United States and Chinese Intelligence Model

Introduction

According to Liu (2007), the intelligence models of the United States and China are mainly dependant on their economic stability which enhances their military growth. He points out that both United States and China have developed a stable economy thereby promoting their domestic and foreign intelligence models. However, he noted that United States feel threatened with the rapid growth of China’s economy and military intelligence as it predicts that in future Chinese intelligence model will super succeed the U.S’s foreign intelligence to enable it ultimately form a greater international commanding force.

Domestic and foreign intelligence models are the key security components that both the United States and China actively depend on in gathering security related information that enables them to create effective intelligence units. For instance, Liu (2007) points out that China annually review its military operations with the U.S Congressional military intelligence so as to effectively enhance its intelligence services. Studying the intelligence model of both the United States and China is essential and it should be based not only on their economic stability, but also on the rapid growth of China’s military activities which threaten the superficial powerful nature of the United States. The write up in analyzing the intelligence model compares and contrasts both the domestic and foreign intelligence model of United States and China.

Comparison of U.S’s and Chinese Domestic Intelligence Model

 According to Liu (2007), the domestic intelligence models of the United States and China are based on organizational mechanisms that ensure the sharing of key security information so as to protect the civil liberties by enhancing accountability of the intelligence units’ operations. He points out that it is the Federal Bureau of Intelligence (FBI) organizational domestic intelligence unit that is responsible for federal law enforcement in the United States. He notes that FBI deploys a number of intelligence surveillance tools, including the physical surveillance, confidential informants and the electronic eavesdropping especially in assessing forms of domestic intelligence risks. He points out that the assessment of domestic intelligence risks entails analyzing of intelligence information’s pro-activeness in identifying and measuring security risks and its ability to measure the prevalence of security risks in the society as well as its effectiveness in utilizing scientific data.

 Burch (2007) notes that in sensitizing the process of gathering credible security information, the FBI agents are authorized to engage in a proactive intelligence approach that will ensure that they are not only limited to investigation procedures, but they are able to provide credible intelligence information that can be assessed and analyzed in enhancing domestic surveillance.  He points out that FBI plays an important role not only in domestic intelligence but also in foreign intelligence. He notes that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is the United States’ organizational foreign intelligence unit that oversees the international security of the United States. He observes that CIA normally contacts FBI in cases where they require information on an individual within the United States.

Moreover, Burch (2007) points out that to enhancing domestic surveillance, FBI normally recruit foreigners such as visiting academicians like students so as to obtain credible information that helps in intelligence surveillance. For instance, the recruitment of Chinese native, Katrina Leung by FBI during her Master’s degree in United States clearly illustrates how domestic intelligence units use all means to gain credible intelligence information (Liu, 2007).

Similarly, Chinese domestic intelligence is based on organizational mechanism that ensures the accountability of intelligence units in enforcing law so as to promote civil liberties. According to Liu (2007), Chinese domestic intelligence is handled by the Ministry of State Security (MSS) which ensures comprehensive surveillance of the country.  He points out that MSS deploys various proactive intelligence tools which ensures that it instantly accesses information that is essential in assessing the various forms of domestic intelligence risks. Just like the FBI, the MSS normally deploys electronic eavesdropping as its intelligence surveillance tool (Liu, 2007). He points out that the technological development of China enables MSS to utilize the Signal Intelligence (SIGINT) in enhancing domestic surveillance.

Additionally, Liu (2007) points out that MSS surveillance intelligence plays an important role in foreign intelligence just like the FBI. He notes that the MSS normally provides information of individuals within China in cases the same is required by the People’s Liberation Army. According to him, People’s Liberation Army (PLA) forms the foreign intelligence unit that pursues the international security of China. Moreover, Liu (2007) points out that the recruiting agency of the MSS also targets the foreigners just like the FBI in enhancing effective domestic surveillance.

Contrast of U.S’s and Chinese Domestic Intelligence Model

According to Liu (2007), the Chinese domestic intelligence model is more effective than the United States’ domestic intelligence. He points out that contrary to the United States federal governance structure, China operates under authoritarian regime which also signifies its domestic intelligence operations. According to him, the authoritarian regime of the MSS’s security services normally is advantageous in enhancing domestic surveillance as compared to the FBI’s which is based on congressional information oversight. He notes that the MSS domestic intelligence model enables it to legally and effectively store credible information of every individual in China. Contrary to MSS, FBI is not able to instantly provide credible information of every individual in the United States based on federal structural formality that hinders its security undertakings (Burch, 2007).

For instance, the 9/11 terrorism attack in United States illustrated the ineffectiveness of FBI in detecting domestic terrorism activists (Treverton, 2008). He points out that FBI agency argued that it was the federal structural formality that has hindered their assessment of various forms of intelligence risks and it has been the major contributing factor which led to the 9/11 attack. He points out that the 9/11 attack revealed that the FBI’s decentralization structure did not enable it to gather credible information of the presence of al-Qaeda militia in the United States.  However, he notes that currently the government is sensitizing on various reforms to enhance the internal FBI domestic intelligence model.

Comparison of U.S’s and Chinese Foreign Intelligence Model

The foreign intelligence model in United States and China are based on the organizational mechanisms in enhancing international security intelligence. On the other hand, Bedan (2008) notes that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) which was formed in 1947 and operates under Foreign Intelligence Act (FISA) has been the United States’ foreign intelligence organizational model. He notes that the primary role of the CIA is to gather credible information internationally which effectively enhances the United States’ security. The CIA through its cooperation with other international intelligence agencies is able to obtain intelligence security information (Bedan, 2008).

According to Bedan (2008), the foreign intelligence model of the United States is enhanced by the recruitment of CIA agents into various countries where they are able to gather key security information thereby relaying the same to the CIA headquarters in Virginia. He notes that in most cases the CIA does collaborate with the FBI in recruiting foreigners who help them in gaining more security information. However, he points out that the U.S’ foreign intelligence model is characterized by racial characteristic especially in the way in which they persecute other country’s spy agents in America.

For instance, U.S in its foreign intelligence model used the FBI to recruit Chinese native Katrina Leung who would then provide information about China’s security involvement to the foreign intelligence unit, the CIA (Liu, 2007). This would enable the CIA to investigate the Chinese security impact to the U.S. However, he notes that when the United States foreign intelligence units captured a Chinese government spy, Wen Ho Lee, they accused him and prosecuted him of espionage.

Likewise, the Chinese foreign intelligence model is based on organizational mechanisms. Liu (2007) points out that People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is the central foreign intelligence organizational mechanism that is used by the Chinese authority in enhancing China’s international security. He notes that just like the U.S’s CIA, the Chinese PLA operates in manner that ensures it effectively enhances the China’s international intelligence security. Similar to the CIA, the PLA recruit foreigners who ensure that they obtain important information that is essential for the China’s security intelligence. For instance, the PLA would recruit a student or a businessman who would retrieve specified information of the intelligence operation of another country that includes weapons such as the model of helicopters.

According to Liu (2007), the recruitment of Wen Ho Lee, a Taiwan born, who was working in America by the PLA illustrated the Chinese persuasiveness in enhancing its foreign intelligence. He notes that the Chinese authority encouraged the recruitment of persons who will enhance the intelligence services of PLA.

Contrast of the U.S’s and Chinese Foreign Intelligence Model

According to Bedan (2009), United States’ foreign intelligence model is based on its super power nature of accessing credible information that enhances its international security while China uses its economically investment into other country as a tool to enhance its international security. Liu (2007) notes that the Chinese foreign intelligence authorities have used the economic investment factor in promoting their international intelligence services. For instance, Chinese government continues to invest in America by purchasing various American companies so as to capture the trust of American citizens and authorities thereby to access their desired intelligence information. He even notes that at times the People’ Republic of China (PRC) normally recruits agents as business associates especially in the United States whose primary objection is to gain access to specified intelligence information.

In contrast with China, Bedan (2009) points out that the United States’ foreign intelligence model of using its superficial powers to access credible information at times have been characterized by security loophole. He notes that unlike the Chinese whose economic investment has created trust in foreign countries, the super power nature of U.S at times draws fears among other countries which then do not grant U.S information that is essential for their foreign security intelligence. For instance, Treverton (2008) notes that the 9/11 attack on the U.S was due to the inability of the foreign intelligence security agency, the CIA to detect the international terrorism threat since the Islamic people or nation who had such security intelligence information were unwilling to provide the same to CIA and FBI security agencies.

On the other hand, the mode of intelligence agents’ recruitment of U.S differs with that of the China. Baden (2009) points out that United States’ foreign intelligence model is normally characterized by recruiting agents who are highly recognized in a society or state. This contradicts the Chinese foreign intelligence model of recruiting agents. According to Liu (2007), the Peoples Republic of China normally recruits agents who are of low profile and are out of their location but are actively able to access and relay information to the People’s Liberation Army thereby enhancing its international security. He notes that the Chinese authority normally encourages such recruitment methods since it normally enhances its international image low profile in engaging in such acts.

For instance, Liu (2007) points out that the PRC intelligence agencies recruited security agency in Hong Kong when the region was still under the rule of British monarchial empire. He notes that this did not only enhance RPC’s foreign security intelligence, but it maintains the Chinese low profile engagement in such espionage activities in case an agent was caught. On the other hand, the high espionage profile that has been created by the United States’ foreign intelligence model has affected the U.S’s international security standard (Treverton, 2008). He notes that contrary to China, the U.S high espionage profile has resulted to various criticism of its involvement in such activities which have not only affected its international diplomacy image, but denied it ability to effectively access security information.

Conclusion

In conclusion the write up has compared and contrasted both the domestic and foreign intelligence models in United States and China. The paper has established that security information is an essential element that enhances the credibility and effectiveness of the domestic and foreign intelligence models. It has noted that while both the U.S and China  deploy various intelligence tools such as recruiting spy agents in gathering appropriate information for both their intelligence models, it is primary important to consider the rights of the spies in case they are caught. Moreover, the paper has pointed out the need for the effectively reforming these intelligence model so as to effectively assess forms of intelligence risks in enhancing security. On the other hand, the write up has highlighted the need for United Stats to emulate the Chinese economic investment agencies recruitment platforms since it will not only create a low espionage profile activities of U.S but it will also help it both locally and internationally in integrating its intelligence model.