Mon, Sep 17, 2001 page6

• US Congress mulls a darker CIA

  TOUGHENING UP In the wake of the largest intelligence failure since Pearl Harbor, talk of reintroducing unsavory informats and targeted assassinations is ever increasing

  • NY TIMES NEWS SERVICE
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  The Congressional leaders who oversee the US' intelligence system have concluded that America's spy agencies should be allowed to combat terrorism with more aggressive tactics, including the hiring of unsavory foreign agents.

  The attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon have also revived discussion of reversing a 25-year ban on using covert agents to assassinate foreigners. A consensus has not been reached on that point.

  

  Smoke rises from the destroyed World Trade Center from an attack many have called the US' biggest intelligence lapse since the 1941 surprise attack on Pearl Harbor.

  PHOTO: AFP

  But after the attacks, the chairman and vice chairman of the Senate intelligence committee, the chairman of the House intelligence committee and two former directors of central intelligence said the attacks justified easing some restrictions on the behavior of spy agencies.Some of those leaders also said the terrorist assault represented a colossal failure of US intelligence.

  "We have got to be a hell of a lot more aggressive," said Senator Richard C. Shelby, Republican of Alabama and vice chairman of the Senate intelligence committee.

  R. James Woolsey, former director of central intelligence, said that "Washington has absolutely undergone a sea change in thinking this week."

  ATTITUDE SHIFT

  Those comments reflect a turning point in the attitude of political leaders toward the need for sharp limits on the extent and nature of covert operations and perhaps for allowing American agents to carry out the kinds of actions that have long been prohibited as too ruthless or morally questionable.

  They also reflect a strong public sentiment for a powerful, and prolonged, American assault on the terrorist organizations responsible for the deaths of thousands of people in New York and Washington, and others like them.

  For the moment, the CIA is not pressing Congress or the White House to change its rules. Administration officials said they understood that for many Americans the ban on assassinations was a significant symbol of the nation's role as a standard-bearer of ethical conduct. Under current law, President Bush would have to authorize personally any such change in the existing executive order governing intelligence operations.

  DIRTY TRICKS

  But the public discussion among influential members of Congress about freeing the CIA from restrictions on the recruitment of criminals and known abusers of human rights as informants and about outlaw assassinations stems from a growing debate over the causes of what many are now calling the biggest US intelligence lapse since Pearl Harbor in 1941.

  In the 25 years since Congressional hearings disclosed the agency's role in assassinations and dirty tricks overseas, the government has imposed tighter rules and Congressional oversight of the conduct of America's spies. CIA officers, for example, are not permitted to foster a plot that has the explicit goal of killing a terrorist leader.

  But Congressional leaders said the CIA should be put on a war footing and given the freedom not only to penetrate but also to destroy tightly knit terrorist organizations.

  "Not everybody is playing by Marquess of Queensberry rules," said Representative J. Porter Goss, a Florida Republican who is chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence when asked if he would support an end to the ban on assassinations of foreign leaders, first imposed by President Gerald R. Ford in 1976.

  Senator Bob Graham, a Florida Democrat who is chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, is now willing to end limits on the CIA's recruitment of agents -- spies -- who have committed human rights violations, his spokesman said on Friday.

  But one influential lawmaker warned that proposals to unleash intelligence agencies should be carefully considered.

  Representative Tom DeLay of Texas, the majority whip, said that while the CIA should beef up its human intelligence gathering ability, officials should not move rashly to lift the ban on assassinations.

  The US is naturally "a little panicky," he said. "I think we need to be very clearheaded, very deliberative, about where we're headed."

  Although it is unclear whether the guidelines have ever really undercut the CIA's operations against terrorist organizations, the agency's officers have complained in the past that the rules were symbolic of a broader caution that took hold at the agency in the 1990's, when managers rejected high-risk operations for fear they would fail or lead to political scandal.

  HEATED PASSIONS

  It remains to be seen whether Congressional leaders will continue to recommend that the CIA be liberated from such restrictions once the heated passions in the aftermath of Tuesday's attacks begin to cool.

  Last year, an independent commission on terrorism recommended that the CIA lift its guidelines on the use of agents who had committed human rights violations. The proposals were ultimately not embraced by the government, and CIA officials argued at the time that it was not necessary to lift these restrictions because they had not hampered operations.

  But the new willingness among lawmakers to allow the CIA greater latitude underscores the depth of feeling in Washington about the need to address the intelligence failings exposed on Tuesday.

  One former CIA officer argued that the agency was not organized to fight an all-out war on terrorism and that other organizations might ultimately be needed.

  "The CIA wants to penetrate these groups, to find out about the next attack," the former officer said. "But you can never stop all the attacks because you can never hear about all of them. You can't just spy on these groups. You have to destroy them. And that's not what the CIA has been set up to do."

  QUICK FIX?

  The question of whether to change operating orders of the CIA, which operates outside the US, is up to President Bush. The restriction on assassinations is part of a presidential executive order that could be revoked or rewritten. The rules about recruiting spies are part of the agency's internal procedures and could be revised by the director of central intelligence.

  For now, the CIA is not pressing Congress or the White House to support any change in its rules.

  Beyond any quick fixes, the Congressional intelligence committees are considering more fundamental reforms, and have promised to study closely why the CIA and other agencies were caught by surprise by the attacks.

  Intelligence officials defended the performance of the CIA They emphasized that while the agency had failed to provide a precise warning of the attack, it had issued repeated warnings -- one as recently as August -- that the terrorism suspect Osama bin Laden and his network were seeking to attack the domestic US.

  "We have stated on a regular basis that bin Laden had declared that all US citizens were legitimate targets," noted one US intelligence official. "Could we, should we, have given a tactical warning? Obviously we would have loved to."

  Critics say the government fails to quickly process and analyze information that might help unravel terrorist plots. Often, crucial intelligence is found to have been sitting in the files, but is recognized as significant only in hindsight, after a terrorist incident.

  EARLY WARNINGS

  For instance, US officials noted that the CIA had gathered evidence in August that Khalid al-Midhar, identified on Friday by the Federal Bureau of Investigation as one of the hijackers aboard the plane that smashed into the Pentagon, had met with suspect associates of bin Laden in Malaysia in January of last year. Subsequently the CIA determined that some people at that meeting may have been involved in the plot to attack the USS Cole in October 2000.

  The CIA also determined that Nawaq Alhamzi, another hijacking suspect aboard the same plane, had previously traveled to the US with al-Midhar.

  In late August, the CIA notified the Immigration and Naturalization Service that both men should be placed on the watch list intended to prevent their entry into the US. The INS responded that both men had already gotten into the country, using their real names.

  The FBI was notified, and began looking for them. But too late.
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Napoli’s title hopes shaken by late Genoa equalizer

  • 2

    Privately owned city in Kenya taking on corrupt officials

  • 3

    MOE to encourage foreigners to work in Taiwan

  • 4

    Kane tastes first title as Bayern bid farewell to Mueller

  • 5

    Former president Tsai departs for Lithuania