WIN#19-01
dated 14 May 01
WINs
contain intelligence-related articles and notes, produced,
written, edited by Roy Jonkers based on open source
information, and disseminated to AFIO members and
subscribers for non-profit educational purposes. Associate
editors Don Harvey and John Macartney contribute articles
to WINs. Opinions expressed are those of the producer
and/or contributors, as noted with each article.
WINs
are protected by copyright laws.
Warning Notice:
Perishability of Links: WINs, sent weekly to
members, often contain numerous webpage links to
fast-breaking news, documents or other items of interest;
unfortunately, after four weeks many of these websites
[especially newspaper and other media sites] remove items
or shift them into fee-only archives. This
underscores the benefit of receiving the WINs as they are
released.
SECTION
I -- CURRENT INTELLIGENCE
NATIONAL
SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE NUMBER FIVE DIRECTS
INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY REVIEW -- President
Bush has issued NSPD Number 5, directing the DCI to review
the ability of the Intelligence Community to fulfill its
mission in this era of drastic changes in technology and
in target priorities and requirements, and to make
appropriate recommendations for improvements. The effort
will consider consolidation of programs, reducing
bureaucratic rivalries, and policies that will streamline
systems acquisition. The DCI is to name two panels to
conduct the review, an Internal panel consisting of
intelligence officials, and an External panel of private
sector individuals. The DCI must consult with the
President's National Security Advisor, Condoleeza Rice, in
naming the External panel members. The DCI is to produce a
report by the end of the summer.
The Review and resulting Report could conceivably
assist the agencies by cutting through systemic resistance
to change. CIA has been reported to be struggling with the
challenge of absorbing and analyzing the flood of
"open source" information (raw data as well as
analyses and databases in a plethora of languages and
media) on a timely basis, and is also addressing the task
of re-orienting a good deal of its clandestine operations
to deal with "transnational" targets (e.g.
terrorist and criminal organizations, and international
narcotics trafficking) that have substantially risen in
priority since the end of the Cold War. NSA challenges
have also been well covered in the open source reporting.
It must accomplish its mission in an environment of
increasingly powerful encryption software available
worldwide, exploding volumes of digital voice and data
traffic, and fiber-optic transmission media that are
difficult to exploit. The NRO is facing a challenge in the
widespread availability of high-grade commercial satellite
imagery from a number of US and foreign sources.
Each
of the agencies, and the Military Services, are addressing
their own problems, but a community-approach is still seen
as unsatisfactory. Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, who
recognizes intelligence as a high priority, has observed
that the intelligence community "is not a community
-- it is a set of organizations." During his
confirmation hearings Rumsfeld said he wanted to focus on
"improving our intelligence capabilities so that we
know more about what people think, and how they behave,
and how their behavior can be altered, and what the
capabilities are in this world." We must await,
eagerly, the results of this NSPD Number 5 review and the
resulting recommendations for change. It might well be as
interesting as the previously-directed review of Pentagon
forces and missions that should be forthcoming within
weeks. (Jonkers)
(WashPost 12 May01, p. A3 ///V. Loeb)
SECTION
II -- CONTEXT AND PRECEDENT
PRESSURE
FOR FBI "CULTURE" CHANGE -- The
FBI is having to deal with criticism of its procedures and
modus operandi. Headlines revealing that documents
pertaining to the case against convicted Oklahoma City
bomber Timothy J. McVeigh were not made available to his
defense lawyers reflect adversely on the methodology and
efficiency of the FBI's criminal prosecution activities
(e.g. 46 of 56 field offices were delinquent in turning
over required material). In addition the FBI
Counterintelligence division suffered recently from the
discovery of a mole within its midst, opening up criticism
of personnel clearance & security procedures (no
lie-detector tests). And finally, FBI Director Louis Freeh
has announced his intent to depart from the Bureau in a
few weeks. A close associate of the director is quoted to
the effect that, from the start, Director Freeh, a former
FBI agent, federal prosecutor and federal judge, believed
he had a mission to make the bureau more efficient, more
professional, and more tech-savvy, and along the way, to
rebuild public confidence (which had suffered from the
Waco and Idaho disasters, infuriating many Americans --
such as Timothy McVeigh). But Freeh may have to depart
without succeeding in reaching his objectives after eight
years in office ( not too uncommon a phenomenon in
Washington). The FBI now finds itself the subject of
separate, high-level, independent investigations into its
handling of both national security secrets and major
criminal cases -- both core functions of the Bureau.
It is said that the FBI's problems go beyond
procedures and hardware. A former Justice Department
inspector general, Michael Bromwich, stated that, despite
the notion that the FBI is a "centralized
paramilitary organization, it is in fact a series of
fiefdoms." Within the FBI field offices and major
headquarters divisions act with such independence that key
information generated on big investigations never gets to
the key players. According to Bromwich, FBI personnel
admit and "know this is a weakness, yet no one can
explain why the culture doesn't change." Top Justice
Department officials ( frequently at odds with its
independent "subordinate" agency), allegedly
complain that although Freeh wanted to update (if not
reform) the FBI culture, he has perpetuated an FBI culture
of arrogance and self-righteousness. Senator Charles E.
Grassly (R-Iowa), a frequent critic of the FBI, is quoted
as saying that "Freeh tried to some extent, but he
was not able to change the cowboy culture inside the
FBI." The next director "is going to have to be
someone who understands that this culture has to
change."
Obviously the effectiveness as well as the
accountability of the FBI is a major concern of all
citizens, as is the entire system of Justice and
prosecutorial behavior. We may benefit from strong
independent reviews of both. We depend on these for a safe
and just society that inspires confidence and pride in
country. (Jonkers) (WashPost 13 May, 2001, p. 1) /// R.
Suro)
BAY
OF PIGS -- HAVANA CONFERENCE REPORT --- Dr.
Arthur Schlesinger Jr. recently recorded his impressions
on the Bay of Pigs Conference held in Havana, Cuba, in
March of this year. He opens by stating that, "in the
long annals of US foreign policy, no fiasco was more
complete, no miscarriage more total, than the Central
Intelligence Agency's attempted invasion of Cuba at the
Bay of Pigs in April 1961. Historians call it ''the
perfect failure.'' He continues:
After 40 years, the number of people involved in
the Bay of Pigs episode is rapidly dwindling. Among the
Cubans at the Havana Conference were Fidel Castro himself,
the maximum leader, and General Jose Ramon Fernandez, the
military commander, as well as veterans of the fight at
the beachhead. The American delegation included two of
President Kennedy's special assistants (Richard Goodwin
and this writer, both of whom had opposed the adventure),
and two former CIA officers. There were in addition five
veterans of Brigade 2506, the invading force. One of the
latter, reminiscing about the fighting, recalled the
moment when, hiding in the swamp, he saw Castro drive by
in an open car and, fearing discovery, held his fire. ''It
is lucky that you did not shoot me,'' Castro said with
high good humor. ''For then neither of us would have been
here today.''
"Castro was a faithful attendant who probably
talked more than all the other participants put together.
One detected a deterioration in self-control from his
performance in the 1992 ''critical oral history''
conference on the Cuban missile crisis. Then he was
relatively disciplined; his interventions were mostly apt,
relevant, and constructive. This time we had to endure an
incessant flow of rambling stream-of-consciousness. ''He
needs an editor,'' my wife whispered to me. There flashed
into my mind Emerson's aphorism: ''Every hero becomes a
bore at last.'' Some of us began to worry about his lack
of self-control. Was he losing his grip? But Fidel in
private remains far more reasonable and engaging than
Castro in public. Over the luncheon table his humor, which
is wry and genial, comes into play, and he actually
listens and replies to other people's points."
How did the Bay of Pigs invasion come about anyway?
On March 17, 1960, President Eisenhower directed the CIA
to organize ''an adequate paramilitary force'' of Cuban
exiles in order to overthrow Castro and his regime. In his
last meeting with Kennedy the day before his inauguration,
Eisenhower urged the president-elect to go full speed
ahead. Allen W. Dulles, the head of the CIA, detecting
limited enthusiasm on Kennedy's part, told the new
president not to worry. He assured Kennedy that the
invasion would set off uprisings behind the line and
defections from Castro's militia, and that if things went
badly, the invaders could easily join anti-Castro
guerrilla bands in the Escambray Mountains. As for a
possible cancellation of the operation, Dulles placed
particular emphasis on what he called ''the disposal
problem.'' What would happen, Dulles said, to the 1,200
Cubans whom the CIA had been training in Central America?
They would wander about the hemisphere, saying that the
great United States, after preparing an expedition against
Castro, had lost its nerve. Kennedy well understood that
Dulles was also warning him against the political fallout
within the United States should a former naval lieutenant
junior grade dare veto an operation conceived and blessed
by the supreme commander of the greatest amphibious
landing in history.
So, says Schlesinger, Kennedy was trapped. He also
perhaps felt that after his series of political triumphs
he was on a roll. And if brave Cuban exiles wanted to free
their land from a dictator, why not give them the means to
try their luck? ''If we have to get rid of those men,'' he
told me 10 days before the landing, ''it is much better to
dump them in Cuba than in the United States.'' His idea
was to transform the invasion from a major production into
a mass infiltration. He sought to lower the ''noise
level'' of the project in order to conceal the US hand and
reduce the invasion to something Cuban exiles might have
undertaken on their own. He looked with skepticism on the
CIA's target, the southern coast city of Trinidad. That
would indeed be a major production, and he asked his
advisers to find a more deserted area: Hence, the Bay of
Pigs.
Some US commentators have called the shift from
Trinidad to the Bay of Pigs, for which they correctly
blame Kennedy, a fatal error. Castro disagreed. ''We
analyzed possible landing sites,'' he said, ''and we
decided that Trinidad was a probable objective. We were
well prepared at Trinidad. We had soldiers there, and
heavy artillery. If they had landed at Trinidad, there
would have been a bloodbath. But we were not prepared for
a landing at Playa Giron [the Bay of Pigs]. That choice
was not at all bad in its conception. The strategic plan
was perfect, the arms were perfect, the use of
paratroopers was perfect. If they had been able to seize
the roads leading to the beach...'' Musing, he told us how
he would have run the invasion. Like Kennedy, he would
have favored a multitude of infiltrations over one big
production.
US critics have made much of Kennedy's cancellation
of a second air strike designed to knock out Castro's air
force. But, as Castro pointed out, the first air strike,
two days before the landings, had warned the Cubans that
the invasion was about to begin. He consequently dispersed
his tiny air force. ''The cancellation of the second air
strike,'' Castro aid, ''made no difference at all.''
Kennedy also repeatedly stipulated that he would
not countenance the use of US forces in case the invasion
faltered. Neither the CIA operatives nor the Cuban exiles
believed him. They assumed that if the invasion failed,
the new American president could not afford defeat and
would be forced to send in the Marines.
CIA
planning had assumed active guerrilla support in the
hills. Doubts later arose as to whether there was ever
much guerrilla activity, but Castro told us that there
were 3,000 guerrillas, though they were not a unified
force and some groups had been penetrated by Cuban
intelligence. CIA planning had also assumed the existence
of anti-Castro activists in Cuban towns and cities. Ramiro
Valdez Menendez, Castro's minister of internal security in
1961, told us that 20,000 suspects were arrested in the
days after the Bay of Pigs landing. These figures lend
plausibility to the CIA assumptions.
Disaster came, and Kennedy famously said, ''There's
an old saying that victory has a hundred fathers and
defeat an orphan.'' The Bay of Pigs was indeed a
perfect failure. But for Kennedy it was also an effective,
if expensive, education. He talked ruefully about the
advantage the professional military had in making their
case. ''If someone comes to tell me this or that about the
minimum wage bill,'' he observed to me, ''I have no
hesitation in overruling them. But you also assume that
the military and the intelligence people have some secret
skill not available to ordinary mortals.'' He never made
that assumption again.
(Jonkers)
((Excerpts from article by Arthur Schlesinger Jr., who is
a historian and a former special assistant to President
John F. Kennedy.. He participated in planning sessions for
the Bay of Pigs invasion) (Boston Globe, April 17, 2001,
Pg. 11 )
SECTION
III -- CYBER INTELLIGENCE
CYBER-SECURITY
REVIEW -- The
White House announced Wednesday that President Bush will
soon receive recommendations on how to coordinate the
multiple federal entities involved in the cyber security
arena.. Shortly after assuming office in January, the
President stated his intention to continue the efforts
started in May 1998 by Presidential Decision Directive 63,
which requires agencies to secure the systems that support
the nation's critical infrastructure, including
telecommunications
and power. Many officials inside and outside government
including in the General Accounting Office have criticized
the large number of overlapping agencies involved in
critical infrastructure protection. The list currently
includes the National Security Council, the Critical
Infrastructure Assurance Office, the National
Infrastructure Protection Center and the Federal Computer
Incident Response Center. (Levine 5/11)
http://www.fcw.com/fcw/articles/2001/0507/web-cip-05-11-01.asp
MOONLIGHT
MAZE UPDATE -- Many
cyber attacks are mainly nuisances. They can be costly,
but they do not threaten government secrets. MOONLIGHT
MAZE is said to be different. It was first uncovered in
March 1998 when network security specialists at the
Defense Information Systems Agency discovered that
attackers had entered unclassified Pentagon networks
through a technique known as "tunneling," in
which instructions are embedded within programs for
routine computer operations -- making them very difficult
to detect. The GAO last March described Moonlight Maze as
"a series of recurring "stealth-like"
attacks --- that federal officials have attributed to
foreign entities and are still investigating."
Michael Vatis, former top computer security official at
the FBI, said the attackers had purloined unclassified,
but still sensitive, information about defense technical
research."
According to a member of the NSA Advisory Board,
the investigation has produced "disturbingly few
clues" as to who is responsible. On the other hand,
the State Department last year issued a demarche to Russia
after investigators determined that the attacks appeared
to have originated from seven Russian internet addresses.
But Russian officials replied that the telephone numbers
of the sites cited were inactive and denied knowledge of
the attacks. The FBI and the US Space Command (which has
primary responsibility for offensive and defensive
cyberwar), declined comment, but a source stated that much
more is known about Moonlight Maze than has been made
public. Finally, there is this thought: a computer
security expert at Sandia Labs noted that there is nothing
so sophisticated about Moonlight Maze that federal
security officials cannot protect their networks, saying,
"if you want to stop them, you can stop them."
Moonlight Maze -- substance or fluff? Real threat or
budget posturing? From open source information difficult
to determine. (Jonkers) (Wpost7May01, p.A2 ///V. Loeb)
FBI
FILES ON CITIZENS -- When
Richard Smith got his FBI file, he learned a lot of
interesting things about himself. He found out that he had
died in 1976 and that he may have previously been married
to a woman named Mary. He also discovered that he may be
known as "Ricky Smith" or "Rickie
Smith" -- aliases he shares with a couple of convicts
doing hard time in Texas. En fin, Smith -- who is the
chief technology officer of the Privacy Foundation --
found that his FBI file contained more errors than correct
data.
http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,43743,00.html
ECHELON
INVESTIGATORS SNUBBED -- A
delegation from the European Parliament investigating the
existence and impact of a global satellite communications
intercept system (the so-called Echelon system) reportedly
operated by the United States (and other English-speaking
allies), abruptly ended a fact-finding visit to
Washington, D.C., Thursday, after Administration officials
refused to meet with the group. (Levine 5/11) http://www.msnbc.com/news/572192.asp
SECTION
IV -- BOOKS AND SOURCES
The
"STRATEGIC INVESTMENT PLAN FOR INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY
ANALYSIS," produced
by the National Intelligence Production Board (NIPB), was
published last week by the CIA. The new Strategic Plan
notes that the Intelligence Community investment in open
source information acquisition and analysis declined
radically in recent years, even as the utility of open
source intelligence was growing by leaps and bounds ( as
Robert Steele has tirelessly pointed out).. The report
states that "Today, open source material of relevance
to [intelligence] analysts working in a dispersed threat
environment is dauntingly voluminous, and the Intelligence
Community is not keeping up with it." But the tide
has now changed. The new Plan states that the development
of an Intelligence Community strategy for open source has
been made a top priority for investment and concerted
action over the next few years. It noted that the
Community " needs to exploit the Internet and other
open media more effectively and efficiently." Under
the new Plan it appears that intelligence agencies will
now endeavor to make up for lost time, beginning this year
with development of "a Community-wide strategy for
exploiting open source material." (Jonkers)
(The
Strategic Investment Plan for Intelligence Community
Analysis is available on the CIA web site (via the AFIO
Website <www.afio.com>)
or at: <http://www.fas.org/irp/cia/product/UnclasSIP.pdf>
// a 3 MB PDF file). (FAS 2May, 01)
SECTION
V -- ANNOUNCEMENTS & LETTERS
CIA
SENIOR PERSONNEL CHANGE --The
DCI announced on 14 May that John C. Gannon, Chairman of
the National Intelligence Council (NIC) for the past four
years, was leaving for the private sector. "A
tireless advocate for the role of intelligence and an
enthusiastic proponent for greater public policy debate,
John has been a powerful voice on behalf of the
Intelligence Community."
(
http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/press_release/pr05142001.html)
REUNION
ANNOUNCEMENT -- 7499th SUPPORT GROUP COMING OUT OF THE
CLOSET -- Calling
all former members of 7499th Spt Gp & Sqs:
7499th/7405th/7406th/7407th. Also 7580th Ops Sq &
6916th Security Sq. Fuerstenfeldbrueck/ Wiesbaden/Rhein-Main
1948-1990. ( C-47/B-17/C-54/RB-26/RB-50/RF-100/
RB-57/C-118/ L-20/C-97/ T-29/ C-130.) Reunion 11-15
October 2001, Washington, DC.
Contact Al Brown, 703-455-3828, email <aebrown@erols.com>,
or John Bessette (7405th 1965-1968), tel 703-569-1875,
email <jcbessette@aol.com>.
CARRY
ON THE AFIO MISSION:
sponsor a New Member!!!!
KEEP AFIO PROGRAMS GROWING:
sponsor a new Corporate Partner!!!!
For Membership sponsorship and other information,
see AFIO Website www.afio.com