WASHINGTON - June 30 - The Progressive Government Institute (PGI), a non-partisan, educational organization dedicated to ensuring transparency and accountability in the Executive Branch of the Federal Government today released an analysis of the current state of American intelligence operations and urged the candidates for president to articulate who they would appoint as Director of the CIA.

"The safety and security of American's at home and abroad is one of the biggest concerns of the electorate this cycle," said PGI Executive Director Ted Carr. "The 9-11 Commission, the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison, and the continuing problems in Iraq make the Director of Central Intelligence one of the most important appointments that the President will make in the near future. We are calling on President Bush to nominate his next CIA Director before the November election. We are also calling on Senator John Kerry to supply the names of several individuals whom he would consider nominating to this important post if he wins in November. It is critical that this information be supplied to the voters before they head to the ballot box in November."

The analysis also notes that intelligence reform has become an area of increased concern for both Congress and the Administration, putting added pressure on an already troubled agency to reform under either temporary or new leadership. Among the reforms suggested are increasing the information sharing between various sub-agencies and reducing the level of secrecy that was the hallmark of American intelligence work during the Cold War.

To read the entire analysis, please visit our website at www.progressivegovernment.org. To view the PGI's recommendations for CIA Director visit the "PGI Exclusives" section of our homepage.

Reforming the Intelligence Community

By Danielle Curtis, PGI researcher June 28, 2004

The White House has abandoned its original plan to leave Deputy Director of Intelligence John McLaughlin in charge of the CIA when Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) George Tenet leaves office on July 11. A White House official stated that "there will be a new DCI this year" [1]. President Bush intends to appoint Tenet's successor prior to the November 2 election in order to commence intelligence reform and establish national security as a key issue in the election [1].

The need for reform

Intelligence reform has become a top priority in Congress and the White House. The upcoming 9-11 Commission and Senate Intelligence Committee reports are expected to be highly critical of intelligence failures regarding both the 9-11 attacks and weapons of mass destruction in Iraq [2]. National security will be a pressing issue in the upcoming election, and President Bush is actively searching for a new CIA head so that intelligence reforms may commence prior to the election, according to several sources.

Currently, the intelligence community is made up of fifteen independent agencies that employ approximately 100,000 people and spend $40 billion a year [5]. According to former CIA agent Robert David Steele, the intelligence community is "a collection of fiefdoms without interoperable data that don't play nicely together" [5].

And it is the "playing nicely together" that has become a focal point of intelligence reform - especially since the agencies' failure to communicate, cooperate, or focus on a common goal has been widely reported. Paul Magnusson of Business Week points out that while reform is essential, the middle of a war on terrorism is the wrong time to tear down and rebuild the intelligence community, as the 9-11 Commission and Senate reports will most likely advocate [5].

Throwing money, creating domestic intel agency is not the way to go The formation of an intelligence division focused solely on domestic intelligence has been bandied about and would relieve the FBI of one of its duties and allow it to focus on law enforcement. FBI Director Robert Mueller supports the idea of a separate and "semi-autonomous intelligence division within its own walls" [6]. Domestic intelligence is as important as national intelligence because accurate information could help prevent terrorist attacks like 9-11.

The FBI is overburdened and the functions of law enforcement and domestic intelligence need to be separated [6]. The creation of a domestic spy agency would be expensive and time consuming, but a new intelligence division within the FBI could accomplish these goals while consuming fewer resources. Paul Magnusson of Business Week concludes that in order to improve domestic intelligence, "the FBI's mission needs to be redefined to give the counterintelligence branch equal weight with the crimefighters" [5].

However, creating a National Director of Intelligence and a domestic spying agency are unnecessary measures that will consume resources without repairing the outdated intelligence systems.

Another debated strategy for reforming the relationships between the intelligence agencies would be to increase the budgetary power of the Director of Central Intelligence in order to provide that office with more control over all fifteen agencies [5]. With this budgetary control, the DCI would be able to unite the missions and goals of the various spy agencies, including the CIA, the NSA, and the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO).

Changing mentality and gathering procedures key to reform

Experts agree that the best way to reform intelligence is to eliminate the Cold War mentality of extreme secrecy that prevents the agencies from sharing relevant data [5]. This could be accomplished by requiring top officials from each agency to meet regularly in order to understand their common goals, a technique that was originally used to break down rivalries between the agencies [5]. Elizabeth Rindskopf Parker, former general counsel at both the CIA and the National Security Administration, asserts that "intelligence, law enforcement, and the military need to understand one another and be properly schooled, but this doesn't require collapsing them all into one unit" [5].

In light of the ongoing war on stateless terrorists, the most important reform that the intelligence community should make is to change the way they gather and analyze information about stateless terrorists [5]. The CIA and other agencies fail to adequately monitor "open source" information that is available on the Internet, the Al Jazeera television network, and the Arabic press. The CIA needs more translators and analysts to gather information from these sources and analyze the actions and intentions of terrorists [5]. Effective partnerships with the other spy agencies within the intelligence community would expand the intelligence resources and increase their ability to monitor and analyze open source information.

Porter Goss: natural successor to Tenet?

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Porter Goss, R-Fla, has been championed by some administration officials as a natural successor to Tenet, because he is popular in the Senate and also worked as a case officer with the CIA for nine years [2]. Goss has been campaigning for the position by combating accusations that he believes intelligence problems can be fixed with only money and personnel.

In an attempt to show that he is serious about intelligence reform, Goss angered top CIA officials by releasing the House report on intelligence failures, which presents a scathing critique of the CIA. According to the report, the CIA has been "ignoring its core mission activities" and is on its way to becoming "a stilted bureaucracy incapable of even the slightest bit of success" [3]. However, House Democrats are reluctant to place all the blame on the CIA, saying that they have become frustrated with the Intelligence Committee's lack of aggressive action under Goss' leadership [3]. Tenet has also criticized the House report, calling it "absurd" and "ill-informed" [3].

Goss denied reports of his potential appointment, classifying them as rumors and stating, "I am not campaigning for the job. I have not sought the job. I have not asked for the job" [3]. However, Goss drew suspicion in the House last week when he interrupted a debate on a new intelligence reform bill by holding up a sign with a 1977 quote from Senator John Kerry that argued for intelligence budget cuts [3]. Many in Congress suspect that the retiring Congressman badly wants the position at the CIA, and is attempting to curry favor with the White House by attacking Kerry [3].

Goss has backed mild intelligence reform in Congress, including a bill that would increase the budgetary power of the DCI [3]. While President Bush may hope that appointing a new DCI prior to the election will allow him to say that reforms are being made, Democrats worry that Goss' appointment would politicize the directorship of the CIA [2].

West Virginia Senator Jay Rockefeller, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence committee, has been an outspoken opponent of appointing a politician to the CIA post. He stated that it would be a mistake to appoint a politician from either party to the post because "the debacle related to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction has damaged the credibility of the intelligence community and the image of the United States around the world" [4]. Therefore, "we need a director that is not only knowledgeable and capable but unquestionably independent" [4].

Additional DCI contenders

Appointing a politician with close ties to the CIA, such as Porter Goss, to the position of Director of Central Intelligence would not be conducive to achieving these reforms. The intelligence agencies have historically been reluctant to change, or to break down rivalries between the different branches. An independent director who has not worked for the CIA but has experience working with large corporations would provide a fresh view of intelligence problems and possible reforms [7]. The intelligence agencies are similar to a large corporation, in that both are composed of independent branches with a common focus and goal. The key to intelligence reform is to change the way the agencies gather information as well as the way they share and analyze it [7].

While the White House has not named the two people, besides Goss, that it is considering for the DCI position, outside speculation has pointed to Deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage and former Senator Sam Nunn, a Georgia Democrat [4]. After his retirement from Congress in 1996, Nunn co- founded the Nuclear Threat Initiative to "prevent the use and spread of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons" [8]. Nunn believes that intelligence reform is essential to preserving national security. His ideas for reform include building partnerships "across agency lines in our own government and across international lines with other governments and down through the federal government to state and locals" [8].

Nunn also advocates technological reforms that will facilitate information sharing between agencies while maintaining security; a reform that he says must take place as the growing amounts of stored data are exchanged between agencies. He believes that the top priority for reform within the government as a whole should be "maximizing the information sharing and minimizing the security risks of doing this" [8]. This mission is essential to intelligence reform, and the new Director of Central Intelligence must make it his primary goal.

Conclusion

In order to take a strong stand on intelligence reform, the administration must appoint a DCI who is committed to addressing the roots of the intelligence failures that led to 9-11 and the war in Iraq. Rather than merely increasing the budget and hiring more personnel, the new DCI must make changes that remedy the problems with the fundamental structures and mindset of the intelligence community. Under strong leadership, less dramatic changes like modernizing information gathering and analysis techniques and improving inter- agency communication, will begin the process of reforming the intelligence community.

References

1. Newsweek: "9-11 Commission Staff Has Concluded Attacks Were Preventable, Lapses By CIA Primarily Responsible, Say Sources." June 27, 2004. http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040627/nysu008a_1.html

2. Allen, Mike and Walter Pincus. The Washington Post: "Bush considers Goss for CIA Director." June 25, 2004. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3960-2004Jun24.html

3. Hirsh, Michael, Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball. Newsweek: "Secret Agent Man." June 26, 2004. http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5305528/site/newsweek/

4. Fox News: "Dem Discourages Bush from Top CIA Pick." June 27, 2004. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,123849,00.html

5. Magnusson, Paul. MSNBC: "Commentary: The Smart Way to Fix Intelligence." June 22, 2004. http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5262357/

6. New Dem Daily: "Idea of the Week: Intelligence Reform." June 4, 2004. http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=131&subid=207&contentid=252685

7. McCutcheon, Chuck. Newhouse News: "Should CIA Look to the Business World for Leadership?" June 16, 2004. http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/mccutcheon061604.html

8. Sarkar, Dibya. FCW.com: "Eight questions for Sam Nunn." June 28, 2004. http://www.fcw.com/fcw/articles/2004/0621/feat-nunn-06-21-04.asp

###