# What it would take to Share all INTEL?



## MAJOR_Baker (27 Jan 2006)

I was in a briefing a couple weeks ago where a civilian talked about INTEL sharing between the US CAN, UK, and AUS.  Everything, nothing held back.

I am in principle very much inclined to this type of arrangement, however the big issue, what about disclosure?  How would one prosecute an act such as releasing T.S. documents?


----------



## tomahawk6 (27 Jan 2006)

I would say share intelligence where it relates to the global war on terror. This should be done through ONI, Office National Intelligence.


----------



## NCRCrow (27 Jan 2006)

I thought ONI was Office of Naval Intelligence.

4 Eyes INT, poor New Zealand.


----------



## tomahawk6 (27 Jan 2006)

It means that as well. 

http://www.odni.gov/DNI.html


----------



## Armymatters (27 Jan 2006)

The American, UK, Canadian (CSIS), and Australian intelligence services are linked together through the post-WWII Quadpartite Pact. The Canadian Communications Security Establishment (CSE) is linked to the United States National Security Agency (NSA), the British Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), the Australian Defence Signals Directorate (DSD) and New Zealand's Government Communications Security Bureau by the UKUSA Community agreement, which operates the ECHELON system.


----------



## George Wallace (27 Jan 2006)

Like everything else Military, when it comes to Security it all boils down to "Need to Know" and "If you don't need to know, you won't".  There is not one single 'compact' when it comes to Intelligence sharing, but dozens.  There is the compact between Canada and the US, then Canada, US and UK, Australia, Canada, US and UK, the NATO compacts, the SEATO compacts.  The numbers of alliances and networking going on is very wide ranging.  So, it boils down to "Need to Know".  

Armymatters has listed some, mixing Military and Civilian organizations, which I do not believe occurs very often, but it gives one an idea of what some of the more 'publicly known' organizations may be doing.  Of course it isn't 'gospel'.  No one in the Int community is going to tell us what they are doing.  

It is interesting to see this, as within each nations Intelligence communities they have trouble sharing info amongst themselves, let alone with another nation or more.


----------



## muffin (27 Jan 2006)

"Eyes only" caveats for Canada, Britian, US, and Australia are reflective of the pre-existing arrangements - so as an operator you need to watch for the designators on the message/document you are reading. 

CAN - Canada
UK - Britian
US - American
AUS - Australia 

and they generally are all together such as CANUKUS, CANUS, CANUKUS\AUS or something similar. (CANUKUS =  Canadian - British - American eyes only)


CANUKUS is known as the tripartite intelligence community.

The US arrangements are documented here http://jya.com/usic12.htm 

For more light reading on Canadian Security Designators etc - I suggest the following - http://www.carleton.ca/csds/occasional_papers/Npsia-22.pdf

muffin


----------

