A Review of Intelligence for an Age of Terror (Treverton, 2009). The WritePass Journal

A Review of Intelligence for an Age of Terror (Treverton, 2009). Introduction A Review of Intelligence for an Age of Terror (Treverton, 2009). IntroductionConclusionsReferenceRelated Introduction This book by Treverton (2009) is argued here to be a vitally important area of work that looks specifically at the way in which the use of intelligence has naturally had to change as a result of modern society. Interestingly, although there is a clear aim not to apportion blame specifically for the recent atrocities, the author indicates that he feels there is a link between the United States and their flawed approach to intelligence and the high profile terror attacks that have taken place in the US. Significantly, the author is very careful not to apportion blame or finger point and maintains a balanced and critical approach when trying to establish a link and to look at the role of intelligence. Main Arguments Presented In this book, the author actually goes on to break down the failures, in order to try to identify the impact that the specific shortcomings are having on the magnitude and nature of the target of the threats. He recognises in this analysis that, in many cases, the intelligence approaches are enshrined in the Cold War security approaches of looking at the organisation and the tactical decisions of the intelligence offerings, rather than focusing on the actual threats that are being faced in the current climate (Riley et al 2005). One of the main aspects of the book which provides added value to the information that is being presented is that, although the author spends time identifying the failings, he also spends some considerable time looking at the way in which the changes he suggests could be implemented, in practice. As a professional with experience in the field, this shows and adds considerable value to what would otherwise be a potentially academic discussion. In order to achieve this, the author takes a very pragmatic view, with the initial stage being to look at the nature of the risks that are looking at being targeted from intelligence operations. He states that recognising the threats is the first step towards then being able to recognise the way these should be handled. It is this pragmatic approach which looks at both the practical reality and the academic study that makes this book so informative in the area of intelligence being used in the terror context. The author follows themes and after identifying them he then goes on to look at how intelligence should be reformed to deal with the modern challenges. In order to identify the best way to deal with intelligence and to look at the reform of intelligence culture, there is a need first to consider the actual route of the threat and where it emanates from. One underlying argument and theme which is presented by the author here and which adds particular value to the discussion, in the opinion of the reviewer, is to look at the role of the nation state as being at the root of the changing dynamic. For example, during the Cold War, the focus of terror attacks was typically nation states and as such the intelligence gathering focussed on these entities. As time has passed, the nation states have become much more than simply target areas. Nation states can often offer a great deal of information that adds to the knowledge and understanding of the general issues of intelligence. Increasingly however in the modern context, the non-state actors play a vitally important role and it is argued by the author here that much of the role of the modern intelligence officer is to look at understanding the distinctions and various nuances that exist within these non-state actors, in such a way that their own motivation and actions can be better understood (p.141) Linked to this thread of discussion and again a vitally important aspect of the role of intelligence is that there are considerably more individuals, groups and entities that are involved in the area of intelligence gathering to prevent terrorism. With this increased number of people involved, the author places a great deal of focus on the idea that, whilst agencies may well have the technology to share information, they do not necessarily have the appropriate policies in place and therefore the underlying policies need to be reviewed, if modern challenges are going to be dealt with. As an overall position, the author maintains that there needs to be a reasonable means of supplying information across all relevant actors and to ensure that the information which is being presented is relevant and measured, so that the correct people can react quickly and appropriately. By focusing on some of the practical difficulties faced in the current climate, it is argued here that the author gains a much higher degree of legitimacy than other academic analyses in this area may achieve; in particular, the author recognises that it is necessary to take a balance between the need to improve security, but also to provide privacy and security for individuals’ information (Snowden, 2002). He notes that paying attention to legality and legitimacy is in fact increasingly important to the anti-terror efforts and that there then needs to be a total review of the policies associated with anti-terror activities as the main way of managing and combating such issues. He supports this by suggesting that factors such as encouraging intelligence authorities to create a method whereby they can share information with other entities in a constructive and balanced manner is as important, if not more so, than the actual intelligence itself. Conclusions On balance, it is argued that this book presents an interesting and well informed opinion on the modern challenges facing the intelligence industry. By being an author who has practical experience in this area, it is suggested that this allows the text to gain legitimacy and also to take a more rounded view of the challenges being faced. Finally, providing practical and well backed up suggestions for the future means that this text presents real value to the area of intelligence and counter terrorist activities. It is concluded, therefore, that this is a well-balanced and informative text that fills a gap within the current understanding of the intelligence industry. Reference Riley et al., (2005) State and Local Intelligence in the War on Terrorism, Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation Snowden, D (2002) Complex Acts of Knowing: Paradox and Descriptive Self-Awareness, Journal of Knowledge Management, Special Issue, September. Treverton, G. (2009). Intelligence for an Age of Terror. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Essay on Whistle-blowing the EnvironmentEssay Writing Service

Essay on Whistle-blowing the EnvironmentEssay Writing Service Essay on Whistle-blowing the Environment Essay on Whistle-blowing the EnvironmentOften times companies will do things that they are not supposed to knowing that they can get away with it. One problem with this is that if someone finds out and does something about it, it can be extremely detrimental for the company. This was the case with Avco Environmental Services who have a contract with a local hospital. Avco is a company that deals with toxic-waste disposal and it was discovered by one of their employees (named Chantale Leroux) that they were disposing of some of this medical waste in a local municipal landfill. This is not only an illegal action, but it could be very harmful to the health of the workers and the public in general.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Chantale Leroux is faced with a very loaded decision. She could either say something about it and risk falling out of favor in the company or allow this activity to continue in hopes of maintaining good standing in the company. Chantale takes the fo llowing course of action. Initially she goes to her immediate superior and is told to drop it because it is neither the concern of her or her superior. Not being satisfied with this, Chantale takes her issue to a higher ranking employee the very next day. When Chantale brings up the issue, her superior is clearly irritated and tells Chantale things like â€Å"this isn’t your concern†, â€Å"everyone knows that the regulations in this area are overly cautious†, and that there is no real danger and that the matter should be considered closed.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   After Chantale had taken the previously mentioned, she was unsure of what to do. Her supervisors had both been extremely clear that they thought she should just drop her concerns, but she was hesitant to drop it. One the one hand, she knew that it was a completely illegal act and that it could be potentially harmful to the unsuspecting public. On the other hand though, if she were t o take this fact public, she fears that she could jeopardize her job. She is especially fearful of this because she is new and has a promising future with the company. Chantale thinks that the management of the company is honest and trustworthy and generally has faith in them. She is, however, unsure of what to do. She looks up the phone number of an old friend who worked for the local newspaper in case she wants to tell the story, but has still yet to decide.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Corporations have moral obligations in a multitude of ways including obligations to people and obligations to the environment. Corporations are not to harm the people or environment around them especially if it is not of a significant cost. In this sense, cost can mean many things including the obvious money, but also includes things like lives, the well-being of people, and surrounding areas. What is being questioned is whether Chantale has a moral obligation to do as much as she ca n to prevent her company from harming others even if it may cost her job.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Whistle-blowing is essentially just a name used to describe the act of somebody making information public that was secret and intended to be kept secret. There are multiple kinds of whistle-blowing, but for this specific case, we will focus on what is called internal whistle-blowing. â€Å"[T]he term refers to disclosures made by employees to executives in a firm, perhaps concerning improper conduct of fellow employees or superiors who are cheating on expense accounts, or are engaging in petty or grand theft.† (DeGeorge 300) It is referred to as internal whistle-blowing because it is done by somebody inside of the company which is the exact situation that Chantale finds herself in. â€Å"Generally (when one whistle-blows), one believes an investigation will follow and a sanction will be imposed.† (DeGeorge 300) This would be the case for Chantale as wel l because she would only whistle-blow in order to potentially reduce harm to her surroundings.Whistle-blowing can be viewed three different ways: prohibited, permitted, and mandatory.Prohibited – This is the most widely held view of the three. DeGeorge states that â€Å"[t]here is a strong tradition within American mores against †ratting† or telling on others.† (303) Due to this common viewpoint, it is typical for a whistle-blower to be seen as someone who went against the firm and therefore the people in the firm.Permitted – Permitted whistle-blowing â€Å"involves an employee somehow going public, revealing information or concerns about his or her firm in the hope that the firm will change the product, action, policy, or whatever it is that the whistle-blower feels will harm, or has harmed, and needs to be rectified.† (DeGeorge 306) Whistle-blowing is typically not seen as something done with the permission or consent of the company and will often do the company harm. For this reason, for whistle-blowing to be permitted, good must come of it and enough to where it outweighs the bad.Mandatory – This is the case when a person has a moral obligation to whistle-blow because of certain conditions including, but not limited to, the concern for the health of others and the concern for the environment.As long as there are activities going on, goods being made, or really anything else where companies are acting immorally, there will be some sort of whistle=blowing that not only will happen, but really in some cases, should happen. â€Å"The need for moral heroes shows a defective society and defective corporations. It is more important to change the legal and corporate structures that make whistle-blowing necessary than to convince people to be moral heroes.† (DeGeorge 316) When speaking about whistle-blowing one must understand that it can on the one hand lead to troubling times for a company, but on the other, i t can make companies work toward a higher standard. DeGeorge states, â€Å"[w]histle-blowing should also alert corporations to what can and should be done if they wish to be both moral and excellent.† (317) Overall, whistle-blowing should be see looked at in a case-by-case basis because it can be both wrong and right.Chantale finds herself in a situation that is far from enviable, but she is trying to decide whether or not to blow the whistle on her company. There are positives and negatives to both sides, but armed with the previous information, she should be able to make a decision. What should Chantale do?