Introduction to the System
Brief Overview
The intelligent system of Germany has three main operating agencies that perform a specific role in gathering information and protecting the country’s interests. The first one is the Federal Intelligence Service, known as Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND) in German (BND, 2018a). This agency is concerned with collecting information about international affairs of the state and possible threats that can come from outside Germany. The second agency is the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, otherwise called Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz (BfV) (BfV, 2018a). This particular service operates to monitor domestic security and gather information to prevent any local issues from arising.
Although data collection of this agency concerns such spheres as the established democratic order, internal security, and peaceful coexistence, its operations may also deal with international affairs because of foreign visitors, residents, and organizations. Finally, the last major agency operating as a part of Germany’s intelligence system is the Military Counterintelligence Service. In Germany, this agency is known as Militärischer Abschirmdienst or MAD (BND, 2018a). Its primary purpose is to counter other countries’ attempts to gather intelligence information and prevent actions that are deemed unconstitutional by the state’s laws.
Obvious Threats
The services mentioned above work together to create a system that covers all possible problems that may arise inside and outside the country and damage the existing constitutional order. The country’s most apparent threats currently come from both directions and can be classified as terrorism and extremism. Terrorist attacks and extremist operations facilitated by forces situated outside of the country fall under the responsibility of all three agencies (Lowenthal, 2016). For example, one of the leading defined threats mentioned by the BfV (2018a) is the extremism of foreigners and Islamist terrorism based on the violation of Islamic religion.
Similarly, internal threats also can be based on these two movements. As the politics of the country remain positive in their acceptance of various ethnicities, racist ideologies arise among some citizens who form extremist groups and endanger the country’s peaceful living with xenophobia, aggression, and violence (BfV, 2018b). The agency names this particular threat as “right-wing extremism” (BfV, 2018b, para. 1).
Another domestic problem also deals with hostility. However, this particular movement, “left-wing extremism,” is concerned with the existing order and deems the democratic state structure as faulty and oppressive to citizens (BfV, 2018c, para. 1). Here, this group of extremists consists of violent communist and anarchist individuals who may perform acts of disturbance, injure people, and act against the law to show their opposition to the regime. Left-wing extremism can also be rooted in the violent resistance to racist and xenophobic ideologies. Both movements represent aggressive approaches to protest that disrupt the lives of other citizens and guests of the country.
Geopolitics
Geographically, Germany is situated in Western Europe and shares a border with multiple European countries, including Poland, Denmark, the Netherlands, Switzerland, France, Czech Republic, and others. Furthermore, Germany’s position places it in the center of Europe, separating the Eastern and Western parts of the area. Therefore, the relations of the country span across the region and influence Germany’s history.
For example, this position may be a cause of anxiety for the state linked to the fear of invasion which can, hypothetically, come from any side. Germany’s relationship with other countries is most likely based on that fact as it currently uses the European Union (EU) as a way to placate possible conflicts between the European nations and place more attention on integration (Wood, 2017). Germany’s actions in supporting the EU are based on its security concerns.
The relationship with other countries is also dictated by the fact that Germany can be considered one of the leading states in the Union (Wood, 2017). For example, the presence of the US among Germany’s allies also grants the latter a status and security needed to ensure the country’s stability. However, the latest changes in the politics of the EU and the loss of Great Britain as a part of the Union have affected the connections of Germany and put it in a more challenging position (Allen et al., 2018). However, Germany’s view of geopolitics still emphasizes its collaborative effort and economic and political codependence with other countries.
History
Germany’s domestic and international politics have undergone significant changes as a result of multiple wars, incidents, and conflicts. The history of Germany can cover its years as a group of separate entities, which were later unified to form the German Empire, an influential leader of the continent. However, its participation and initiation of multiple wars during the twentieth century have significantly damaged the position of the country and made the government carefully weigh their options for constructing a narrative for the future. World War I saw Germany go against Russia, France, and Great Britain and employ an aggressive foreign policy (Johnson, 2017).
After being defeated, the country lost many resources and was left in an unstable position. Later, the growth of radical ideologies and the establishment of the totalitarian regime exacerbated Germany’s anxiety over losing its previous influence, and the country returned to its focus on military power, initiating another major conflict that later drastically changed the surface of the region (Johnson, 2017).
After World War II, Germany’s split territories had various experiences, as the democratic West and the communist East utilized different tactics to manage their respective parts of the country. Western Germany regained its superior position in Western Europe and was able to improve its economic situation, while East Germany’s development could not gain the same momentum (Johnson, 2017).
As the Berlin wall that was separating the two parts of the country was destroyed, Germany reunited and regained some stability again. Later, the influence and the initiative of the country contributed to the creation and growth of the European Union with which Germany solidified its place as one of the most influential states in Europe (Wood, 2017). However, this status and the state’s somewhat stable economy placed more financial responsibility on it as it assumed the place of a sponsor to other nations. Recently, the migration of people into Europe also changed the position of Germany in the region as the country decided to allow open entry and give asylum seekers many opportunities to stay (BfV, 2018a).
Purpose of the Study
The main purpose of this study is to describe the intelligence system of modern Germany, analyze its level of preparedness to respond to potential threats and risks, and propose some possible practical solutions to improve the current system of the country.
Intelligence System Description
The three main agencies of Germany’s intelligence system operate together to cover all areas of data gathering. The central service concerned with international affairs, BND, collects information for the government to make necessary political decisions. According to the agency’s official website, some information provided to the country by media and state authorities “has proved inadequate” (BND, 2018b, papa. 1). Therefore, the agency has to search for other ways to access and collect necessary data, as there is a constant need for new detailed information. The process of obtaining data is separated into four main types: human, signals, imagery, and open-source intelligence.
The traditional ways of gathering information through human informants and public domain documents are complemented with satellite imagery analysis and electronic data collection (BND, 2018a). Thus, the agency employs a variety of techniques to access specific and recent information. BfV also employs similar techniques and gathers information locally and abroad. The focus on domestic affairs does not stop the service from collecting information outside the country as this process is required to prevent any possible dangers or conflicts directed at Germany’s internal systems. The collaborative work of these agencies allows services to approach threats from multiple angles.
Main Risk
Currently, one of the main risks that challenge both domestic and international services is terrorism. This danger is outlined as the main priority of BfV, and although BND does not mention this threat on its official website, its activities allow one to assume the same. Terrorists attacking different European countries, including Germany, not only halted the efforts of the national intelligence system but also negatively affected domestic problems of the nation as they led to the rise of various local extremist groups (Allen et al., 2018).
Thus, the issue of terrorist attacks has multiple ways of influencing the processes of intelligence agencies in the country. Terrorism is a real risk and a threat that currently exists in the region. While there may be some hypothetical situations that could bring massive destruction or a more substantial amount of losses, the existence of this problem defines it as a more suitable risk to analyze.
Readiness to Respond
The system described by the agencies seems to cover the majority of channels through which terrorists and involved individuals can share valuable information. Thus, it may be assumed that the services could be ready to respond to an attack and prevent it completely or mitigate its consequences. However, the location of systems and the lack of centralization can limit the country’s ability to use all services effectively. BND headquarters are located in Berlin while BfV and MAD are situated in Cologne. Although the current state of communications allows agencies to receive and send information in short periods, the inability to collaborate regularly may decrease the agencies’ level of efficiency. Therefore, the activities of these services are not coordinated enough to deliver results and prevent incidents before they happen.
Terrorist attacks usually require preparation, which in turn implies excessive communication between involved persons (BfV, 2018a). Therefore, the focus of the agencies should be put on gathering information from channels that are suitable for these interactions, meaning that BfV and BND should have a broad reach for their services. The case analysis below shows a situation where the drawbacks of this system are brought into the light.
Case Analysis
The last major terrorist attack that was not prevented by the government officials and ended in several dead and injured individuals happened in Berlin at the end of 2016 (BBC, 2016). While some later incidents were prevented with the help of intelligence agencies, they were minor and, therefore, cannot be considered as the main example of the services’ effectiveness. In the following days after the Berlin attack, the country’s officials stated that they would reconsider their existing policies for monitoring and data collection. A similar incident happened in Paris before this one, which prompted European countries to pay more attention to their security services (BBC, 2016). Thus, a review of French intelligence also revealed that both countries failed to successfully use their services to prevent the attacks (BBC, 2016).
The lack of communication between the agencies could have limited their ability to prevent the incident from happening. Similar arguments against such distribution of intelligence agencies were brought up after the events of September 9, 2001 (Jackson, 2009). However, many stakeholders did not respond to a proposition of changing locations, wanting to maintain their independence with local agencies and dispersed connections.
Therefore, the system was not adjusted to work in such situations as the 2016 Berlin attack. Moreover, the access to data of German intelligence agencies was rather limited at the moment. The services could not “eavesdrop on citizens in the same way as their counterparts in the UK and the US routinely do,” as was noted by the director of security studies, Pantucci (BBC, 2016, para. 39). While the government started to consider similar options for its agencies, the change has not been made yet.
Intelligence System Analysis
The example provided above reveals the lack of preparedness of the country’s intelligence system. The collaboration between local and international agencies was and is not competent enough to prevent major incidents and investigate hazards promptly. Furthermore, several events also show the flaws of the system. For instance, in 2014, BND uncovered and arrested a double agent who was working in the agency and sent all essential classified documents to the US (Spiegel Staff, 2014).
According to BND’s agents, the fact that the US was able to infiltrate the system and get access to information was not predicted due to the countries’ relationship. Nevertheless, the outcome of this incident was a breach of a trusting relationship and a growing idea of Germany having to rely only on its abilities (Spiegel Staff, 2014). This example shows that Germany should reconsider its tactics and relationships with other states.
However, the incident does not mean that the country should sever its information exchange with other nations. It should improve the system to protect valuable data more efficiently. Moreover, it should employ new technology to target new types of media for data gathering. For example, metadata collection may be useful in some cases, but in others, it may not reveal anything substantial (Biermann, 2015). Germany should also consider improving its collaboration between agencies and create a more centralized system to deal with major incidents.
Conclusion
Germany’s intelligence system shows that the process of information gathering has to have a broad scope of reach to collect the most relevant information in a short period. Moreover, it also allows one to conclude that the speed of implementing new solutions and innovations should be high to correspond with continuously emerging technologies. Germany’s services for data gathering need to become more centralized and employ new technology to gather data that can produce results. The rules outlined by the agencies seem to have an outlook that is respectful of people’s privacy. However, the reality shows the opposite as agencies do not use a more targeted approach collecting massive amounts of metadata instead, exposing many people to unnecessary surveillance.
References
Allen, W., Anderson, B., Van Hear, N., Sumption, M., Düvell, F., Hough, J.,… Walker, S. (2018). Who counts in crises? The new geopolitics of international migration and refugee governance. Geopolitics, 23(1), 217-243.
BBC. (2016). Germany attacks: What is going on? Web.
Biermann, K. (2015). BND stores 220 million telephone data – Every day. Zeit Online. Web.
Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz (BfV). (2018a). Fields of work. Web.
Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz (BfV). (2018b). Right-wing extremism. Web.
Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz (BfV). (2018c). Left-wing extremism. Web.
Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND). (2018a). Federal Intelligence Service – Coordination. Web.
Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND). (2018b). Mission. Web.
Jackson, B. A. (Ed.). (2009). Considering the creation of a domestic intelligence agency in the United States: Lessons from the experiences of Australia, Canada, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
Lowenthal, M. M. (2016). Intelligence: From secrets to policy (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: CQ press.
Spiegel Staff. (2014). Arrest of BND employee strains ties between Germany and US. Spiegel Online. Web.
Wood, S. (2017). Germany and East-Central Europe: Political, economic and socio-cultural relations in the era of EU enlargement. New York, NY: Routledge.