Inside the CIA's Dysfunctional Intelligence Culture             
By
<http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/authors.aspx?GUID=88fb73c8-df72-4b9c-9
7f7-3cfb6de25bb1> Jamie Glazov
FrontPageMagazine.com | Friday, August 01, 2008 
 
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=8D285E6E-3433-4E20-B6CF-
599CFD1F1E7B

Frontpage Interview's guest today is Ishmael Jones, a former member of the
Central Intelligence Agency. He joined the agency in the 1980s, where he
served as a deep cover officer focusing on human sources with access to
intelligence on terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. His assignments
included more than fifteen years of continuous overseas service in numerous
exotic countries and several rogue nations. He resigned from the CIA in good
standing. Ishmael Jones is a pseudonym, in accordance with laws that make it
a felony to reveal the true names of deep cover officers. He is the author
of the new book,
<http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/product-description/1594032238/ref=dp_prod
desc_0?ie=UTF8&n=283155&s=books> The Human Factor: Inside the CIA's
Dysfunctional Intelligence Culture. It is the first book written by a deep
cover CIA officer. 



FP: Ishmael Jones, welcome to Frontpage Interview. 

Jones: Thanks very much. I'm a long-time fan of Frontpage. 

FP: What inspired you to write this book? 

Jones: I realized the CIA's clandestine service was broken. False and
nonexistent human source intelligence exposes Americans and our allies to
great risk, and has been at the root of most of the foreign policy crises
faced by post-war American presidents: Korea, the Bay of Pigs, Vietnam, the
Cold War with the Soviet Union, Iran hostages, 9/11, Iraq, and so on.
Whether we have President Obama or President McCain, history suggests that
the major crises they face will feature a lack of good human source
intelligence. It's deadly serious. 

My mission has always been to defend America, and for many years I sought to
do this by producing intelligence as an active CIA officer. Today, using
this book as a tool, I seek to defend America by working to fix our broken
clandestine service. 

FP: What is unique about your book? 

Jones: Many CIA books are written by retired Headquarters managers who are
accustomed to pontificating in front of their underlings, trapped within a
windowless room at Headquarters, and their books can be a bit windy. I hope
mine is not. 

My book has also been disapproved in its entirety by CIA censors. I actively
sought the approval of the censors, and repeatedly asked them during the
course of a year what parts of the book they would like removed or
rewritten. But they simply replied: all of it. In the end, CIA censors
returned the manuscript to me as a stack of blank pages. There is no
classified information in my book. It is simply highly critical of the
organization. 

My book is also the first CIA book for which all author profits will be
given away. The recent George Tenet and Valerie Plame books, for example,
were written for the profit of the authors. 

FP: What was the CIA when you worked for it? 

Jones: The CIA bureaucracy is a living creature, and like any life form it
wants to feed itself and grow. There are many hard workers within the CIA,
but the bureaucracy itself is a couch potato - there actually are
televisions in many CIA offices - and it wants to avoid difficult tasks. 

Its demeanor masks a powerful will to survive. It will leap up and
ferociously defend itself if it feels threatened. 

The CIA thrives on ever-expanding funds from Congress and secrecy that
prevents accountability. It organizes itself by stacking employees in
offices, employees who don't get out on the streets much. The CIA is meant
to serve in foreign countries, and CIA targets such as terrorists and
nuclear proliferators are located in foreign countries. But most CIA
employees live and work within myriad offices in the United States, because
it's just a lot easier that way. 

FP: Paint a picture for us of the CIA's training methods. 

Jones: Our instructors were intelligent and well-meaning, but they'd had
little actual espionage experience. They'd spent their careers within
Headquarters in Langley and in embassies abroad, meeting Soviets at
diplomatic cocktail parties and playing a lot of tennis. In hindsight,
though teaching us little about espionage, they were doing a good job of
teaching us to exist within the bureaucracy. 

My training class sat in stuffy rooms with the shades pulled down, listening
to instructors drone on. Visiting speakers from Headquarters arrived late
and spoke without preparation, usually about themselves and their thoughts
and feelings. We role-played as US State Department diplomats working in
embassies. 

I visited a large CIA training facility in recent years, though, and the
training was much improved, with organized lectures and schedules, and
excellent instructors. 

FP: Tell us about your experience in the CIA and what your main struggle
entailed. 

Jones: I had some tremendous experiences in the CIA and a great family life.
The main struggle was to fight, outwit, and manipulate the bureaucracy in
order to get the job done. 

The CIA has bureaucrats within each embassy located in friendly or neutral
countries. CIA officers doing operations in these countries must obtain
approval from these people. For example, if a CIA officer stationed in
Germany wants to meet a rogue state nuclear scientist planning to travel to
Belgium, approvals are needed from CIA bureaucrats in Germany, Belgium, the
Headquarters desks for Germany, Belgium, and the rogue state, the
Headquarters desks for the nuclear issue, and a Headquarters desk
responsible for the officer's administration. Each bureaucrat can block the
operation, and there's little incentive for them to approve. Most of the
bureaucrats will have had little actual espionage experience upon which to
guide their decisions, and some will stonewall the request, making sure that
nothing can go wrong by simply not answering. If the rogue state scientist
should at the last minute change his plans and travel to France instead, the
need for fast approvals would make the operation impossible. James Bond
would be shut down in a matter of hours and forced into a cubicle. 

For many years I recruited and ran human sources in five separate weapons
systems, in five separate countries, each of which were important threats to
the lives of Americans. This was what I called "management". But that's not
how the CIA sees it. Management means how many CIA employees one sits upon
in the CIA bureaucracy. There's a lot of pressure on CIA officers in the
field to return to Headquarters to be managers. 

FP: What is supposed to be the purpose of the CIA? Why has the CIA failed in
this purpose? What are its main weaknesses and flaws? 

Jones: Gathering human source intelligence is the fundamental purpose of the
CIA's clandestine service. It involves locating people within hostile
governments or terrorist organizations, meeting them, developing a
relationship, and obtaining secret information, usually in exchange for
money. 

The CIA fails as a result of system design. More to the point, when the CIA
fails to deliver the intelligence the President needs, nothing happens. CIA
employees are sometimes punished if they make an effort to collect
intelligence and something goes wrong, and low level employees are sometimes
punished for losing a briefcase or having porno on their computer, but no
top CIA manager has ever been disciplined for failure to do his duty. The
CIA continues to perform poorly, and yet is rewarded with ever greater
amounts of money. 

Recruiting human sources is a low form of work within the Agency, and few
top managers have ever recruited a good human source. To have recruited
human sources in al Qaeda and in Iraqi WMD, a case officer would have had to
be in the field for years, away from Agency stations and HQs. He'd have
returned to a dead career, with no management experience and with none of
the connections at HQs necessary for personal advancement. A person who
wants to advance in the organization does so through lengthy service at HQs,
with occasional embassy assignments overseas. 

This leads to mission drift: to doing fun things, to doing things which lead
to promotion, such as creating layers of managers, handling liaison
operations, building boondoggles, Potemkin offices and elaborate cover
mechanisms, and elaborate covert action schemes. 

For example, if the CIA were to run a hospital, doctors would realize
there's nothing to be gained from treating patients - sick people are not
much fun to be around, after all, and bad things can happen: sick people
sometimes bring malpractice suits. In such a hospital, doctors seek to climb
the ranks of hospital management, avoiding patients, and creating new
management layers. Treating patients becomes lower-level work, looked down
upon, the work of a few oddballs who just insist on treating patients.
Fast-track doctors get into management as soon as possible, and spend
decades seeking to increase their federal funding and the size of their
bureaucratic turf, without ever seeing a patient. That's how a hospital
would run if it looked like the CIA. 

Periodically, CIA management blames the poor quality of the CIA work force
for its failures, but this is not true. The CIA has always hired good
people. These people want to do the best job they can, and if the system
were changed, they'd get out and gather the intelligence we need, and they'd
start doing it overnight. 

FP: How do you think it is best for the U.S. to fight the terror war? What
have we done right and wrong in Iraq? 

Jones: We have a strong military and despite years of war the military
maintains excellent standards of discipline and morale. Our military forces
are creative and innovative, and under dedicated and motivated leadership.
When the military has problems, it identifies the problems and fixes them.
We should strengthen the ability of the US military to control the war on
terror. 

The CIA people I met in Iraq were the best I encountered. But to improve
productivity in Iraq, the CIA should assign more espionage officers there
and send most of the support staff home. There are only a few experienced
officers who actually collect intelligence in Iraq. Most experienced
officers serve as supervisors, and most of the people they supervise are
support staff. Lots of chow hall, security, and computer people. CIA
officers should also be rewarded for service in Iraq. Most top CIA
bureaucrats have not served in Iraq, and this tells employees that service
in Iraq is not the path to the top. 

FP: Can you talk about your experience in serving with the CIA in Iraq? 

Jones: In Iraq, I met Iraqis and gathered intelligence, and I started doing
that the moment I arrived. Through good luck and the hard work of others, I
was assigned to a position which actually made me one of the world's top
producers of intelligence on terrorism. 

The hyper-violence in Iraq at the time made the CIA people there much less
risk-averse. In Europe CIA officers can be frightened of making a phone
call. In Iraq CIA employees were doing all sorts of daring and productive
things with minimum Headquarters resistance. 

FP: What positive and effective things has the CIA been doing to win the war
for us in Iraq and Afghanistan -- and also in finding bin Laden? 

Jones: I think we have the best of the CIA's people in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Despite some PR blunders, the terrorist interrogations have been one of the
most effective producers of intelligence, and there are some good CIA
intelligence networks in Iraq. 

FP: What do you know about how dangerous Iran is right now in terms of
nuclear weapons? What do you propose we do? 

Jones: Unfortunately I know this target, and I know that the CIA has no
human sources of any quality there. The President, the United States, and
our allies are walking blindly into danger in the Iranian nuclear weapons
issue without the intelligence they need. I know who these targets are, I
know where they are, and I know we're not doing anything about them. This
will become apparent in the future, as has happened with so many crises in
the past, when former CIA managers reveal in their memoirs that we never had
a single human intelligence source of value. 

FP: Your thoughts on Israel and the dangers it faces? What must Israel do?
What must the U.S. do to help Israel ? 

Jones: The best thing a supporter of Israel can do is contact his Senator
and Representative and encourage them to improve American intelligence
capabilities. 

Israel faces the risk of apocalyptic attack from nuclear weapons. It takes
1930's technology to build these weapons, and they are increasingly
available. Terrorist groups who obtain these weapons will use them. 

Israel's intelligence services don't have the worldwide scope and the money
of American intelligence services. The CIA's clandestine service should be
employed to protect free people and allies everywhere, and this includes
Israel. A functioning American intelligence service can target nuclear
proliferators and prevent nuclear attacks. The dysfunctional CIA we
currently have cannot do this. 

Supporters of Israel are reputed to be politically adept. Members of the
Senate and House intelligence committees are remarkably accessible, and if
they're not, they each have a person on their staffs who handles
intelligence issues. Just recently I called the offices of the intelligence
committee members to get the names of their intelligence staffers, so that I
could send them copies of my book. A supporter of Israel who calls or writes
one of these people and encourages them to clean up the CIA's clandestine
service may actually be taking action which will prevent the obliteration of
Israel. 

I want to see the dismantling of the CIA and its replacement by a
functioning intelligence system. But even small, incremental improvements in
the CIA will increase Israel's security. Accountability for money, an end to
nepotism, an end to favoritism and fraud in the assignment of contracts,
stopping the CIA's massive expansion within the United States and moving its
activities to foreign countries - things that the CIA has already been
commanded to do, and is not - would be important improvements. 

Michael Ross, a former Mossad spy, and author of The Volunteer, has said
that the Mossad recognizes the evil of bureaucracy and fights it
effectively. Also, he's mentioned the restrictions the Mossad has on
operating in its own country. 

FP: How can the CIA best be reformed? Or are there other alternatives? 

Jones: John McCain has a plan involving creating a small, nimble clandestine
service along the lines of the old OSS of World War II days. I think this
would be an effective solution. 

I hope Barack Obama, who promises real change, will also create a plan for
change at the American institution most in need of it. 

The CIA has proven virulently resistant to reform and I believe it should be
broken up and the parts assigned to organizations that already have clear
missions and defined chains of command. CIA offices and personnel operating
within the United States should be transferred to the FBI. The CIA was never
intended to be a domestic spy agency. The FBI is measured and held
accountable by its ability to catch criminals, and this accountability
provides the motivation for the FBI to perform. CIA embassy activities
overseas should be assigned to the US Department of State. The State
Department is designed to handle diplomacy. Much of what the CIA now does in
its embassies involves diplomacy, such as handling relationships with
liaison services. 

Overseas human intelligence collection programs should be given to the US
military. The fundamental motivation of the American military-to win wars
and to protect the lives of its soldiers-will give the motivation to ensure
that its case officers provide the necessary intelligence and do not become
distracted by soft targets or by designing programs meant to look busy and
spend money. The US military already has a large corps of trained case
officers, graduates of the CIA's own training course.

FP: Ishmael Jones, thank you for joining Frontpage Interview. 

Jones: Thank you very much. 

 
(F)AIR USE NOTICE: All original content and/or articles and graphics in this
message are copyrighted, unless specifically noted otherwise. All rights to
these copyrighted items are reserved. Articles and graphics have been placed
within for educational and discussion purposes only, in compliance with
"Fair Use" criteria established in Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976.
The principle of "Fair Use" was established as law by Section 107 of The
Copyright Act of 1976. "Fair Use" legally eliminates the need to obtain
permission or pay royalties for the use of previously copyrighted materials
if the purposes of display include "criticism, comment, news reporting,
teaching, scholarship, and research." Section 107 establishes four criteria
for determining whether the use of a work in any particular case qualifies
as a "fair use". A work used does not necessarily have to satisfy all four
criteria to qualify as an instance of "fair use". Rather, "fair use" is
determined by the overall extent to which the cited work does or does not
substantially satisfy the criteria in their totality. If you wish to use
copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you
must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to:
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml>
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml 

THIS DOCUMENT MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. COPYING AND DISSEMINATION IS
PROHIBITED WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT OWNERS.

 
 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


------------------------------------

--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: [email protected]
  Subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtmlYahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to