Intelligence and National Security

Intelligence and Ethics

Introduction
Given the fact that Intelligence was my favourite subject from my first year at
Security and Diplomacy, I had a hard time choosing the subject for my final paper. But I
settled with Intelligence and Ethics for some reasons: first of all, my passion for
Intelligence, Security, Strategies, Analysis, Investigations, Warfare and my interest for Social
Activism and Human Rights meet up in this point. Secondly, even though we covered a large
panel of intelligence topics, we didn`t actually had an academic debate on this subject at
class; we only tangentially talked about it while discussing other matters. Thirdly, I was
curious to find and discuss about the theoretical approach of that fragile and thin line when
the Ethics become debatable within Intelligence and if that point is obvious and important or
not.
My little research didn`t start from a naive or hypocrite point of view. I am very
aware that some people (even researchers, teachers or authors), mostly coming from vary
domains where Ethics is the main pylon or have extremely strong ethical values consider
Intelligence the child that gone wild from the International Relations range and surround
this field with false motives, hypocrisy, justified wrongs, torture, bribe, espionage,
surveillance, spying, unjustified

missions,

infiltration, betrayal,

assassinations,

black

operations, corruption, extortion and violation of Human Rights.

I tried to see if Ethics that are at the core of the conceptual level of Intelligence are
represented in practice. Does that practice involve nowadays any method to get to the vital
information that transforms ignorance to uncertainty, to risk and furthermore into certainty
and knowledge? There is any place for the traditional meaning of Ethics, defined by The
Oxford English as moral principles that govern a persons behaviour or the conducting of
an activity within those methods? Are the moral codes, the general principles of rights and
wrongs, the ethos, the rules of conduct important, or the only difference worth considering in
Intelligence practice is legal or illegal? The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is
applicable for any domain, including one that connotes secrecy in the first place? Is the
Blaga Ioana-Iulia

Security and Diplomacy 2014

Intelligence and National Security

information above the Universal Charter or the law? Finis coronat opus - the end justifies the
means?
Body content
Who determines what is ethical and moral what it comes to such a large practice as
collecting/hunting, analyzing and disseminating information? It is very commodious to
consider that thin line between right and wrong/ legal and illegal/ moral and immoral is also
modifiable and can be alter to tally the context.
Ethicist Rushworth Kidder states that standard definitions of ethics have typically
included such phrases as 'the science of the ideal human character' or 'the science of moral
duty'.1 Therefore, ethics has a vague and interpretable definition, regarding each individual
and its character and morality. But, it can be more general, as Richard William Paul and
Linda Elder define it as a set of concepts and principles that guide us in determining what
behavior helps or harms sentient creatures2.
Considering that the discipline of Intelligence Studies and theories are a new
academic field within the Social Sciences, with a relatively short period of time of theorizing
the practice, there are various definitions and theories that try to describe the best the
Intelligence concept. Defining it has to involve the intelligence agencies` core purpose- the
protection of national security. Security is defined by the absence of threats, but national
security`s definition is harder to point out, because of its subjectivity (security`s meaning for
one state might not apply for another) depending on the geopolitical or historical context.
Intelligence's raison d'etre refers to general purposes of national security, with
particular reference to defence, foreign policy and internal security threats, national economic
well-being and support for the prevention or detection of serious crime and charged with
responsibilities to monitor and give early warning of the development of direct or indirect
foreign threats to Security Service3. This is a complex definition of the Intelligence concept
that gathers and describes very well its purposes, missions and responsibilities.

Kidder, R. M., How good people make tough choices: Resolving the dilemmas of ethical living. New York: Fireside, 1995.

Richard William Paul, Linda Elder, Critical Thinking-Concepts and Tools, Foundation for Critical Thinking, 2009

Michael Herman, Intelligence power in peace and war, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2004

Blaga Ioana-Iulia

Security and Diplomacy 2014

Intelligence and National Security

Some authors argue the fact that Intelligence Studies are an applied social science,
dealing with the empirical realities of national security threats and opportunities4 because if
applied means systematically drawing on and contributing to explicitly generalized
knowledge-i.e. theory- then there is actually not much application in intelligence studies (cf.
Honig, 2007; Johnson, 2007)5. Stephen Budiansky describes this field as being influenced
more by the methods of historical studies than by the social sciences6.
For most of history, intelligence has been used to oppress, and in many parts of the
world, it still is used in this way.7 This is one of the reasons why Intelligence as an
occupation is regarded with skepticism and considered a dirty job.
As any other sociological concept, Intelligence has many framings, depending on
what current or International Relations school of thought the author that describes it belongs
to. Therefore, all is debatable, interpretable and subjective when it comes to a general
Intelligence generally accepted. The controversial part of the Intelligence is not the definition,
nor its purpose; it is the core of it the information, and more precisely, the methods of
gathering it and for what meaning. The ethical dilemmas are also present in
counterintelligence operations. The debate about Ethics within Intelligence really starts here.
World`s most famous and (allegedly) most prolific Intelligence Agency, the CIA,
defines its Ethos referring to the ability to obtain secrets by protecting sources and
methods8. It is also stated that Nation comes first. I deem that most members of the
intelligence community have the same principles and share the same values, even though
their missions and framework might be different (domestic, foreign or military intelligence).
It is notable that many agencies try to be, or at least to appear, as transparent as possible,
considering how little transparent they can be when secrecy is one of their most important
pylons.
In order to answer to some of the initials questions of this essay, any discussion about
Ethics and Intelligence should refer to the relationship between the two of them, to the
institutional and individual levels of ethical responsibility and to the righteous approach of
the intelligence process.

Johan Eriksson, Giampiero Giacomello, Intelligence Studies and the Need for Theory: Strategic and Intellectual Challenges, San
Francisco, 2008;
5
Idem;
6
Stephen Budiansky, Battle of Wits: The Complete Story of Codebreaking in World War II, Free Press, 2000
7
Loch K. Johnson, The Oxford Handbook of National Security Intelligence, Oxford University Press,2012
8
Source: https://www.cia.gov/about-cia/cia-vision-mission-values

Blaga Ioana-Iulia

Security and Diplomacy 2014

Intelligence and National Security

Intelligence practices, as any other profession are regulated by national and
international laws. Cynically speaking, if it`s legal, is also ethical. But, sometimes,
information might come on legal ways, not necessarily moral. For example, while
questioning somebody, you can obtain several information that didn`t come voluntarily; is
this a righteous way to collect it? Of course, the answer is it depends on who you`re asking.
The relationship between Intelligence and Ethics is not necessarily always obvious. It
is very plain and clear when something is illegal as torture, bribe, espionage, extortion, etc.
that is also immoral and unethical. But, things aren`t always black and white, laws are also
interpretable, and you can excuse your methods with your great results.
The distinction amongst institutional and individual levels of the ethical responsibility
is debatable, as well. For institutions, is very straightforward to determine what is ethical and
what is not, using the text of laws without any interpretation and equalizing ethics and
morality with legality. For individuals, it is all about their mere perception and own demeanor
to establish the ethical dimension of their acts.
The sources and methods used in the practice of intelligence collection and analysis are as
variable as the nature as the obtained information. The sources might be from the five main
ways to gather information, known as intelligence collection disciplines or the INTs:
HUMINT

(human

sources),

SIGINT

(electronic

sources)

including

COMINT

(communications intelligence), IMINT or PHOTINT (imagery sources), MASINT

(measurement and signature intelligence) including TELINT (telemetry intelligence) and
ELINT (electronic intelligence), OSINT (Open-Source Intelligence; publicly available
sources). Of course the ethical dilemma settles in when the sources involve governmental
spying, intercepted communications or the human source that can entail any questionable
method (bribe, espionage, threats or torture). Nobody will argue the implications of Ethics in
other sources as images obtained by satellites or publicly available media reports. Herman
states in Intelligence Power in Peace and war that reliable information is still shrouded in
official secrecy and I think that this is a matter of ethics, as well. Not only the nature or
source of information, but also what is done with it, because sometimes is intentionally
hidden and this is arguably unethical. Where the ethical questions come in is in regards to
covert surveillance and other operationssimply put, spying and espionage. This includes a
broad range of activities, some of the more controversial including assassination, plotting
coups and inciting rebellion, while on the other hand we also find nonviolent forms such as
Blaga Ioana-Iulia

Security and Diplomacy 2014

Intelligence and National Security

communications interception, monitoring of foreign agents and passively receiving
information from agents in target countries.
Therefore, to the end that delimitate the ethics in the collection of intelligence, some
agencies use moral codes. At an organizational level, the agency imposes a set of rules and
principles that have to be followed accordingly be every employee, transforming the theory
into daily practice.
In the Intelligence literature, the ethical dilemma has three approaches: the realistic
one, one based on consequences and the deontological one. The realist approach gives
priority to order over justice; and as strict legalism does, ethical realism also contains an
element of justice, though it is not necessarily bound by the law. Ethical realists appreciate
the value of the law and legal precedents, though in certain cases they may say that the law is
wrong, even after all legal options have been exhausted. Michael Herman fits the ethical
realist model, and he has addressed ethical issues in intelligence quite directly in his writings.
Herman postulates that a Just War doctrine for intelligence may be possible, applying criteria
such as restraint, necessity and proportionality9. The second approaches infers that
intelligence should be analyzed based on its consequences. This also implies that any method
is valid, as long as it has the expected results; if it is a success, it doesn`t really matters if the
operation was moral or not. The third one, the deontological approach refers more to the
distinction between wright and wrong, no matter what were the results. If the actions were
accordingly with The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR),
therefore there are considered ethical.
Conclusion
Many intelligence specialists consider the intelligence ethics an oxymoron, a
contradiction of terms, as a former long-serving officer from the US Central Intelligence
Agency once said. I consider that, as beauty, when is about the ethical dilemma within
intelligence, the truth lies in eyes of the beholder. You can`t really draw a big black line
and delimitate what is ethical and what is not ethical to do in this profession. I don`t argue the
undeniable fact that Intelligence needs Ethics. But, you can always play the devil`s advocate
role and say it depends.

Michael Herman, Ethics and Intelligence after September 2001, Intelligence and National Security Volume 19, Issue 2, 2004

Blaga Ioana-Iulia

Security and Diplomacy 2014

Intelligence and National Security

Admiral Stansfield Turner, as Head of the US Central Intelligence Agency in the
1980s, said There is one overall test of the ethics of human intelligence activities. That is
whether those approving them feel they could defend their actions before the public if the
actions became public

Bibliography

Books

Kidder, R. M., How good people make tough choices: Resolving the dilemmas of ethical living. New
York: Fireside, 1995.Richard William Paul, Linda Elder, Critical Thinking-Concepts and Tools,
Foundation for Critical Thinking, 2009
Michael Herman, Intelligence power in peace and war, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2004
Johan Eriksson, Giampiero Giacomello, Intelligence Studies and the Need for Theory: Strategic and
Intellectual Challenges, San Francisco, 2008;
Stephen Budiansky, Battle of Wits: The Complete Story of Codebreaking in World War II, Free Press,
2000
Loch K. Johnson, The Oxford Handbook of National Security Intelligence, Oxford University Press,
2012
Jan Goldman, Ethics of Spying: A Reader for the Intelligence Professional, Volume 2 (Scarecrow
Professional Intelligence Education), Scarecrow Press, 2007
Carter David, Law Enforcement Intelligence, School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State University,
2004

Articles

Michael Quinlan, Just Intelligence: Prolegomena to an Ethical Theory, Intelligence and National
Security, Vol. 22, Issue 1, 2007
Andregg Michael, The Definitive Work of 2007* ,The Center for the Study of Intelligence and
Wisdom
Andregg, MichaelIntelligence Ethics, Strategic Intelligence, 2007
Jan Goldman , Teaching About Intelligence and Ethics, AFIO's Intelligencer Journal Volume 20
Number 2 Fall/Winter 2013
Nolte William, Ethics and Intelligence, Joint Force Quarterly Magazine No. 54, 2009
Michael Herman, Ethics and Intelligence after September 2001, Intelligence and National Security
Volume 19, Issue 2, 2004

Websites

https://intelligence-ethics.org/
https://cia.gov/about-cia/cia-vision-mission-values
https://intelligence-ethics.org

Blaga Ioana-Iulia

Security and Diplomacy 2014