Theory Of The Principle Agent Problem

The CIA, otherwise known as the Central Intelligence Agency, is a federal agency that is independent and has the responsibilities of providing the country of the United States with national security intelligence. The CIA is in charge of gathering information that is going on from other countries in order to help our own national security to become stronger, and to be able to protect the citizens of the United States better. However, what happens when the CIA tries to protect it’s citizens by screwing over other countries? What happens when the CIA is responsible for destroying other countries’ governments or placing leaders where we do not belong as a country to try and control politics that we should not even be involving ourselves in. While the CIA is meant to have good intentions for providing our country with national security, a lot of times the United States is responsible for meddling in affairs we never belonged in which cause harm, devastation, or death to the countries we force ourselves upon.

Thinking in the philosophical terms of "good" and "evil," nothing purely "good" can survive without the slightest taint of "evil," and vice-versa. The same standard exists for everything. Just as you cannot always succeed by being purely honest, a government cannot hold itself together without committing it's own personal rights and wrongs. The United States of America has protected its residents well in the past, and kept the appearance of a mild innocense; well, most of it, anyway. The Covert Intelligence Agency (CIA) is mostly swamped in its wrongs, though many have not even been proven. The CIA has been this country's "yang" to protect the populace of the USA.

“Whenever one party (the principal) hires someone else (the agent) to work for him or her, their interaction is called an agency relationship. The agent is always supposed to act in the principal’s best interests.” (Cornett, Adair, & Nofsinger, 2016, p. 15).

A major goal I always strive for is the acquisition of enemy technology and weapons. Then having the technology or weapon analyzed and used to develop countermeasures or techniques, which will save U.S. Forces lives. Realizing I am not currently in an operational unit to accomplish this, I look at other issues in my career field. One of the issues I have noticed in my career path is the negative connotation towards counterintelligence agents. This exists for several reasons, lazy agents, inexperienced agents, or lack of knowledge of commanders. My goal is teach to younger agents there is always something they can be doing some kind of counterintelligence related work anywhere they are stationed. Also, confronting the lazy agents and either convincing them it is in their best interest to work or get out of the military occupational specialty and make room for agents who actually want to do the job. There needs to be an organizational change throughout counterintelligence to change how the intelligence discipline is seen by the rest of the operating

1. How much obedience and loyalty does an agent employee owe to an employer? What if the employer engages in an activity—or requests that the employee engage in an activity—that violates the employee’s ethical standards but does not violate any public policy or law? In such a situation, does an employee’s duty to abide by her or his own ethical standards override the employee’s duty of loyalty to the employer?

It all started in 1979 when FBI agent Robert Hanssen, using the pseudonym “B” committed espionage against the United States for the former Soviet Union and later on the Russian Federation. Mr. Hanssen’s spying activities against the United States were conducted over three different phases over 22 years. While working as an FBI Agent at the Bureau’s Soviet Counterintelligence Division in New York City and at different leadership posts in Washington, DC, Mr. Hanssen provided the Komitet gosudarstvennoy bezopasnosti (KGB) and later on the Foreign Intelligence Service of the Russian Federation the identities of Russian spies, two of which were executed as a result. Mr. Hanssen also provided over 6000 national security classified documents

and various species of more or less outright lying. Many of these behaviors are subsumed under

in politics, and even individuals in administration, are destined to get “dirty hands.” The concept implicates that individuals who interact in either of these realms cannot help but engage in conduct that is either unethical or, at the very least, less than desirable. Although, many researchers acknowledge that there does exist separate meaning between the roles of political constituents and administrative staff, many believe there are also plenty of similarities. In examining the political/administrative dichotomy, researchers have found extreme overlap in some instances, which emphasizes the probability that administrative staff can also find themselves with dirty hands. Many argue that it is absolutely necessary, in some instances, for individuals to act deceptively with a lack of transparency in order to reach ultimate goals with desirable ends. These ends might include advancing the bigger goals of the organization or preventing the fall of the organization as a whole. However, the

People in organizations are tempted to sabotage the organization due to their ego, self-interest and the incentive of becoming higher in the organization’s hierarchy (JJCOB1964, 2012). Furthermore, people in these organizations can create small groups within the organization that can destroy the organization (JJCOB1964, 2012). According to O’Hara organizations must be quick to stop environmental challenges (JJCOB1964, 2012). Only a few organizations can keep up with these challenges and that is another reason why organizations fail (JJCOB1964, 2012). To illuminate, we can look at Robert Hanssen who betrayed the FBI by giving Russian U.S secrets (O'Hara, 2012, p. 5). Hanssen who was described as an arrogant loner was reported by his FBI agent brother for being a security risk (O'Hara, 2012, p. 5). Despite being reported, Hanssen was able to climb the hierarchy in the organization, which increased his ability to spy (O'Hara, 2012, p. 5). Here we see a slow response from the FBI to rid the organization of a threat. Although the FBI has many downturns the people of the United States still heavily supports the organization (O'Hara, 2012, p. 6).

There are many stories of Americans spying for other countries. Some of these spies have loyalty to other countries, some are coerced into spying, and some are just in for the money. David Sheldon Boone fits the character of someone spying just for the money. Every spy have their own story and purpose of this paper is to provide David Boone’s timeline to present time. Through this timeline, I will discuss detail of David Boone’s background, indicators, materials compromised, handler, and investigation.

Public offices cannot use their authority for personal gain. “Intelligence is empowered to take actions in the public’s interest and in the public’s name that are prohibited to the public at large.” (Nolte, 2009, p.23). Oleg Penkovsky, the Main Intelligence Directorate officer, provided information to the West to deescalate the Cuban Missile Crisis. He was sacrificed as an asset for the people’s interest, only to be arrested and later executed. DHS has the Office of Inspector General (OIG) to conduct integrity operations to rid the agency of dishonest employees. This office also handles all reports of misconduct involving DHS Code of Conduct. Officers can send anonymous tips to the agency at any time if they witness misconduct of employees or

Further research regarding the sociological and psychological effects of Counterinsurgency Human Intelligence operations, and how a compulsory may change intelligence guidelines and procedures to modify motivation structures and reduce civilian violence associated with foreign Human Intelligence agent networks. What authority approves recruiters to operate outside the scope of intelligence gathering?

“Intelligence work has one moral law - it is justified by results.” (page 13). Spies cannot afford to display or have emotions associated with normal humanity, if they start to show human emotions in the field that doesn't have a meaning on their mission they will surely get killed or severely wounded. A spies life must be turned to ash and built back up to black and white so they don’t see the colour anymore. Results are always shown when the soldier/agent/or spy keeps his professionalism up at all times and keeps specific morals that will keep him alive and get the job done so others can be safe.

The term “Covert Action” brings with it a connotation of shadowy figures wrapped in secrecy and intrigue. It also brings with it a substantial amount of moral questions as to “what is right.” The use of covert action has been widely publicized since the early seventies, but trying to find out the truth to these events has been difficult to say the least. What is even more difficult, is historically recording these events into categories of successes or failures. These operations are difficult to dissect because of their secrecy and although events have been recorded, some facts simply aren’t apparent. This paper will seek to identify the complex issues associated with covert operations.

Everyday citizens often live unaware of their government’s inner workings. The knowing of political espionage is often too heavy of a subject to be inducted in conversation. True, prima facie, modest twists and turns of information may not be considered substantial, but this inconsideration leaves much to be uncontrolled. It is easy for political leaders to become power crazed, to not realize the massive implications that come of their actions. Only after all is said and done do the people actually realize their government is an opaque mask of deception. The Watergate Scandal substantially impacted Americans’ trust in their government.