By principle, intelligence is useful for knowing what threats are not known beforehand, making it possible for policy makers to develop an anticipatory effort to eliminate or minimize the threats that arise.
Based on Article 4, Law No.17 of 2011, State Intelligence has the role to make efforts, work, activities, and actions for early detection and early warning in the framework of prevention, deterrence, and countermeasures for any nature of threats that may arise and threaten interests and national security.
In order to understand the scope of tasks and functions of Indonesian intelligence, which is national interests and security, we need to start from what is meant by the national ideals of the Indonesian people. For the Indonesian nation, these national ideals are listed in the “Preamble” of the 1945 Constitution and to realize the National ideals, the National Goal is born in a tangible form, namely the Government of the Republic of Indonesia, an archipelago characterized by the Archipelago based on the Pancasila ideology.
From the National Goals itself, there are eternal National Interests namely National Sovereignty, Archipelago Integrity and Nation Safety. Aspects of National Interest can be seen as two sides of the coin, namely the Security Aspect and the Welfare Aspect, but in the current era of globalization it also divided into three aspects, namely Security, Welfare and the Economy.
Based on the definition of national interests and national security, the main tasks and functions carried out by Indonesian intelligence are very broad. Indonesian intelligence is responsible for national security and national interests which consist of sovereignty, territorial integrity and national safety. Starting from the threat of terrorism, sabotage, separatism, social conflict, the food price indexs, economics in the border area until the Covid-19 pandemic is only part of the responsibility that must be carried out for gained early detection efforts (Deteksi Dini/Deni) and early prevent efforts (Cegah Dini/Ceni) by Indonesian intelligence.
Since July 2019 until june 2020 period, Indonesian Intelligence has made some anticipatory efforts which are quite satisfying. Starting from resolving the threat of social conflict between Jokowi’s supporters and Prabowo Subianto after the presidential election untill involved either directly or indirectly in the anticipatory efforts of the co-19 pandemic.
Regarding the covid-19 Pandemic, Indonesian intelligence has carried out its main duties and functions as an intelligence function in the elements of the national security system, which is early detection effort (Deteksi Dini/Deni) and early prevention effort (Cegah Dini/Ceni). At the beginning of the pandemic, intelligence had collected information both publicly and by using the clandestine method. From the main problems of pandemic, such as the number of victims of Covid-19, distribution of Covid-19, the development of vaccines; Untill the derivative problems such as food distribution, social assistance and economic impacts are become the attention of Indonesian intelligence. The data that has been successfully collected is then analyzed into information which is then continued with the strategics-intelligence analysis to produce knowledge for the stakeholders of event.
This knowledge is used to make an anticipatory measure in form of early prevention effort (Cegah Dini/Ceni) against the threat of the covid-19 pandemic in the form of socialization and education to the public, so that the threat of the covid-19 pandemic to national security and interests can be anticipated by increasing public awareness.
Aside from being a form of early prevention effort (Cegah Dini/Ceni) on the threat of the co-19 pandemic, intelligence transfer of knowledge to the public is also a form of intelligence accountability to the public. This issue is related to the obligation of government agencies to deliver public information which categorized can be disseminated to the public. As a rule, Indonesian intelligence is obliged to provide 10% of public information (which categorized can be share to the public), while the rest is confidential and only distributed according to applicable regulations.
From these two examples of intelligence activities, we can conclude that Indonesian intelligence has broad and large responsibilities related to the definition of security and national interests. Starting from anticipatory efforts against the threat of social conflict to resolve pandemic problems is part of the tasks and functions of Indonesian intelligence.
As modern intelligence organizations that have carried out the differentiation of tasks, both military and civilian intelligence organizations, it is better for Indonesian intelligence to make the necessary adjustments. So that the great burden borne by Indonesian intelligence can be distributed to several intelligence organizations in accordance with their duties and functions. The following are arguments for why Indonesian intelligence needs to adapt to modern intelligence organizations that have made changes.
Since the beginning, intelligence organizations have flexible space. Intelligence can move both domestically and abroad. The flexibility of the intelligence space causes many countries to differentiate intelligence organizations so that intelligence organizations tend not to be single but plural
Intelligence originating from military institutions has raised the need for the defense intelligence service and the combat intelligence service. On the other hand, intelligence which originated from civilians has not only produced the need for various law enforcement intelligence services, but also the need to answer all asymmetric threats to security and national interests, for example in the form of pandemic covid-19. In this point of views, there are three additional explanations that can be identified why the need for differentiation of intelligence organizations, namely:
1. The first explanation is related to the needs of specialization. Modernization that results in increasingly complex human life will make intelligence services ineffective. If Indonesian intelligence really wishes to bear obligations to early detection effort (Deteksi Dini/DENI) and early prevention effort (Cegah Dini/CENI) regarding threats to security and national interests, then there should be specialization in the realm of its activities.
2. The second explanation relates to the need for efficiency in the use of funds. In further developments, it should be noted that for reasons of the need for specialization and efficiency this has also led to an impetus to organize all existing intelligence services. The assumption is that duplication of the realm of activities will result in a waste of national resources owned by a country. However, this can be anticipated by fusion and coordination between intelligence organizations, so as to minimize duplication of activities.
3. The third explanation relates to the need to increase the political accountability of state intelligence organizations. Increasing political accountability is an integral part of security sector reform which will ultimately support the process of democratic consolidation. However, if Indonesian intelligence still wants to assume the duties and functions of security and national interests, then an internal and external supervisory board should be formed, so that potential threats to democratic values can be eliminated.
From the perspective of political development, the differentiation of state intelligence organizations that has been carried out by countries in the world can be used as an indicator to express the degree of political institutionalization that is the foundation of macro system stability and continuity. Differentiation of structure is also a modern technocratic instrument for the functioning of supervision. This technocratic instrument follows the principle of “small is beautiful and” dispersion of power “as one of the methods to minimize the tendency for corruption inherent in power.
Through this principle, each intelligence service should only have one specific function. The application of this principle is an important technocratic instrument to reduce the risk of abuse of power. This is due to – following the Lord Action argument line: “Too many missions being performed by a single intelligence service implies an accumulation of power”.
Yudha Fernando, SE.,M.Si.,M.Kom.,CEH.,ECIH
Team Teaching Organisasi & Tata Kelola Intelijen
Program Kajian Ketahanan Nasional-Kekhususan Intelstrat UI