Assessing Reform of the Japanese Intelligence Community

To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the author.

No full-text available

Request Full-text Paper PDF

To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.

... In addition to improving the image of an intelligence organization in the eyes of the public, intelligence reform generally starts from the desire to correct its weaknesses or inability to keep up with the complexity of the growing threats. Like the intelligence reform in Japan that began in 1998 after the territory was passed several ballistic missile tests conducted by North Korea, this is considered as an intelligence failure in gathering information that resulted in the Japanese government's delay in anticipating threats to its country (Kobayashi, 2015). ...
... In contrast to Chile, Tunisia, and Spain, intelligence reform in Japan is measured by the correlation method to assess the relationship between the effectiveness of intelligence work and the number of meetings between the Prime Minister's intelligence (Kobayashi, 2015). Intelligence reform began in 2000 based on the need to keep pace with the rapidly changing strategic environment and spectrum of threats. ...
Full-text available
Every state intelligence organization is faced with the same problem in maintaining a balance between demands for accountability and openness with the confidentiality principle possessed by intelligence. The bureaucratic reform policy that forces all government agencies to apply the same standards, some of which are considered too rigid if implemented in the state intelligence agency.. Several criteria for assessing bureaucratic reform actually contradict the need for intelligence reform at the State Intelligence Agency (BIN), which is slowly tending to erode intelligence professionalism and secrecy to become more open, and have an impact on the weakening of the intelligence work system. This research will bridge the implementation of bureaucratic reform policies with the intelligence reform model so that the two can go hand in hand and strengthen each other. The method used in this research is the Systematic Literature Review (SLR) of journal articles published in the 2014-2019 period. Intelligence reform modeling is compiled based on the Research Question (RQ) related to policy objectives and intelligence typology. The results obtained from this study indicate that reform in intelligence organizations cannot be fully assessed using an evaluation worksheet of the implementation of bureaucratic reform, but rather prioritizes the ideal intelligence structure, intelligence secrecy, special surveillance, intelligence coordination, and effectiveness of intelligence operations. This research needs to be interpreted as merely a form of commitment and seriousness of researchers to participate in efforts to build a more professional intelligence community following the principles of democracy, upholding law, and human rights.
This forum compares and contrasts national experiences in the development of intelligence studies from the perspective of seven countries: France, Japan, Israel, Romania, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The discussion is structured around a comparative framework that emphasizes five core dimensions that, we posit, are essential to the emergence of this subfield: access to relevant government information, institutionalization of research on intelligence and security in a higher education setting, periodic scientific meetings and networks, teaching and learning opportunities, and engagement between researchers and practitioners. The forum demonstrates how researchers working in different contexts and disciplines have overcome similar challenges to broaden our understanding of secret government practices.
Since 2012, China’s assertion of its sovereignty claim to the contested Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands has significantly raised the risk of a potentially escalatory political-military crisis with Japan. As circumstances worsen, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has championed major institutional reforms aimed at centralizing Japanese security policy decision-making and vastly improving crisis management. This article assesses these reforms’ significance for ameliorating Japan’s long-standing internal crisis management weaknesses, and enhancing its ability to communicate with Beijing promptly under challenging conditions. While significant issues remain, recent developments – especially the establishment of Japan’s first-ever National Security Council – demonstrate significant progress. Bilaterally, however, important firebreaks remain conspicuously absent.
The Panel Regarding the Enhancement of Counterintelligence
  • Counterintelligence Suishin-Kaigi
Origins and Current Status of Japan's Reconnaissance Satellite Program
  • William W Radcliffe
Nihon-gata ‘Spy-Soshiki
  • Taro Kono
  • Sumio Mabuchi
  • Koichi Yamauchi
Nihon-gata ‘Spy-Soshiki
  • Taro Kono
Kantei no Intelligence-Kino wa Kyoka Sareruka [Can Intelligence Functions of the Prime Minister's Office Be Strengthened?
  • Masashi Kaneko
Nihon no Intelligence Jijo
  • Ken Kotani
The Panel on Exploring the Enhancement of Intelligence Capabilities
  • Jyoho Kino Kyoka Kento Kaigi