Over the years, the two agencies have been on different sides of the intelligence fence. The Department of Defense is aligned with the armed forces while the CIA is a branch of the State Department. Because of this, the DoD and CIA looks at things and conflicts in a different perspective (Bambenek, n. d). For the Department of Defense, their ultimate objective is to kill and achieve victory in times of war. Their initial reaction whenever they see an enemy or threat is to take them out of the picture (Bambenek, n. d). The State Department, on the other hand, is more geared towards diplomacy.
Their aim is to maximize whatever information they collect regarding their enemies or potential threats. In the case of the CIA, whenever they find a potential threat, they exhaust all means to find information about the enemy, such as who are the people behind it, their objectives, and what other groups are involved (Bambenek, n. d). Another area where the DoD and CIA is in conflict concerns the situation in Iraq. The Department of Defense is geared towards ending the 12-year conflict in Iraq while the State and CIA is against such move because it would end the process of information-gathering and diplomacy.
This conflicting views about the Iraq situation has fueled the rivalry between the Central Intelligence Agency and the Department of Defense (Bambenek, n. d). Stemming The Tide Realizing that the conflict between the Central Intelligence Agency and the Department of Defense will not be healthy for the intelligence community, one of the first moves that President George W. Bush initiated was to appoint a former military man as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), John Hayden (Bambenek, n. d). With such move, there is seemingly an intention to make the CIA more action-oriented.
As an intelligence man, Hayden definitely knows the importance of information gathering. However, as a soldier himself, Hayden likewise understands the importance of taking action on intelligence despite the fact that there is more information that could be collected (Bambenek, n. d). Another important reform initiated by the Bush government is the establishment of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, also known as Intelligence Reform Act, PL 108-458, which established the Director of National Intelligence (Heinisha, 2007).
Under this new law, the DNI would serve as the main intelligence officer of the President who would supervise and manage the acquisition of principal collection systems. Under the DNI, the responsibilities of the various intelligence communities would be limited to dissemination and coordination of information. It is the intention of the Intelligence Reform Act to create a non-partisan director who could concentrate on the activities of the various agencies in the Intelligence community (Heinisha, 2007). Many people worldwide remembered that fateful day of September 11, 2001 when terrorists attack the United States.
The plan was craftily laid out by its leaders. Four planes were hijacked—two of them dropped the two World Trade Center towers in New York, another one hit the Pentagon, while the fourth one, which was believed to be targeting the White House, crashed in Pennsylvania (Heinisha, 2007). Considered as one of the darkest days in the history of the United States, the9/11 attack opened the eyes of its leadership who now felt that there was a need to break down the walls of the intelligence community in order that there would be no repeat of the September 11 terrorist attacks (Heinisha, 2007).
The success of the perpetrators in carrying out their plan of chaos was the failure of the intelligence community in gathering information that could have averted the World Trade Center incident (Heinisha, 2007). Conclusion The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Department of Defense (DoD) are in the forefront of intelligence efforts. Over the years, the two government agencies have been at odds with each other.
The 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center placed the entire intelligence community under close scrutiny after the findings of the 9/11 commission revealed the failure of the CIA to share vital information that could have prevented the attack from taking place.
Baker, J (n. d). United States Government. Microsoft Encarta Online Encyclopedia. Retrieved August 25 2008 from http://www. encarta. msn. com Bambenek, J (n. d). Toward A More Perfect CIA. Part-time Pundit. Retrieved August 252008 from http://www. parttimepundit. com/archives/951 Executive Order 12333. Technical Surveillance Counter Measure.
Retrieved August 25 2008 from http://www. tscm. com/EO12333. html Heinisha, J (2006). Director of National Intelligence: Another Bureaucratic Layer of an Effective Office? US Army Command and General Staff College. Retrieved August 25 2008 from Combined Arms Research Digital Library Jeffreys-Jones, R (n. d). Central Intelligence Agency. Microsoft Encarta Online Encyclopedia. Retrieved August 25 2008 from http://www. encarta. msn. com Parajon, C (2007). Defensive Intelligence: Should Intelligence and Military Mix? Princeton University. Retrieved August 25 2008 from http://webscript. princeton. edu/~afp/article. php? issid=18&artid=7