Paper Example on Counterintelligence

Introduction

The counterintelligence system in the world has been complicated and evolving. It all depends on the individual country's location and its priorities on the kind of system that they will need to adopt. The behaviour of rival groups and countries will to a large extent determine its choice. There are different approaches and standard practice to take in having a practical, capable system. The concerned agencies concealed their activities, and it may not be possible to point them out in some situations, but they are just known to exists. This essay will be critiquing a counterintelligence paper written by a colleague.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The works that my colleague chose is focusing on the differences and similarities between the counterintelligence systems of Israel and the United States. These are two countries where the counterintelligence topic elicits much interest due to their interest in global politics and the role that they play (Mobley, 2012). First, there are the ideological differences between the western nations and the ones supposedly referred to as the eastern bloc. Second Prunckun (2012) argues that there are other factors like religion and business rivalry that come into play. Lastly, there are the historical perspectives that come into play which all need to be considered for any studies in the area to be seen to have been comprehensive.

The paper started by appreciating the geopolitical differences between the two nations which made for a good start. There was the mention of the relations between the given country and its neighbors to appreciate in determining the form of the approach taken. The situation also informed the strategy, priorities and the methods that were going used for the same. The paper proceeded to give the priorities for Israel which then formed the basis for its counterintelligence activities. These were presented as the Palestinians threat and the Iranian nuclear weapons proliferation program (Heller, 2016). It proceeded to appreciate the fact that Israel had so many priorities compared to its counterpart. The paper further gave differences and similarities between the two systems covering issues dealing with Israel and the way it was addressing its matters with great in-depth. It concluded by mentioning the evolution of the threat that called for the same changes as Israel's intelligence system. It talked about the interconnected nature of global security issues and the need to have a non-traditional approach and one that is holistic for the Israelites.

Whereas the paper dwelt in excellent detail with the counterintelligence matters of the two nations, it failed to give a balance of the given countries. It focused so much with Israel that one who is reading will be mistaken to say that it was giving differences and similarities of the two (Turk & Kirkman. 2015). There seems to be lack of information on what the United States has been doing with its security threats. The priorities for it as a nation were not even addressed, and it will not be wrong for one reading the paper to conclude that the United States does not have any pressing matters. The article was short of being declared as one whose heading should have read counterintelligence methods and approaches being taken by Israel rather than what it currently reads.

The paper had some good points but was not divided into individual independent paragraphs with clear topic sentences. Except for the conclusion and the introduction which had a clear thesis statement it was difficult to follow on the specific topic addressed by the rest of the paragraphs. Hence they ended up to be too long with a lot of pertinent details. It also makes it hard to critique some specific points raised by the paper on a point to point basis. It would have been prudent according to Turk and Kirkman (2015) to have a set of points discussed and cleared with at the paragraph level. The United States and Israel should have been looked at independently by individual paragraphs and then followed by others to address specific differences and similarities.

The population of the people making up the nation versus the ones that are surrounding it may be one of the bases that informed their counterintelligence approach. There are fewer people in the Israelite nation compared to the ones in the surrounding hostile countries. Therefore if one is to take these numbers as the basis for their might, then the neighbours will come out stronger than the Israelites. According to Mickolus (2015), it is also on this basis that the army will have less personnel in Israel compared to the combined forces of the neighbouring countries. It calls for the utilization of other means in equating their military personnel to several others in the rest of the neighbouring nations. This fact will be a pressing issue on the counterintelligence agencies to devise ways to continually identify and diffuse any perceived threat before they take any form of action.

The size of the Israelite nation makes the surrounding regions to be areas that can be used to launch an effective attack based on the numbers that will be affected. It forces the administration to forcefully occupy some of these in the interest of their safety. In so doing they create enemies out of the displaced people who then have a score to settle (Kennedy, 2011). They use these areas for surveillance and to detect and stop any missiles that may be aimed at their nation.

Conclusion

In conclusion, there was so much to learn from your paper. It explained in detail why the Israeli state opted for specific forms of approaches. There was a possibility that the length may have restricted a lot that could have been divulged by the paper. There is so much to learn in counterintelligence matters when it comes to nations like Israel where security is a more of a priority than any other country.

References

Heller, J. (2016). The United States, the Soviet Union and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, 1948-67: Superpower rivalry.

Kennedy, W. V. (2011). The intelligence war: Penetrating the secret world of today's advanced technology conflict. London: Salamander Books.

Mickolus, E. F. (2015). The counterintelligence chronology: Spying by and against the United States from the 1700s through 2014. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers.

Mobley, B. W. (2012). Terrorism and counter-intelligence: How terrorist groups elude detection. New York: Columbia University Press.

Prunckun, H. W. (2012). Counterintelligence theory and practice. Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Turk, C., & Kirkman, J. (2015). Effective writing: Improving scientific, technical, and business communication.