The Relationship with the Mass-Media

Material presented by SIE at the Sinaia Conference -"Intelligence and Security Services and the Security Agenda of the 21st century - 10 - 14 April 2002

During the early years after the Revolution (1990), the Intelligence Services in Romania had quite a negative public image which was due, mainly, to the mistrust and, to a certain extent, the adversity and frustrations of some segments of the civil society, which could not forget easily the former Securitate, whose activity left deep and, sometimes, painful scars in the social memory. In addition, there were deficiencies in the communication management, with a few of them inherent to any new beginning, but also to an incomplete legislative framework.

On the other hand, it is also true that the intelligence services have not paid the duly attention to their relationship with the mass-media, and acted as they did for fear of not making mistakes and becoming exposed more than they should. At the same time, this aspect involved a certain lack of experience in this area, which the Romanian Foreign Intelligence Service will try to redress as soon as possible.

Twelve years have elapsed since the democratic system in Romania has developed its functioning mechanisms, including those relating to the activity of the secret services, namely the Foreign Intelligence Service.

The reform pursued within the Foreign Intelligence Service in the context of Romania’s readiness for NATO membership is in an advanced stage and continues to be applied according to the laws and rules of a democratic society.

Bruce Jackson, the Chairman of the US Committee on NATO stated recently on “Romania 1” Channel: “There are really no right answers. Nobody knows them. We cannot go back to the ” Book of Reforms” and find exactly the right answers. Basically, it is a competition of ideas that takes place over years. It is a process to last. Only our children, probably, when looking back, will be able to decide if reform was completely successful.”

Throughout this 12-year period, the Foreign Intelligence Service has been in permanent contact with the similar services of the Euro-Atlantic space and has benefited from a substantial transfer of experience, as well as of specialty assistance for its institutional reform. As a result of these contacts, at this moment a structure has been reached, which, in our opinion, comes very close, through its compatibility, to the model of the similar structures in the NATO member countries and in other democratic states.

Thus, under the National Security Strategy, the Foreign Intelligence Service has formulated its own strategy, setting out its goals, courses and methods of action for the future. This strategy has underlain the shaping of a new organizational chart which, we think, is in keeping with the Euro-Atlantic standards in this area. In order to ensure a better communication and the permanent improvement of the SIE relationship with the civil society, the new organizational chart provides for the establishment of a distinct structure for communication and relation with the media, which is currently under way to be set up and organized.

The main goal of the Foreign Intelligence Service in this area has been the creation of a balance between its activities and their presentation for public perception, the harmonization of the right of the citizen to be informed in conditions of transparency and the need to keep the secrecy of some categories of data that cannot be disclosed to the public or fall within the incidence of the Law of National Security.

The correct understanding of these specific characteristics will certainly lead to the creation, over the years, of a climate of mutual esteem and respect between the civil society and the mass-media on the one hand, and the people working in this specialized organization, on the other hand.

This is, undoubtedly, the result of the democratic developments within the Romanian society, and the enhancement of transparency and ensuring communication represent absolutely natural aspects for the Foreign Intelligence Service, aiming to ensure, at the same time, the faster alignment of the SIE to NATO and EU standards in this area.

On the other hand, the Foreign Intelligence Service has, in principle, perceived as justified the exigencies, and even the sort of pressure exercised, at a certain moment, by the civil society, the mass-media and some non-governmental organizations, both on the SIE itself and on the other intelligence services in order to guarantee transparency. We should not omit, however, the secret nature of SIE’s activity, and thereby a number of inevitable constraints that can be found, as a matter of fact, in an advanced democracy. That entails, as I have mentioned, the finding of an optimum relationship between what can be made public and what must be kept secret.

With respect to the concrete communication means of the Foreign Intelligence Service with the civil society and the mass media, we consider as quite adequate the efficient use of press releases, interviews with authorized persons belonging to the SIE, participation in discussion panels, debates, seminars, etc, along with the opportunities offered by SIE’s own site on the Internet. We shall also seek to disseminate the culture of security among the members of the academic environment, with priority being given to students’ circles, with a view to making them become aware of the role and importance of the intelligence services in the space of the Euro-Atlantic civilization.

We consider that, by such a dialogue, the Foreign Intelligence Service will meet the expectations and the concerns of the public opinion, relating to the knowledge of the role, present orientations and major goals of the Service.

By making an adequate presentation of the way in which the SIE supports the day-to-day activity of state institutions and upholds the interests of the citizen, we shall gain an adequate credibility concerning our specific activity.

At the same time, it is absolutely necessary for the representatives of the civil society and the mass media to understand correctly the restraints that the Foreign Intelligence Service is subject to, due to the specificity of the activity it carries on in areas such as, the fight against terrorism, organized crime and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, all of which having a huge impact on the security of the country.

It is obvious that, once these essential functions are understood and observed, transparency and communication will be better anchored to reality.

The formation and dissemination, according to the Western standards, of the civic security culture within the Romanian society, by which the public opinion acquires a real and correct representation of the importance of the activity of the intelligence services within a democracy is a fact which has pregnantly resulted from a public opinion poll titled “The Romanians’ opinion on the role and activity of the Intelligence Services”, conducted by IRSOP (specialized institute), from 16 to 20 March, and commissioned by Romanian Television for a televised debate on the topic of “The Role of the Intelligence Services in a Democratic Society and in the Process of Romania’s Accession to NATO”.

The comments made on this opinion poll highlight several interesting conclusions, which strengthen the idea that, during the 12 years that have passed since the Revolution, the “shadow” of the Securitate has diminished significantly, which accounts for the fact that most Romanians (55%) have a good opinion of the Secret Services, even if they consider these services as being “too secret”.

A significant majority of Romanians (60%) also appreciate that the Secret Services have turned into democratic institutions, on the model of the Western ones, with only 33% of the interviewees considering that “they have remained much as the former Securitate”. We should mention that 37% of the interviewees who have opted for the first variant are aged between 18-34 years.

The prevailing feeling among Romanian citizens is that the intelligence services are well trained for safeguarding national security (48% as against 42% who consider that they are not well prepared).

In terms of the transparency of the Intelligence Services, only 23% of the interviewees consider that the secret services provide sufficient information, whereas 70% think that the information destined to the public is too little.

This latter conclusion justifies even more the concern of the Foreign Intelligence Service to improve and diversify its communication with the public and the mass-media.

In this sense, the Foreign Intelligence Service, starts from the fact that the relationship with the mass-media has as a reference system the constitutional provisions concerning the right to the freedom of expression and the obligation of correctly informing the public opinion. The Foreign Intelligence Service considers that this communication must be based on a number of principles, also established as a practice of the counterpart services in advanced democracies, such as:

- the need to establish a well-defined balance between transparency and secrecy;

- the public and the mass-media must be considered partners in cooperating on the national level on the issue of security and, consequently, that entails that they should be informed with the relevant aspects in this area;

- the release of information should be based on transparency, political un-partisanship and objectivity;

- never deliver deliberately untrue information;

- managing communication on the basis of planned programmes, supported and led by the Superior Management of the Service;

- ensure an equal treatment of the whole mass-media.

There can’t be any dialogue on sources, the employees of the service, operations, specific means and methods, as well as any data regarding natural persons.

Besides these fundamental principles, we are paying particular attention to keeping the public informed on the new, complete functions of the Foreign Intelligence Service in the new Euro-Atlantic context and the imperatives of the international operational situation after 11 September 2001, as well as on the measures that the civil society, on the whole, has to focus on in order to contribute to preventing and managing the main risks and threats to national security.

We are also concerned with winning the consensus of the population for the reform process, with streamlining, harmonizing and reaching compatibility with the Euro-Atlantic structures by the Foreign Intelligence Service, and with the legislative drafts that are being initiated concerning SIE or other national security organizations, as well as with making best use of the public opinion currents in the process of drafting these regulations.

Last, but not least, we want to efficiently act for developing the channels of information and communication with wide circles of the Romanian society, with a view to building an adequate public support for the Foreign Intelligence Service that can be made best use of in managing possible crises.

I conclude by emphasizing that the several ideas that I have shared out with you cover, of course partially, an extremely delicate area whose sensitivity can be handled only through a loyal, dedicated partnership between our Service and the most outstanding representatives of the national interest, of the civil society and the philosophy of human rights.

Fully aware of making a debut in such a relationship, I want to assure you that we shall undertake all the moves in order to make best use of the expertise of the special partner services with the sincere wish of reaching the European and Euro-Atlantic standards in this over-sensitive area.

Înapoi