As Germany paves the way for an integrated European army, EU INTCEN, the EU’s intelligence analysis centre, will need a massive capabilities upgrade. In 2013, former Commissioner Viviane Reding, now an MEP, called for the European Union to create its own CIA. The idea was shot down then, but is gathering support today. So how can the EU expand its own capabilities when Brussels is littered with the debris of interstate tradecraft? The United States has been caught spying on EU institutions, and on Europe’s leaders; but so too have the British; and several MEPs are suspected of spying on the EU for Russia. EU Files examines the shadows of Brussels espionage and explores the future capacity and control of Jacques Le Bond.

Angela Merkel’s CDU policy team Europe has set out a 10-point plan for military co-operation in Europe. The Telegraph reported the strategy is understood to closely reflect Merkel’s thinking. It calls for a permanent EU military headquarters, combined weapons procurement and a shared military doctrine. And… the Germans say it’s “urgent” to integrate armed forces “in the face of multifaceted crises.”

So what would that mean for INTCEN, the EU’s intelligence analysis centre? Well, firstly, INTCEN is just about legal. It doesn’t have a formal legal basis in the EU treaties. Last year, Liberal MEP Sophie Int’Veld questioned the premise for its existence, to which Catherine Aston, the former High Representative for Foreign Affairs replied, outlining the legal basis.

However, the Lisbon Treaty clearly states that national security is the competence of the member states, so INTCEN operates within a grey area. With a staff level of less than one hundred, the agency doesn’t have a separate budget. It operates within the directorate of the European External Action Service, overseen by the current High Representative, Federica Mogherini. If this was a James Bond film, she would be ‘M’.

Oversight

In terms of oversight, MEPs including In’t Veld are less than satisfied. Parliament has the right to oversight with the use of parliamentary questions; and it will make use of committee hearings to invite Mogherini and other directors to gain insight, but there is no real control of the intelligence service.

Some might argue that no real oversight is needed, INTCENT doesn’t have agents on the ground, it doesn’t run covert operations and it doesn’t engage in data surveillance.

Its staff are composed of one representative from each national security agency, and a team of EU officials working in analysis, planning and support roles.

What it does do, is provide analysis on security issues affecting the European Union, such as terrorist threats, migration, Syria.

These reports are compiled with input from security services from the member states, information from EU delegations and open source material. The reports are sent primarily to Commissioners, and increasingly they are making the rounds at the European Council.

New Treaty

Sources Euranet Plus spoke with were clear that if an EU Army is on the horizon, then INTCEN will need the authority of a treaty declaration to expand its operations. It will certainly need a much bigger budget and with a bigger budget will come more scrutiny.

Recently, the Financial Times reported that Andrew Parker, Director-General of British intelligence agency MI5, said the nature of Islamic extremism, especially ISIS, is different from previous terrorist threats.

Parker argues that mainstream, consumer-driven data encryption, is now so complex and widespread that it seriously limits data collection. It’s estimated that security agencies now need to be able to hack more than 1 million smartphone apps. Parker believes that modern encryption now benefits terrorists more than the agencies fighting them.

This is part of the reason INTCEN may have a bright future. National resources are limited, and while national security remains the remit of member states, the effective sharing of information could lead to greater counter-terrorism success.

Not only that. Organised crime doesn’t respect national borders, so INTCEN may have a pivotal role in supporting Europol and Frontex. Intelligence sources told Euranet Plus that INTCEN could come to be viewed not as a threat to national intelligence agencies, but as a value added resource, a real partner in information exchange.

Values and ethics

Under a new treaty, Parliament would be expected to increase its oversight capability. Officials envisage a select committee of MEPs with a high level of security clearance. Not everyone will be satisfied with a closed committee, citing transparency concerns, but in mature democracies it remains the norm for restricted intelligence access, even for parliamentarians.

The risk of MEPs undermining intelligence work is brutally exposed by accusations of spying against several serving MEPs, including Hungarian MEP Bela Kovacs. Kovacs, member of Jobbik far-right party, is currently fighting attempts to have his immunity lifted. Hungarian authorities want him prosecuted for spying for the Russians.

The challenge for INTCEN will be to work out what its core values will be. Protecting and advancing the economic interests of the European Union; supporting key policy initiatives; or ensuring a human rights and civil liberties agenda. Whatever its core values, it cannot please the whole political spectrum.

And there is always the risk that member states try to leverage the agency for their own interests; providing misleading intelligence with the objective of swaying EU policy. Intelligence sources say however, that the risk of rogue information from member states is small because the balance of assessment would be made with an overview of all 28 contributions. Anything that was outside the normal scope would be noticed and queried.

Mass surveillance

Mass surveillance has been at the forefront of public awareness since former US intelligence officer, Edward Snowden, broke cover and exposed the extent of US data gathering. Snowden’s revelations opened the door to greater public accountability for the secret services, but not much has changed in practical terms and European intelligence agencies continue to argue for more intrusive powers to gather data and break increasingly complex encryption systems.

Public preoccupation with data privacy and high profile hacking breaches, mask the deeper threat of public utility hacking – attempts to disrupt Western electricity and water supplies. While much of Russia’s cyber war against Europe is aimed at disruption rather than damage, NATO’s headquarters in Brussels have been repeatedly targeted by hackers during the office hours of Moscow civil servants. It seems hackers may have trade union rights after all.

Industrial espionage is also at the centre of the intelligence community’s brief, and in the context of the core purpose of the European Union, INTCEN could find itself briefed to defend European economic interests.

This battle is currently fought by member states, and the frontline is not national capitals, but Silicone Valley – it’s here that the vast majority of tech infrastructure is conceived. The data gateway can be open or shut with excellent or sloppy coding. Intelligence agencies want their own private windows on business information flow.

Brussels – spy capital

Brussels has a long history as a spy centre, with 20,000 lobbyists, 1,500 foreign journalists, 2,500 international agencies and 5,000 accredited diplomats.

The United States was been caught spying on EU institutions, and on Europe’s leaders. But so too were the British and several MEPs are suspected of spying for Russia.

Europe’s politicians are subject to espionage even when overseas. The European Parliament’s Liberal Group Leader, Guy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister, had private conversations with Russian opposition leader Alexey Navalny bugged. Russian TV later broadcast footage of the closed meeting.

The email accounts of European Council President, have been hacked, allegedly by the Chinese, though Beijing denied this. And photocopiers are regularly targeted by spies in the European institutions, conveniently sending duplicate copies to spies outside. On one occasion the breach was traced to a telephone number at NATO.

And then last December, Russian agents are alleged to have broken into a third-floor mailroom and left 751 English-language copies of “Red Dalia,” a damning biography of the Lithuanian President, Dalia Grybauskaitė. Bloomberg reported that the book was published after Grybauskaitė accused Vladimir Putin of running a “terrorist state,”. The book alleges that she collaborated with the KGB during the Soviet era. The Russian strategy is a mix of propaganda, disruption and old school spy trade craft.

Intelligence failures have led to shocking terrorism in the European Union. Often, the information has been available to identify potential attackers. But it wasn’t shared. Military budgets have been decimated across Europe. The Americans laugh at the idea of an EU Army – no money, few troops, poor equipment.

Today, military cooperation is largely within the structure of NATO. But that may change. Europe may find a new type of NATO alliance. The same partners but with a centralised European army.

Whatever the future shape of Europe’s military structures, it is clear that European policy makers need better operational and strategic intelligence. A new generation of analysts. Not spies gunning for Queen and country. But spooks, coding for peace and prosperity.

Author: Brian Maguire, Euranet Plus News Agency

Euranet Plus News Agency web tip