How Coronavirus Changes the National Security Issue


A top intelligence official stormed into the meeting room with a recent report, alerting politicians and policymakers to the dangers they were receiving.

So far, at least in the recent past, the subject of such warnings to intelligence has been the subject of terrorist attacks - perhaps from somewhere in the Middle East where terrorists have reportedly plotted a new air strike. Immediately the wheels of many tested national security devices started turning. Efforts are underway at the national level to prevent the attack.

But a different dimension is going to be added to this figure in the future. Now the report brought by the intelligence officer may contain a danger signal that a virus has appeared in a far away country. There are reports that the government of that country is hiding the issue of this disease.

Terrorism has been at the center of national security since the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States almost twenty years ago. Even then, many in the security world have argued that the definition of 'security' should be broadened.

Now, in the context of the coronavirus crisis, the question is whether global health security should be given more importance among the issues to be considered at the National Security Center.

When the issue of national security was last reviewed in Britain, the international epidemic was said to be at the top of the list of national security risks. But there has been no reflection of that in Britain in terms of spending or allocating resources in the security sector. In that case, terrorism, war and cyber attacks have got priority.

But many security experts now say their advice to give equal priority to health care was not heeded by politicians at the time. Experts warned that in this case, the 'red light warning signal has started to burn'.

However, intelligence agencies and spies around the world need to make major changes in their work and mentality. Policy makers also need to understand the reality of changing conditions in the health sector in other countries.

Bio-risk

Intelligence agencies like the CIA in the United Kingdom and the CIA in the United States, which recruit people as spies, also need to think about where in the future they will recruit the kind of people who will be able to provide accurate information about what is happening.

The way detectives listen to conversations will also change, because they have to decide what kind of information they want to hear. In addition, the type of intelligence surveillance that uses satellite or other technology may be used to gather information at health centers, cemeteries, and crematoriums.

Health and bio-hazard detection strategies will now be added to the existing 'smell sniffing' strategies using remote-controlled technology to target nuclear objects.

However, all this will be done in accordance with the traditional practice of intelligence gathering.

Artificial Intelligence

The real change in the future we will see in the case of more complex data collection. Artificial Intelligence (AI) or technology intelligence will be used to understand or find out if there is any indication of change in such a population.


The phone's metadata can be viewed by analyzing what the phone user is looking for or doing online.

Four years ago, the then director of the CIA's Digital Technology Innovation Department told me what kind of work they were doing in gathering information at the population level of an entire country using methods like AI and 'emotion analysis'.

The goal of their work was to anticipate a possible situation before something happened - such as whether a law and order situation was brewing or whether a revolution was about to take place.

In today's world there is already a competition for excellence between America and China. Many in Washington fear that the United States may lose to China in this competition, as China has invested heavily in data collection and technology development.

Future information exchange

What is still unknown, however, is how countries will co-operate in exchanging information on future epidemics, such as the coronavirus epidemic. It has been shown how important it is for different countries of the world to work together to prevent the spread of Kovid-19 infection.

So it is still uncertain how openly countries will share their intelligence in dealing with such risks in the future, or whether their nationalist attitudes will prevail.

There is no denying that in the future, countries will close their borders and deal with the problem at home. They may then focus their intelligence on how other countries are coping with the crisis, whether they are hiding information, or whether new research has solved it.

Bacterial intelligence

The history of 'germ detection' is long. During the Cold War, the West and the Soviet Union tried desperately to find out if the adversary was producing any secret germs or nerve agents. In the future, the focus may not be on weapons of mass destruction, but on who is making the vaccines.

People have long feared that terrorists or groups might give up their weapons at any time. This notion will be further entrenched in the aftermath of the current Corona Crisis, as there are already indications that some extreme right-wing groups have deliberately considered spreading the virus. However, the US Department of Justice has said that anyone who does so intentionally can be charged with terrorism.

In the wake of the current crisis, a question may arise as to how interested or enterprising countries that have improved surveillance systems will be in collecting information about the spread of such viruses, which will be used to prevent further spread by restricting human movement.

Simply put, in the interest of health security, the pressure on countries for intelligence surveillance will increase in the future, both at home and abroad.


China has already done this with the software used to monitor smartphones. Russia has used CCTV and face recognition methods to crack down on violators. Many other countries have created 'electronic fences' through which they have exchanged information with other countries about those who have left the quarantine.

The United Kingdom and the United States are discussing what can be done with various technology companies. But those who work for civil liberties are concerned about such observation technology. They think that while it is reasonable to use such technology to prevent the spread of the virus, if this technology is at hand, at any other time a country can use this technology for political purposes.

There will also be a need for people with appropriate skills to analyze the intelligence collected for future health care. Military experts as well as health experts have to work. On the other hand, there is a debate over the interpretation and analysis of the collected information and what kind of 'security' will be presented to the politicians.

Given the current state of the coronavirus epidemic around the world, the big question for security experts at the moment is how much the impact of the outbreak could weaken the government administration and its military, and who can take advantage of it.

Some intelligence agencies have already done some work on this virus infection. It is known that the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad has carried out an operation and brought one lakh testing kits from abroad, but some important equipments required for the test are not there.

In January and February, US intelligence leaked secret information about the virus to policymakers. The data collected from China indicated the severity of the virus. But White House officials did not heed the warnings.

As a result, no matter how well the intelligence operates, the more powerful those in power are, the more likely it is that they will be able to use it.