The Ming Report

SOURCES AND METHODS

August 2, 2004 - The New Your Times, The Washington Post, The Chicago Tribune and other news outlets are all trumpeting a CIA triumph in the collection of documents, e-mails, and detailed plans for attacks against financial institutions in New York, New Jersey, and Washington. The newspapers credit Al Qaeda with a sophisticated and meticulous compilation of target intelligence and planning. The Times credits the capture in Pakistan of Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan on July 13th said to be the key figure in Al Qaeda’s Internet communications network. The Post says that seizure of two laptops in the arrest in Pakistan last week of Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani was the key that led to the alert and heightened security at the nation’s financial centers. The papers credit and unusual press briefing held Sunday afternoon by unnamed “high intelligence officials” as the source of their stories.

We don’t usually get information as to the content of intelligence information and how it was collected. Just a few days ago Sandy Berger was under fire for his sloppy handling of stale classified information from the National Archives in large part because of fears that the sources and methods of intelligence operations might be revealed. ? Never before has the public been made privy to this kind of detailed information about intelligence operation. Why this deviation from standard doctrine in the Intelligence community?

To find the answer you need to look at the context. First there is the report of the 911 commission highly critical of the intelligence establishment. Its sharp criticism and the determined pressure that the commissioners have kept up since their report was released has stung. Among the structural problems highlighted by the commission was the culture of secrecy concealing intelligence operations and results from the American people has come in for criticism.

Then there is the political season. The one issue area in which the President gets high marks in the polls is the fight on terrorism. CNN is reporting this morning that terrorism is the most important issue on the minds of undecided voters. A few weeks ago in the latest of Secretary Ridge’s announcements of vague security threats we were warned that Al Qaeda would likely strike before Election Day. Cynics saw that announcement in a political context. This new and unprecedented announcement of seems to confirm the earlier warning and a success in the intelligence war against Al Qaeda could not come at a more opportune time.

It is a win-win for the Bush re-election campaign, If Al Qaeda strikes the President will be able to say, “I told you so.” If the storm passes without lightening striking then he will be able to point to this CIA victory as the reason that the Al Qaeda plot was foiled. Of course if either the Times or Post stories are accurate Bin Laden could not have known to what extent Al Qaeda’s communication network had been compromised unless we told him Had we not trumpeted the information we had to the world we might have stood a better chance of rolling up Al Qaeda operational cells already active in the US. One has to ask whether a political imperative trumped the long held doctrine that you have to protect your sources and methods.