The British experience with intelligence accountability

Phythian, Mark

doi:10.1080/02684520701200822

Cited by 25 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…40 And, while it is true that the committee can demand access to any files relating to intelligence, the intelligence services, through the relevant minister of state, can deny such a request if the requested information is regarded as too sensitive. 41 Thus, through its annual reports and investigations into particular events (such as 7/7), the ISC provides a reasonable degree of oversight of the intelligence services. However, the ISC has come under significant criticism for being subservient to the government and perhaps even being regarded as an advocate of the IC.…”

Section: Intelligence Oversightmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intelligence Reform: Adapting to the Changing Security Environment

Lonsdale

2012

Comparative Strategy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years the intelligence communities of the United States and the United Kingdom have faced a rapidly changing security environment. In that time, a number of high-profile failures have exposed weaknesses within these communities and how they perform their tasks. This article analyses these failures, identifying the key problems, and examines the various reforms designed to overcome the identified weaknesses. These reforms are discussed in three categories: structural change, budget increases, and increased oversight procedures. The article concludes with an assessment of whether said reforms have produced intelligence communities ready for the new security environment.

show abstract

Section: Intelligence Oversightmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intelligence Reform: Adapting to the Changing Security Environment

Lonsdale

2012

Comparative Strategy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Certains ouvrages abordent une problématique large sur les relations entre renseignement, services secrets et démocratie (Gill, 1994 ;Leigh & Lustgarten, 1994 ;Vincent, 1998 ;Robertson, 1999 ;Moran, 2013). D'autres études sont plus spécifi quement focalisées sur la question du contrôle parlementaire et de sa nature particulière dans le cas du renseignement puisque le Parlement est dépossédé de sa fonction d'Oversight au profi t de l'Intelligence & Security Committee (Robertson, 1988 ;Phythian, 2005b ;Gill, 2007aGill, , 2007bPhythian, 2007 ;Omand, 2008).…”

Section: Interrogation Démocratique Et Contrôle Des Services De Renseunclassified

Comparaison franco-britannique de la recherche sur les services de renseignement

Chopin

Irondelle

2013

crimino

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Alors que la publication devenue « industrielle » de recueils et de manuels sur les études du renseignement (Intelligence Studies) démontre l’arrivée à maturité des études sur le renseignement au sein de la science politique internationale, la recherche universitaire sur le sujet demeure en France au stade de l’émergence. Le retard français par rapport au Royaume-Uni se double d’un second sur le décalage entre faible connaissance et importance des services de renseignement, la France étant un des rares pays à disposer d’une panoplie complète de services de renseignement intérieurs et extérieurs, civils et militaires, et de moyens techniques de premier plan. L’article présente l’état actuel des études sur le renseignement en France et au Royaume-Uni, analyse la trajectoire du développement de ce champ de recherches et avance des hypothèses sur la réussite britannique et le développement tardif et fragile des études sur le renseignement français. L’explication tient au fonctionnement du marché universitaire, aux transformations de l’État et des modalités de la reconnaissance institutionnelle et sociale du renseignement, et enfin à la mécanique d’un processus différencié de relégitimation du renseignement sur les deux rives de la Manche.As the increasing number of handbooks on intelligence studies indicates, internationally political science has reached a certain level of maturity. However, in France, academic research in this field is in its infancy. The French academic research not only started to develop long after intelligence studies in Britain, but France is also unique because of a paradox : While public knowledge is weak, France is one of the few countries to run a full range of intelligence activities and organisations, both civil and military, human and technical, etc. This paper presents the current state of research on intelligence in France and the United Kingdom, analyzing the developments in this field in both countries. It speculates on the British achievements compared to the late and fragile development of French intelligence studies. These differences can be explained by many factors including the functioning of the academic market, the transformation of the state and recognition of intelligence, and, finally, the legitimization of intelligence on both sides of the Channel.Mientras que la publicación, devenida “industrial”, de manuales sobre los Estudios de Inteligencia demuestra la maduración de los estudios sobre las tareas de inteligencia en el seno de la ciencia política internacional, la investigación académica sobre el tema permanece, en Francia, en estado emergente. Al atraso francés en relación al Reino Unido se agrega un segundo desfase entre el poco conocimiento e importancia de los servicios de inteligencia, siendo Francia uno de los pocos países en disponer de una panoplia completa de servicios de inteligencia interiores y exteriores, civiles y militares, y de recursos técnicos líderes. El artículo presenta el estado actual de los estudios sobre inteligencia en Francia y en el Reino Un...

show abstract

“…Perceived weaknesses in the structure and work of the ISC have been used to reinforce calls for its replacement with a parliamentary select committee (for example, Phythian, 2007). Although proposals for a select committee on intelligence predate the creation of the ISC, recent statements on both sides of the House suggest that the issue has risen up the political agenda.…”

Section: The Intelligence and Security Committeementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The ISC sets its own agenda and, although its proceedings remain secret, it publishes annual reports, and has also produced a number of additional reports on subjects of its own choosing. Although its mandate is limited to the examination of the "administration, policy and expenditure" of the intelligence and security agencies, the Committee has shown an increasing propensity to consider operational matters, and some recent studies have argued that it has exceeded expectations in terms of access to information and established itself as a serious critic of the agencies, for example, with reports on the handling of detainees by British intelligence personnel in Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay and Iraq (Gill and Phythian, 2006;Glees, Davies and Morrison, 2006;Phythian 2007). …”

Section: The Intelligence and Security Committeementioning

confidence: 99%