![]() |
Tuesday, January 25, 2005
Defense bucking advice
One of the most sound predictions coming on the heels of the 9/11 commission's report was that the panel's recommendations on shifting the bulk of the responsibility (and budget authority) to a national intelligence director and away from the Pentagon would trigger a massive turf battle.
The battle appears well joined. Evidence comes from revelations that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld expanded the military's spying role by for the first time creating battlefield intelligence units to work with Special Operations forces on counter-terrorism issues.
Once combat operations are under way in a war, battlefield commanders must, of course, be able to direct their own intelligence forces near and beyond enemy lines. But news that military intelligence teams have been operating in Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries raises a legitimate policy question: What "other countries"?
There is an obvious distinction between the nature, limits and legalities of gathering intelligence on the soil of foreign nations with which we are at war and those with which we are not. The sort of covert intelligence gathering, processing and analysis to be conducted by the Central Intelligence Agency is a preventive operation. If such prevention fails and war is necessary, military success will then require control over battlefield intelligence gathering.
The 9/11 commission concluded the intelligence shortcomings before 9/11 could be mitigated by concentrating power and authority in a stronger civilian authority. Defense Department skirmishes over intelligence turf will not serve to make the country more secure.

more

101 Elliott Ave. W.
Seattle, WA 98119
(206) 448-8000
Home Delivery: (206) 464-2121 or (800) 542-0820
seattlepi.com serves about 1.7 million unique visitors
and 30 million page views each month.
Send comments to newmedia@seattlepi.com
Send investigative tips to iteam@seattlepi.com
©1996-2008 Seattle Post-Intelligencer
Terms of Use/Privacy Policy
