Language
Country/Area
No result found
Concealment and secrecy: Do you know the real difference?
In modern society, the concepts of concealment and secrecy are often confused, but in fact there is a fundamental difference between them. Covert usually refers to concealing the identity of those behind an action, while clandestine conceals the content of the entire action. Whether in the context of international espionage, the operations of underground organizations, or the actions of terrorists, these distinctions are crucial.
The word covert comes from Latin and means an action that can be denied, while secret means an action that is hidden.
Historically, different organizations and movements have used different tactics to conceal their actions. For example, the French Resistance during World War II used various underground cells to carry out attacks on Germany. In this situation, the members of the resistance know only a small part of each other's hot and dark history.
The primary goal of covert operations is to make it impossible for the enemy to determine the source of support for an operation. Covert operations, on the other hand, focus on keeping specific plans and goals from members. For example, a spy may know the mission he needs to perform, but have no idea about the motivation behind the mission.
In many cases, organizations use cellular systems to conduct covert operations. This means that each cell is made up of only a handful of people, and those members barely even interact with each other, which reduces damage to the entire organization if one member is captured.
If a member is detained, all he knows is his mission within the cell, not the structure of the organization as a whole or the identities of other members.
For example, the modern version of the Irish Republican Army adopted a hierarchical structure, but as British security forces became increasingly repressive, the organization moved to a semi-self-operated model. This model allowed the British rebels to understand the command structure but not fully uncover the workings.
What is even more groundbreaking is that in the hidden and secretive efficiency, external support has also become the key to the success or failure of some organizational actions. For example, the Vietcong National Front (NLF) received support from North Vietnam that allowed it to gain a foothold in the civil war. Such support is often not overt but operates as circumstances warrant.
Sometimes a secret source of support gives life to an action, but that support is more fragile than the risk of exposure.
In the current context of terrorist activity, as the structure of Al Qaeda shows, these so-called cellular structures operate in an interdependent manner. However, trust and personal relationships between cells become particularly critical. Such an organizational model has greatly enhanced their ability to resist external surveillance.
Different from traditional operating models, today's technology and communication methods also play a vital role in these operations. Through electronic communication, cells can stay connected with convenience and security unmatched by the dead mailboxes of the past.
Finally, while cellular forms of organization still have huge advantages in ensuring the secrecy and security of operations, there is also a lot of room for reflection. Are the effects of concealment and secrecy sufficient to allow these organizations to sustain their goals? Perhaps future modes of action will blur the lines between the two, but it also makes us think: What are the real secrets in a complex world?
