Politicizing spy agencies harmful to national security, say Obama critics

When US Attorney General Eric Holder announced that he was appointing an independent counsel to investigate possible incidents of abuse by CIA personnel during interrogations that went beyond guidelines imposed by the Bush administration, it had a chilling effect on both the intelligence and law enforcement communities.

It should be remembered that Holder was one of the Justice Department officials during the Clinton Administration who created an environment that prohibited law enforcement and intelligence officials from sharing information on terrorism or international organized crime. In fact, not only were FBI and CIA personnel restricted from sharing information, FBI agents involved in intelligence gathering and analysis were prohibited from sharing their information with FBI agents involved in law enforcement.

Traditionally, intelligence and law enforcement agencies have operated in separate spheres. Law enforcement agencies were concerned with criminal activity inside the United States, while intelligence agencies concentrated on the plans and capabilities of foreign governments.

One complaint often heard privately within law enforcement circles is that the Central Intelligence Agency over the years has morphed into a Liberal think tank rather than maintaining its role as a strategic and tactical intelligence agency.An even bigger concern is that the agency has become overly politicized and prone to leaking information to the mainstream news media in order to have an impact upon the political climate within the Beltway.

The politicization of the CIA has been accelerated by the appointment of former Clinton Administration minion now President Barack Obama's Director of Central Intelligence, Leon Panetta.

Upon being confirmed without so much as a peep by Republican lawmakers, one of Panetta's first actions was the termination of its controversial program of using secret detention centers. Panetta notified the Senate and House intelligence committees in an email that private contractors would no longer question "captured terrorists."

Critics say that Panetta's decision was in response to the concerns of US lawmakers, foreign governments, and the United Nations about the agency's use of contract interrogators. Panetta stated in his email that the CIA has "proposed a plan to decommission the remaining sites" where the Bush administration held dozens of captured terrorists after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. While no inmates are currently incarcerated there, contract security companies still provide protection services at the sites, according to Director Panetta.

Critics also say that Panetta's agenda is more concerned with political considerations and that he is avoiding the difficult -- some say impossible -- task of making the CIA a more effective agency.

The process by which intelligence requirements and priorities are established warrants a dramatic overhaul. Requirements for both collection and analysis should be heavily influenced by the needs of policymakers, an imperative that argues against suggestions to isolate the collection agencies further or increase their autonomy.

At the same time, some sort of market constraint, under which intelligence consumers can only receive so much free intelligence before their own agency has to find resources to support a greater intelligence effort, should be introduced.

Prioritization is a must. The highest priorities for US intelligence collection -- and, in most cases, analysis -- for the foreseeable future include the following: the status of nuclear weapons and materials in the former Soviet Union; developments in Iraq, Iran, and North Korea; potential terrorism against US targets in the continental United States and overseas; unconventional weapons proliferation; and political and military developments in China. Other targets could be added to this list temporarily if, for example, US forces were to be deployed in significant numbers.

There is also a need for economic intelligence, although many could not agree on how aggressively the United States should collect information on its major economic partners or on how much to emphasize analysis of economic issues.

There is agreement that economic intelligence should not be used offensively to help a US firm win a contract against foreign competition, but should be used defensively to alert policymakers when bribes or other unfair practices are being used against an American firm. Counterintelligence was deemed appropriate to help protect US firms from the espionage efforts of foreign firms and governments.

The need to insulate intelligence from political pressure is a powerful argument for maintaining a strong, centralized capability and not leaving intelligence bearing on national concern up to individual policymaking departments. Competitive analysis of controversial questions can also help guard against politicization, as can Congress and the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB).

Competitive or redundant analysis needs to be carried out and conveyed to policymakers in those areas where being wrong can have major consequences. The leaders of the intelligence community must reinforce the ethic that speaking the truth to those in power is required, and defend anyone who comes under criticism for so doing.

The best way to ensure high-quality analysis is to bring high quality analysts into the process. Analysis would be improved by increasing the flow of talented people into the intelligence community from outside the government. Greater provision should be made for lateral and mid-career entry of such analysts as well as for their short-term involvement in specific projects. Closer ties between universities and the intelligence community is not desirable in this regard. Careerists would benefit from greater opportunities to spend time in other departments and nongovernmental organizations, including those involved in commerce and finance.

The most important function for the clandestine services is the collection of human intelligence, that is, espionage. Such intelligence can complement other sources and, especially in closed societies, be the principal or sole source of information. In so doing, it will at times prove necessary to associate the United States with unsavory individuals, including some who have committed crimes. This is acceptable so long as the likely benefits for policy outweigh the moral and political costs of the association.

Sources: Federal Bureau of Investigation, Central Intelligence Agency, US Department of Justice, National Association of Chiefs of Police

Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he's a staff writer for the New Media Alliance (thenma.org). In addition, he's the former editor for the House Conservatives Fund's weblog. Kouri also serves as political advisor for Emmy and Golden Globe winning actor Michael Moriarty.
He's former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed "Crack City" by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations. He's also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He's a news writer for TheConservativeVoice.Com and PHXnews.com. He's also a columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and he's syndicated by AXcessNews.Com. He's appeared as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, Fox News, etc.

To subscribe to Kouri's newsletter write to COPmagazine@aol.com and write "Subscription" on the subject line.

The big problem with much of the discussion of "politicization" is defining the term. Recently, ex-intelligence heads asked Obama to rein in the "politicized" investigation of past agency actions. The problem with this is that if we are playing by the rules, the decision of whether to investigate alleged crimes is the purview of Justice department professionals, and asking an elected politician to direct those actions is politicization. Essentially, the ex-heads were the ones politicizing the issue. The rules should be that there is the law and DOD, DOJ, intelligence professionals follow the law, and DOJ professionals investigate and prosecute when the law isn't followed. That's the depoliticized theory.

It is not clear which things you think are "politicized", why and by what definitions. "Some people think that so and so is too politicized" doesn't tell us much. Much of what you propose sounds very sensible, but your criticisms of current and past actions don't seem at all clear.

Comments

Jim Burrows 2 years ago

The big problem with much of the discussion of "politicization" is defining the term. Recently, ex-intelligence heads asked Obama to rein in the "politicized" investigation of past agency actions. The problem with this is that if we are playing by the rules, the decision of whether to investigate alleged crimes is the purview of Justice department professionals, and asking an elected politician to direct those actions is politicization. Essentially, the ex-heads were the ones politicizing the issue. The rules should be that there is the law and DOD, DOJ, intelligence professionals follow the law, and DOJ professionals investigate and prosecute when the law isn't followed. That's the depoliticized theory.

It is not clear which things you think are "politicized", why and by what definitions. "Some people think that so and so is too politicized" doesn't tell us much. Much of what you propose sounds very sensible, but your criticisms of current and past actions don't seem at all clear.
- reply
- Report this content

Got something to say?

Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!