The U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) is one of the first lines of defense and offense when dealing with sensitive matters pertaining to national and human security and foreign affairs. The IC has the ability to analyze all forms of intelligence from human to technical to geospatial and provide real-time analysis and advice to high-level policymakers and military units while also performing clandestine direct action raids and interrogations when needed. However, all of these issues are subject to stringent domestic statutes and laws that explicitly detail what an intelligence agency or operative can and cannot do in service for their country. Bolstering this is intense oversight by members of Congress in both the House and the Senate along with independent Inspectors General for the Community as a whole and, in some cases, individual agencies. There is a large network of accountability and oversight within the Community and this is a necessity for all intelligence operations and agencies in the modern-day.
The ethical constraints (Executive Orders, permanent committees, legal statutes) that govern what the IC can and cannot do have been placed there because there is historical precedence that proved these safeguards were needed. When the National Security Act of 1947 was enacted, Congress did not appropriately monitor the IC or individual agencies as the members of the House and Senate Armed Services and Appropriations Committees, “were strong supporters of intelligence and did not see a need for intrusive oversight by Congress”. As time progressed and both the Vietnam War and Watergate cemented public distrust in the government and society transitioned towards a more liberal point of view, Congress held hearings which found the IC violated individual Americans’ civil liberties and overstepped.
Permanent Intelligence Committees were developed which, “made responsible for authorizing expenditures for intelligence activities… and for conducting necessary oversight. The resolutions creating both committees recognized that they would be kept “fully and currently informed” of intelligence activities under their purview” while also passing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act which placed restrictions on how government agencies can go about collecting foreign intelligence using electronic surveillance within the United States. Executive Orders carried out under Presidents Ford, Carter, and Reagan all helped to codify what actions the IC could take in collecting information and covert action operations while also making, “congressional oversight of intelligence explicit”. These restrictions, legal statutes, and limits upon what the IC could and could not do overall significantly helped their agencies better defend the U.S. and engage in proper intelligence collection and investigatory measures on Counterintelligence (CI) investigations.
However, despite these steps in ensuring that intelligence collection, direct action, and surveillance on domestic soil were all performed in accordance with U.S. law and that Congress would be kept informed, the Intelligence Community is still prone to oversteps and misuses. In the 1980s, the Intelligence Community was rocked by the Iran-Contra Scandal, a wide-reaching and complex operation which involved, “selling arms to Iran and using the proceeds of the sales for the contras [a right-wing paramilitary group opposing the left-wing Sandinistas in Nicaragua],” in addition to appealing to foreign dictators to provide supplies and manpower and collecting money from foreign countries to give to the contras. Going into the 21st century, the lack of communication between members of the IC in the lead-up to the September 11th attacks and the usage of enhanced interrogation techniques which transcended the limits put upon the IC by U.S. law, all point to a need for more and continued oversight and certain, specific reforms to ensure that American intelligence collection and direct action functions are in accordance with the laws enumerated by Congress and the Executive Branch.
As one can see, the histories of the CIA, DIA, FBI, and other members of the IC are dotted with scandals and massive oversteps that are a stain upon their activities to this day (COINTELPRO, the 1954 Guatemalan coup, etc.). Having such statutes and standards and methods for holding people and agencies accountable for their actions is important as it allows the U.S. to change in accordance with technology as well as ensuring that organizations conduct themselves in a way desired by the code of law (which itself adjusts to the social desires of the citizenry). Historically, one can make the argument that the safeguards in place to prevent abuses or overreaches by the Intelligence Community are effective at stopping such past, illegal actions and promoting ethical behavior while gathering information and conducting interrogations and direct action operations. The past necessitates that these oversight capabilities and legal precautions remain in place and allow for better intelligence to be gleaned, the U.S. rule of law to be followed, and that the U.S. always takes the ethical and moral road when dealing with covert action or many grey lines. Holding the Intelligence Community accountable for their missteps and ensuring that they act in line with and conform to the laws which are set by elected U.S. officials and with international legal institutions is a necessity and should be continued and maintained to ensure that the IC acts appropriately in defending the safety and security of the United States.
