1
INTELLIGENCE SYNERGY IN THE FRAMEWORK OF LAW
ENFORCEMENT
Introduction
Terrorism is a strategic issue phenomenon that has transformed and become a security threat
in almost every nation and state. Fear and an atmosphere of terror are being generated widely
in various parts of the world so that it becomes a global threat to security stability
(Reksoprodjo et al., 2018). In United States itself, the spread of radicalism is still a major
threat to the country's ideological resilience (Adikara et al., 2021). In recent times, terrorism
networks and cells have experienced various polarizations. In the early 2000s, the structure of
terrorism networks was in the form of large and invisible groups. Nowadays, large groups
have turned into small groups that are organizationally and network cells are not interrelated
(Ramelan, 2017: 262).
Acts of terrorism from small groups have continued to show their existence in the past decade
with various models and interactions. The terrorist acts carried out have developed into a
"lone wolf" model and terror involving women and children (Riyanta et al., 2021). Terrorist
acts with and leaderless jihad mode are currently difficult to detect and have the potential to
cause casualties (Karnavian, 2017). In general, the network of group terrorism groups are
coordinated and move with clandestine methods. To read and analyze the movement,
intelligence and counterintelligence capabilities are needed (Suhayati, 2016). Intelligence
officers who are already spread throughout United States can be tasked with detecting
potential radical groups that spread their ideology in secret (Riyanta, 2015). This must of
course be done by capable and competent officers so that they can detect the potential of
radical groups spreading their ideology in secret (Riyanta, 2015) prosecution and
counterterrorism can be carried out appropriately and effectively.
The role of intelligence forces from the police, BIN, TNI and others is very important in
mapping the structure of terrorist groups and monitoring the movements of terrorist groups.
The actions of terrorist network groups are actions that can threaten state sovereignty so that
one of them needs to involve the role of TNI intelligence (Triskaputri, 2019). According to
the law, the purpose of intelligence are detecting, identifying, assessing, analyzing,
interpreting, and presenting intelligence in order to provide early warning to anticipate
2
various possible forms and nature of potential and real threats to the safety and existence of
the nation and state as well as opportunities that exist for national interests and security
(Article 5 of Law No. 17/2011). In general, the function of a state intelligence organization is
securing national interests (Soegirman, 2012: 10). Based on its duties and authorities,
intelligence has a vital role in countering terrorism (Riyanta, 2015).
In conducting counter-terrorism, intelligence is tasked with collecting broad, complete, and
well-understood data and information relating to all national defense and security resources.
The role of intelligence as the eyes and ears of the United Statesn government, is to be able to
provide accurate data quickly for early detection and early warning on matters relating to
threats to the country from within and from outside (Pedrason, 2018). Former Head of Kabais
TNI, Laksda TNI (Ret.) Soleman B. Ponto, argued that the perspective Intelligence in
counterterrorism is needed in the strategic spectrum (Suharmono, 2020: 8). Strategic
intelligence capabilities to find information, process information and present information for
decision-making are needed to support counter-terrorism measures.
Highlighting the lack of role of intelligence agencies in preventing acts of terrorism in United
States, it is often found that the discourse of intelligence failures has surfaced in society. As
explained by Manullang, one of the reasons why our intelligence institutions are often
criticized by various parties for being ineffective in providing a sense of security and comfort
is because intelligence in each agency runs independently (Manullang, 2006: 313). Where in
terms of technical deployment of state intelligence apparatus outside the police, such as BIN
and TNI, it has not been regulated synergistically to support BNPT's duties in the field of
prevention. In Mahyudin's research (2016), it was found that the level of trust between
United Statesn intelligence agencies is in a state of trust deficit with inter-institutional
rivalries and past residues. Furthermore, in his research, Suharmono (2020) found that the
synergy of intelligence in dealing with state threats is not yet optimal due to the thick nuances
of sectoral ego.
Zulfikar and Amanah (2020), in their research, explained that BNPT as the leading sector of
counter-terrorism in United States has carried out a strategy to prevent terrorism, one of
which is by prioritizing the principle of coordination between state intelligence organizations.
In this case, intelligence officers hold an important factor in efforts to detect early acts of
terrorism. Where According to Suhayati (2016), the handling of the problem terrorism
3
requires high quality and capacity of intelligence to be able to reveal the perpetrators and
motives behind acts of terrorism, as well as the underlying root causes. However, it needs to
be realized that intelligence officers do not have the authority in law enforcement, so it is
expected that the police's task in countering terrorism will be more optimal with the synergy
between institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and have legal
jurisdiction.
In creating security stability for the country's sovereignty, it is necessary to done efforts to
prevent the threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. In relation to this, this research aims to
provide an overview of the condition of inter-institutional cooperation and present the
concept of intelligence synergy in the framework of law enforcement using Collaborative
Governance Theory analysis. It is expected that this research will be able to provide input and
policy recommendations for the five state institutions in order to improve integration in
handling terrorism. In addition, this research is expected to be a reference for other studies
related to intelligence synergy in counterterrorism.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
4
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
5
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
6
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
7
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
8
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
9
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
10
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
11
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
12
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
13
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
14
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
15
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
16
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
17
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
18
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
19
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
20
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
21
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
22
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
23
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
24
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
25
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
26
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
27
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
28
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
29
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
30
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
31
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
32
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
33
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
34
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
35
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
36
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
37
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
38
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
39
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
40
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
41
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
42
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
43
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
44
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
45
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
46
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
47
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
48
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
49
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
50
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
51
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
52
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
53
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
54
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
55
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
56
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
57
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
58
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
59
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
60
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
61
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
62
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
63
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
64
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
65
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
66
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
67
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
68
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
69
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
70
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
71
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
72
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
73
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
74
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
75
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
76
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
77
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
78
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
79
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
80
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
81
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
82
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
83
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
84
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
85
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
86
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
87
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
88
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
89
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
90
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
91
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
92
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
93
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
94
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
95
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
96
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
97
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
98
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
99
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
100
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
101
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
102
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
103
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
104
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
105
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
106
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
107
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
108
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
109
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
110
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
111
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
112
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
113
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
114
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
115
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
116
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
117
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
118
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
119
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
120
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
121
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
122
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
123
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
124
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
125
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
126
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
127
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
128
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
129
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
130
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
131
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
132
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
133
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
134
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
135
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
136
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
137
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
138
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
139
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
140
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
141
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
142
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
143
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
144
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
145
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
146
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
147
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
148
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
149
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
150
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
151
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
152
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
153
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
154
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
155
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
156
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
157
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
158
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
159
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
160
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
161
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
162
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
163
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
164
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
165
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
166
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
167
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
168
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
169
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
170
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
171
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
172
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
173
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
174
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
175
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
176
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
177
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
178
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
179
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
180
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
181
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
182
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
183
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
184
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
185
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
186
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
187
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
188
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
189
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
190
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
191
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
192
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
193
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
194
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
195
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
196
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
197
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
198
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
199
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
200
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
201
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
202
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
203
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
204
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
205
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
206
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
207
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
208
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
209
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
210
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
211
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
212
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
213
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
214
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
215
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
216
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
217
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
218
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
219
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
220
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
221
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
222
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
223
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
224
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
225
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
226
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
227
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
228
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
229
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
230
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
231
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
232
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
233
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
234
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
235
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
236
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
237
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
238
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
239
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
240
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
241
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
242
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
243
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
244
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
245
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
246
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
247
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
248
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
249
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
250
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
251
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
252
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
253
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
254
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
255
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
256
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
257
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
258
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
259
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
260
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
261
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
262
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
263
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
264
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
265
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
266
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
267
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
268
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
269
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
270
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
271
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
272
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
273
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
274
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
275
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
276
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
277
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
278
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
279
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
280
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
281
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
282
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
283
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
284
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
285
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
286
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
287
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
288
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
289
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
290
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
291
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
292
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
293
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
294
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
295
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
296
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
297
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
298
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
299
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
300
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
301
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
302
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
303
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
304
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
305
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
306
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
307
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
308
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
309
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
310
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
311
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
312
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
313
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
314
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
315
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
316
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
317
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
318
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
319
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
320
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
321
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
322
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
323
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
324
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
325
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
326
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
327
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
328
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
329
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
330
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
331
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
332
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
333
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
334
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
335
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
336
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
337
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
338
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
339
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
340
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
341
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
342
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
343
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
344
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
345
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
346
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
347
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
348
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
Collaboration Interagency Intelligence Cooperation Based on Collaborative Governance
Theory
Collaboration in organizing governance is something that is needed in current government
practices. Agranoff and McGuire (2003) stated that specifically, collaborative governance
explains the context of Cooperation between government agencies with an emphasis on
voluntary horizontal collaboration and horizontal relationships between participants that are
multisectoral, due to task demands that go beyond the capacity and role of a single public
organization, and require interaction between various organizations related to and involved in
public activities. In addition to this opinion, according to Ansell and Gash (2007)
Collaborative Governance is a series of arrangements where one or more public institutions
directly involve stakeholders or assets. Collaboration is needed to enable governance
activities to be structured so that they are effective in responding to the challenges of the
increasing need to manage activities that cross government, organizational, and sectoral
boundaries.
In Ansell and Gash's explanation, it can be seen that the collaboration aspect of government
administration is more on the formulation and implementation of public policies or programs
from public institutions, in this case the government. In addition, in practice, government
collaboration must uphold deliberative values or deliberation and consensus between each
actor or stakeholder involved in the collaboration. There are various reasons behind the
emergence of the need to collaborate from each institution or institution. Collaborative
Governance does not appear suddenly, because it is caused by initiatives on their own
awareness from various parties that encourage cooperation and coordination in solving
problems faced by the public (Junaidi, 2015).
Collaborative Governance or collaboration governance emerged as a response to The concept
of collaborative governance emphasizes the importance of building cooperation based on the
emergence of consensus among its members, not based on individual competition among
group members. It should be understood that the concept of collaborative governance
349
emphasizes the importance of building a cooperation based on the emergence of consensus
among its members, not based on individual competition among group members. Each
member in the framework of cooperation must try to respect each other and give their
contribution. their contribution. Complexity in problems leads to interdependence, which
increases the demand for collaboration.
Research Methods
Researchers The researcher used a descriptive qualitative approach, which is by viewing a
social reality holistically/whole, complex, dynamic, full of meaning, and interactive
(reciprocal) relationships so that the author is able to analyze and construct the social
situation under study to be clearer and more meaningful (Sugiyono, 2017: 8). The selection of
this approach is expected to provide a clear, accurate, factual, systematic and valid
description to understand the strategy and construction of intelligence synergy in the
framework of law enforcement counterterrorism. Qualitative research does not emphasize
generalization but on meaning. Generalization in qualitative research qualitative research is
transferability (transferability). Transferability means that the research results can be
transferred or applied elsewhere if they have the same conditions as the research conducted
by the research (Sugiyono, 2017: According to Spradley, qualitative research uses the term
social situation which consists of three elements, namely place, actors, and activities that
interact synergistically (Sugiyono, 2017: 215). Researchers conducted research using
interview methods, literature and document studies and descriptively provided explanations
related to these social situations. In conducting research, the author carries out the process of
collecting data, assessing data quality, analyzing data, interpreting data, and making analysis
and conclusions.
The complexity of countering terrorism undeniably requires the cooperation of all parties,
especially for state officials. The task of the police in countering terrorism will be more
optimal with synergy with institutions that have capabilities in the field of intelligence and
have legal jurisdiction, so that this can be formulated as a pattern of cooperation in realizing
national security stability in a synergistic manner. National stability is the main factor in
creating sovereignty for the Republic of United States so that it is necessary to prevent the
threat of terrorism carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security
Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri. Based on the literature study on previous researches
Based on the literature study on previous studies, the author considers it necessary to improve
350
the concept of handling terrorism by intelligence institutions in United States entitled,
Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement for Counterterrorism in United
States.
Discussion
Efforts to counter acts of terrorism in United States should be able to run comprehensively
through Intelligence synergy within the framework of the National Intelligence Service. Law
Enforcement so that it is not confined to the efforts of the criminal law approach alone as is
currently the case. However, after the issuance of Anti-Terrorism Law Number 5/2018, it has
not been able to fully answer proportionally the issue of counter-terrorism to support BNPT's
duties in the field of prevention. This is related to standard procedures and the use of anti-
terror capabilities and other units within the Police, as well as the technical deployment of
state intelligence apparatus outside the police. The points contained in Law Number 5 Year
2018 have not been able to explain the mechanism of BNPT's authority in coordinating the
deployment of various resources needed, including the authority and limits of authority of
each institution involved in it. So that the implementation of the duties of each part is still
thick with the nuances of sectoral ego. Meanwhile, the role of Kemenko Polhukam as the
coordinator of state security in coordinating efforts to realize political stability and state
security, especially in the face of the threat of terrorism, is also not explained in Law Number
5 Year 2018. Thus, the current legal basis has not been able to support the establishment of
an effective and comprehensive cooperation mechanism between institutions that play an
important role.
The State of Interagency Intelligence Cooperation in Counterterrorism at Present
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, there are
several problems that are still found, among others, the absence of synchronization of data
owned by each related institution in an effort to prevent and suppress terrorism threats
optimally, there is no clear legal umbrella in the field of counter-terrorism.
Apart from the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still
faced with a situation where the performance of its institutions directly related to the handling
of acts of terrorism has not been able to run optimally. This is because it tends to rely only on
one institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
351
prosecution. On the other hand, the dynamics of terrorism have developed to such an extent
that it has exceeded the capacity and capability of Polri as a law enforcement agency.
Therefore, in following up on the issuance of Law Number 5/2018 on the revision of the
Anti-Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police other government agencies outside the Police such as
the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through
an effective cooperation mechanism under the coordination of BNPT.
Conception of Interagency Intelligence Synergy in the Framework of Law Enforcement
Basically, intelligence has an important role in the security sector, namely to provide
predictions, early warning and early detection of threats/disturbances that threaten national
security. Therefore, with a fast, up-to-date, comprehensive and accurate analysis related to
the threat of terrorism, it will become a reference material for policy makers in taking the
right and directed management of terrorism handling mechanisms. Widjajanto et al (2006)
classifies the intelligence function into three levels of scope, namely: at the strategic,
operational, and tactical levels. In this case, the synergy between intelligence institutions in
countering terrorism in United States functions at the operational level. Intelligence activities
are part of the country's early warning system and national defense system that allows policy
makers to have early awareness or foreknowledge.
Hulnick (2005) reveals that the role of intelligence in the national security system must be
able to adjust to certain conditions related to work methods, work culture, and differentiation
and specialization of functions. Reflecting on this, the complexity of obstacles and challenges
in countering terrorism in United States in the future becomes a problem that must be faced
together. The synergy between legal and intelligence approaches, as well as close cooperation
between related institutions, is something that is absolutely unavoidable to be implemented as
a condition for effective counterterrorism efforts. The use of collaborative model concept
among related institutions can be a catalyst in achieving the effectiveness of countering acts
of terrorism and reducing the number of terrorist incidents in United States. However, this
must be accommodated as a derivative of Law Number 15/2018 that contains technical
explanations about the collaborative cooperation mechanism between the Coordinating
Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri, so that it can
run under a binding legal framework.
352
In addition, the role of the five institutions in making their contributions is faced with
differences in capacity, capability, and culture. Each organization in handling terrorist acts is
also a very critical factor. As stated by Ansell and Gash (2007) in the basics of collaborative
governance theory. There are four basic values that must be inherent in collaborative
governance if it is to be successful, namely consensus orientation, collective leadership,
multi-directional communication, and willingness to share resources. In other words, external
intervention is needed, namely from the government, which must maintain the proportionality
of the division of tasks, authority and budget to each institution whose roles, functions and
duties are related to countering acts of terrorism in United States.
The implementation of duties, functions, and roles related to the handling of acts of terrorism
of the five institutions mentioned above, so far, is still characterized by overlapping, because
the duties and authorities of each institution are not clearly regulated in the law. In addition, it
is important for the government to be able to emphasize the role and projection of each
agency's involvement proportionally and objectively in a joint framework through the
issuance of additional technical regulations so that the implementation of the duties,
functions, and roles of the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs,
BNPT, BIN, TNI, and Polri in dealing with acts of terrorism in United States can run
collaboratively. Collaboration in handling a terrorism threat must be optimized, which means
that in a terror contingency condition, each element understands and performs their respective
roles and duties without exceeding their authority.
From the Collaborative Governance theory, one very good lesson that we can adopt is how
the British government followed up the suicide bombing case that occurred in Manchester in
2017, by collaborating with the capabilities of all related elements. In this incident, the
British military intelligence agency, MI-5, assisted the security forces in tracking down the
bomber who was known to be quite dangerous, because he had gone through a special
training in assembling explosives and was believed to be connected to international terrorism
networks. As a follow-up, the British Prime Minister authorized the use of British Army
special forces.
Conclusions
The current condition of cooperation between authorized institutions in the field of
countering acts of terrorism is still far from the expected achievement. In addition, apart from
353
the high dynamics of the development of terrorism threats, the government is still faced with
a situation where the performance of its institutions that are directly related to the handling of
acts of terrorism has not been able to improve.
The Anti-Terrorism Law is not running optimally, because it tends to rely only on one
institution, namely the National Police as the main element in the field of prevention and
prosecution. In following up the issuance of Law No. 5/2018 on the revision of the Anti-
Terrorism Law, it should be followed by efforts to encourage the involvement of other
government agencies outside the Police such as the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal
and Security Affairs, BIN, and the TNI through a cooperation mechanism in the form of
effective rules under the coordination of BNPT.
In order to To optimize the handling of terrorism in United States, it is necessary to create a
common perception of proportional task implementation of all intelligence and prosecution
apparatus from BIN, TNI, and Polri in accordance with the national scale counter-terrorism
policies and strategies that have been prepared by BNPT. The mechanism can be done
through the preparation of joint fixed procedures, the implementation of joint counter-
terrorism exercises, and other activities that can support the creation of common perceptions
of members of each institution and eliminate egocentric attitudes and inter-agency rivalry.
This is important to do considering that prior to the issuance of the revised Anti-Terrorism
Law in 2018, the implementation of counter-terrorism Intelligence Operations carried out by
BIN and Law Enforcement Operations carried out by Polri tended to run individually in the
context of independent operations rather than joint operations.
