The national security field as we define it does not include policy intelligence such as you seem to feel is needed for the twelve core policies that you identify — including local law enforcement — that are outside our “lane” called national security.
I cannot change this but wonder if you have a comment.
I am delighted you are willing to ask this question.
I will start with my epiphany (the Republican word for “aha”) experience. Alvin Toffler and I were guests of honor at an informal lunch with military intelligence leaders after we had both spoken at the National Defense University. As we were driving away Alvin turned to me and said
“They are stuck in their little green box.”
The below graphic instantly formed itself in my mind:
If I have learned anything in the past 30 years it is that you cannot do OSINT in isolation within a stovepipe without getting it wrong.
If I have pioneered anything in the last 30 years it is that OSINT done right demand holistic analytics across ALL threats, ALL policies ALL demographics and ALL languages as well as ALL mediums.
If I have recognized anything new in the past 30 years it is that secret intelligence cannot be relied upon unless it is bracketed by ruthless pervasive counterintelligence on one side and full spectrum OSINT on the other.
For the military to say they will do OSINT only on “their” domain is to commit intellectual suicide and fail before starting. I am well aware of RAWs successes over time, and as a former spy I value what spies can do when properly focused, but the reality is that 80% or more of what the military needs to know is both OSINT and not known to the military — it is known to academics, civil society (labor and religion), commerce, government, media, counterpart militaries, and non-profits.
For the military to say that it will only do national security OSINT is to fail to see that the failure of agriculture policy, or energy policy, or health policy, or immigration policy, or water policy, is a severe handicap for the military going forward in both strategic and financial terms.
Below is a concept from Jan Herring, former National Intelligence Officer for Science & Technology (NIO S&T). Such a capability must be national ALL INDIA in nature to optimal effect.
One of the more interesting books I have read and reviewed is below:
This book asks and answers the question: why do the sciences need the humanities.
In the USA the two greatest failures of intelligence have been, on the military side, the failure to do intelligence -based national security strategy, acquisition, operations, and tactics; and on the other, the failure of the secret world to do policy OSINT compounded by the failure of the policy departments to do intelligence (decision-support).
I will repeat three three graphics from before. If the military wants to lead, protect, and assure the prosperity of India going forward, it has no alternative but to embrace my vision.
Note: Short URL for the entire series including new posts is