서강대학교

초록/요약

This research aims to analyze the necessity of intelligence as a critical tool for controlling counterinsurgency. By examining two theorists’ thoughts on the practice and theory of counterinsurgency, it will become clear that population is the critical factor to countering the efforts of an insurgent force. Standards of practice in collecting intelligence are the best way to sustaining an effective counterinsurgency. In this paper, the confirmed laws and standards for collecting intelligence will be dealt with as the research object. The innovation of intelligence-collecting in the United States unmasks the necessity of laws and standards for collecting intelligence both inside and outside nation’s borders. The laws initiated serve to check and balance the intelligence-collecting agencies not restrain them. Checks and balances define the boundary of the method of collecting intelligence, while restraints prevent agencies from collecting intelligence. The current conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan serve as examples to exemplify the effects of unwarranted intelligence-collecting techniques. When intelligence oversight laws were secure, legitimacy the counterinsurgency operation gained strength. Once sound theories were placed into the battle-field, and intelligence oversight and international laws were followed, the insurgence lost support; it could be said that the counterinsurgency gained support. The function of collecting intelligence can be fulfilled within the civil and humanitarian laws already in place. In fact, compliance with the international humanitarian laws enhances the reliability of action at home and abroad. Intelligence oversight laws do not place improper restrictions on operators but provide sensible direction in proven methods of supporting counterinsurgency and domestic operations.