the related questions in the wake of the controversy about ER and has argued:
“Engaging in international networking of security agencies is certainly the adequate response to the recent terrorism threats. However, it is necessary to create a legal framework in which cooperation with foreign agencies is only permissible according to principles established by law(including human rights safeguards)authorized according to strict routines (with proper trails)and controlled or supervised by applicable parliamentary or expert bodies”
There is strong need of transnational oversight, whether expert, executive or legislative, may ultimately be necessary in order to solve some of the inconsistencies and dangers particular to intelligence networks. Accountability tools, Legislature and other regulatory mechanism may prove effective in check-and-balance of intelligence networks.
Björn MüllerWille has suggested a “model building on an independent oversight body composed of professional experts.” He envisioned it as:
Experts, e.g., from national oversight bodies, could be appointed by Member States and representatives from the [European Parliament] . . . EU oversight bodies should report to their national equivalents (and through them to national parliaments), the Council and, if not to the responsible committee of the EP as a whole, at least to the five MEPs with security clearance . . . . These bodies should be responsible for ensuring that agencies act within their mandate and that they do not violate civil liberties and constitutional rights.
This essay has attempted to give historical view of international intelligence liaison its reason its advantages and disadvantages in today’s context. The recent attacks show that there is increasing and urgent need of new international intelligence liaison. As professor Adam Svendsen has argued: ‘Liaison today represents the most significant dimension of intelligence. ‘Moreover, as Richard J.Aldrich has argued: “Intelligence cooperation is the most important weapon in the struggle to contain the ‘new’ terrorism, but its significance is even greater than that.” There are somethings that need to be understood by states/countries that may lead to disadvantages and risks of international intelligence liaison. The new ways should be found to resolve the issues mentioned. There is also need of legislation over the matters of international intelligence liaison. International intelligence liaison should be treated as the most effective method to face the new challenges of terrorism and all factors should be taken into serious considerations that block that ways of effective international intelligence liaison. The appropriate measures are required to reduce the disadvantages international intelligence liaison. We need to understand that we all are threatened by the same source. Terrorism is cross cultural and transnational issue those hands that are striving to eliminate it should be strengthened. There is urgent need of resolving issues that constitute the disadvantageous part of international intelligence liaison. States countries and nations should perceive the nature of terrorism and develop combined methodologies, sharing based strategies to neutralize the causes of terrorism. Terrorism should not be taken as regional national issue but as international and global threat. One intelligence director spoke following words in 2010 that compiled the global phenomenon.
“The main driver was that all of us, from our respective horizons, saw that the threat [from terrorism] came closer to Europe, and simultaneously increased in volume, terrorists cross borders, which forced us to cooperate. This was not something any state could handle on its own”
The trust among actors let be devoted as it can generate transnational connection that is main requirement of this time and that will also bring down the levels of risks. There another important point that needs serious thoughts that is the level of sharing. If one actor is benefited by sharing done by another actor, reciprocally, the other one should strive in the same manner to return the favor that two way cooperation can strongly ensure the existence of bilateral cooperation in future as well. A slight unbalance in this two way act may negatively affect the relationship. There should be priorities set beforehand so that at the time there may not be any conflict of interests and priorities.
Strong and trustworthy international intelligence liaison can benefit states individuals and can be mutually beneficial. The engagement between state Intelligence agencies and international intelligence liaison would be a highly positive step in the international counterterrorism effort and it will establish relations that can be nurtured in the future. The main goal of intelligence network sanctions and rewards should be to cultivate capable, accountable, and professionalized network partners who can be trusted to gather, analyze, and use information in humane and professional ways. All the actors should play honest role.
Conclusion:
There are advantages and disadvantages discussed above. Clearly there are more benefits advantages than disadvantages. There should be balance maintained in sharing for the international intelligence liaison to be effective. The establishment of a cooperative symmetry is therefore in the best interest of the actors and parties involved. In the favor of balanced and strong the actors and parties of international intelligence liaison should encourage their relation on the grounds of business, marketing access, trade, commerce in order to maintain relational and informational balance. Each actor should work to increase their level of credibility. The intelligence gaps should be filled with mutual collaboration. Off course, there are weak spots that is one of the reason why terrorist acts are taking places. Working in the international intelligence liaison will surely point out the weak spots resulting in the maximum capabilities of each and every intelligence. The increased capabilities are certain to yield positive and effective results. The exchange of information will also fill the gaps.
The future of liaison relationships among world actors is not an easy thing to predict. There is uncertainty about the future of international intelligence liaison. If anything is certain that is the need of international intelligence liaison. Under these conditions we can see obstacles that delay the development of strong relationship among actors. But looking at the terrorist activities it becomes necessary to take extraordinary action in the development of relations on the basis of trust and mutual interest. As former intelligence directors Dame Stella Rimington argues: “… in a world where the threats get more sophisticated and more global, the intelligence task gets more difficult, and cooperation between intelligence allies is vital and grows ever closer’
This world needs peace, peace needs collaborated efforts, and such efforts need trust. This is a time to take things in to global perspective. Actors should work to reduce the levels of effects that are formed in the result of such liaison. Globalization of intelligence work can be the key to the global peace and harmony and development.