Frequently, intelligence scholars and historians make the charge that democracies are inherently worse at intelligence work than authoritarian states. However, this claim has never been tested. This study seeks to advance the discussion of intelligence and counterintelligence effectiveness through an analysis of how the level of democratization within a state relates to its intelligence structure – a critical variable when assessing the effectiveness of an intelligence apparatus. Avoiding judgment on the morality of intelligence actions and refraining from a discussion of effectiveness, my aim is to answer this question – what is the relationship between democratization and intelligence structure? Utilizing a comparative case study method and building on the theoretical foundations of intelligence scholars like Thomas Bruneau, Roy Godson, and Hank Prunckun, this study analyzes the primary intelligence structures and relevant history of Pakistan, Russia, India, Israel, the United States, and the United Kingdom. The overall intelligence organizations of these states are then classified according to their operational control, structure, and emphasis, paying special attention to the distinction between counterintelligence and intelligence.
Helvering, Abigail C., "Are Democracies Truly "Bad" at Intelligence? An Analysis of Counterintelligence vs. Intelligence and State Structure" (2016). Senior Independent Study Theses. Paper 6976.
Intelligence, espionage, intelligence structure, counterintelligence
Bachelor of Arts
Senior Independent Study Thesis
© Copyright 2016 Abigail C. Helvering