|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
073524
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2006.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This paper demonstrates that US-Scandinavian intelligence relations in general, and Signals Intelligence (Sigint) relations in particular, during the period 1945 through 1960 were more extensive and complicated than had previously been believed. Bilateral US intelligence liaison relations with nominally neutral Sweden were of particular importance in the early years of the Cold War given its geographic location adjacent to the northwestern portion of the USSR. Moreover, the importance of Sigint received from the three principal Scandinavian countries covered by this paper (Norway, Denmark, and Sweden) proved to be quite important to the US intelligence community during the early years of the Cold War, when the US Sigint infrastructure was relatively weak and stretched thin by commitments in Asia and elsewhere. This paper covers the quantity, quality, and types of intelligence information provided to the US by each of the Scandinavian nations, demonstrating that the nature of US intelligence relations with these countries changed substantially as time went by.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
139512
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The evolution of intelligence sharing within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) reveals periods of tension, relaxation, and intense cooperation. Historically, the relationship among the United States, France, and the United Kingdom regarding intelligence sharing, especially during the Cold War, has not been one of trust and mutual cooperation. The mistrust of NATO's allies in the American deterrent strategy related not to Washington's willingness to keep its commitment to defend Europeans, but rather to the idea that in an event involving nuclear weapons “an American politician would never exchange the survival of Detroit for that of Paris.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
116171
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
We introduce the latest member of the intelligence family. Joining IMINT, HUMINT, SIGINT and others is 'SOCMINT' - social media intelligence. In an age of ubiquitous social media it is the responsibility of the security community to admit SOCMINT into the national intelligence framework, but only when two important tests are passed. First, that it rests on solid methodological bedrock of collection, evidence, verification, understanding and application. Second, that the moral hazard it entails can be legitimately managed. This article offers a framework for how this can be done.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
167471
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
138808
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Finland's defense and intelligence establishments are living in interesting times indeed. Edward Snowden's leaks and revelations concerning the United States's National Security Agency (NSA) might not have revealed anything new or astonishing about the ancient techniques of diplomacy, but they have awakened Europeans to the reality of life with first-class superpower(s). Even in Finland an unusual amount of media and civil interest has developed towards the Intelligence Community's data and information gathering procedures, a focus made more interesting by the fact that two Finns were, in 2014, manning very high positions within the European Union's (EU) Intelligence Community. The ex-chief of Finnish Security Intelligence Service (Suojelupoliisi, SUPO), Ilkka Salmi, has been the director of European Union's Intelligence Analysis Center (INTCEN, former Situation Centre of the European Union, EU SITCEN) since February 2011.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|