|
|
readers will find the work rich in theory, as well as a departure from the usual approaches that study the subject exclusively from a practical point of view. While these approaches have their usefulness in both the study of intelligence and peacekeeping, the disproportionate balance against a need to interface theory and practice demonstrates an apparent reluctance to depart from the familiar into exploring new territories that could provide a platform for an extensive and rigorous analysis of functions of intelligence, decision making, and international organisations. At best, publications that have, so far, taken a stab at this issue as a collection of essays and conference papers have also mainly been limited to exploring the practicalities of intelligence in peacekeeping and their likely implications for international conflicts.2 The present work attempts to provide a bridge between theory and practice. In so doing, it adapts a broad-based approach that combines a theoretically thorough and sophisticated analysis of the linkages between theory, practice, and their practical implications.
If a case should be made for such a broad and inclusive approach, it is simply that an exercise such as this should aim to outline criteria for the analysis of collective security intelligence mechanisms and, where necessary, provide a platform for further research into the concept as well as a foundation for a more informed, rigorous, and well-considered debate about the issues involved. The absence of acceptable concepts and such criteria in this vein has meant that even when the notion of intelligence within the UN system is found to be plausible and supported at various levels of analysis, scholars may still be at a loss on the vital question of how to provide a conceptual framework for such occurrences. Within these terms, the issue ceases to be strictly about identifying the existence of particular entities or practice but should also aim to provide a theoretical description of its feasibility, as well as opportunities for further refinement and extension of existing knowledge on the subject. This does not imply that the wider problem of a UN intelligence capability can be solved in this kind of exercise; it nevertheless provides, at a minimum, the context in which the observed practices and patterns of behaviour concerning the utilisation of intelligence could be located,