- The Washington Times - Sunday, April 3, 2005

The President’s Commission on (deep breath) Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) has issued its report, and true to predictions, it indicts the CIA and other intelligence agencies for giving the president and Congress “dead wrong” information accompanied with assurance the agencies had 90 percent confidence in its accuracy. Here, at last, is the accounting that has been wanting since our forces scoured the Iraqi countryside and found not a single WMD.

Specialists at missing the point, some members of the White House press corps demanded of the commission co-chairmen, former Sen. Chuck Robb and Judge Larry Silberman, whether the Bush administration was not really at fault for “pressuring” the intelligence agencies to produce estimates consonant with preferred policies. There were references to Vice President Dick Cheney’s famous ride to Langley to discuss the Iraq situation — a visit many antiwar types were convinced had strong-armed the agency to tailor its intelligence to the administration’s pattern.

This the chairmen stoutly deny. As the transmittal letter makes clear “the commission found no indication that the intelligence community distorted the evidence regarding Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. What the intelligence professionals told [the president] about Saddam Hussein’s programs was what they believed. They were simply wrong.”

Later, the report notes “the intelligence community did not make or change any analytic judgments in response to political pressure to reach a particular conclusion, but the pervasive conventional wisdom that Saddam retained WMD affected the analytic process.”

The question that should be foremost in the minds of reporters and everyone else is why the intelligence was so wrong. Simple-minded men like Sen. Ted Kennedy and Michael Moore avoid the problem by asserting President Bush lied. Real grown-ups must grapple with the fact our most important weapon in the war on terror — the intelligence agencies — are severely dysfunctional.

Admittedly, the intelligence business is difficult for outsiders to judge because, of necessity, their triumphs are mostly secret, while their failures make headlines. But even with that, the record of the CIA and its siblings has been terrible for 25 years.

The agencies completely misjudged the Soviet Union’s economic output, thus skewing analysis of what the Soviets spent on defense. They failed to anticipate the Khomeini revolution in Iran. They were caught by surprise when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. And they completely botched the Osama bin Laden project, virtually inviting the worst attack on American soil since the War of 1812.

The emasculation of the intelligence community began with the Church committee hearings in the 1970s — an orgy of military- and intelligence-bashing by liberal Republicans and Democrats embarrassed that the United States would stoop to defending itself. It continued through the next several decades.

Ronald Reagan was pro-intelligence, but the Iran-Contra scandal made the skittish agency even more risk-averse. Added to the risk of being hauled before a congressional committee was a new fear of indictment by a special prosecutor.

Things reached a nadir during the Bill Clinton’s presidency. As Gabriel Schoenfeld notes in the March issue of Commentary magazine, “When the Clinton administration came into power, combating sexual harassment and the ‘glass ceiling’ became part of a much broader campaign to reconstitute the agency work force.” Under Director George Tenet, who knew how to please any boss, the CIA initiated a thorough campaign to recruit more minorities and women and make the agency friendlier to Pacific Islanders and Hispanics. Such trivialities can lead to dangerous weakness in a world with Abu Al Zarqawis and Osama bin Ladens.

The new report, like the September 11 Commission report and others, recommends better integration of the intelligence agencies and better information-sharing. All to the good. But more important than any structural change would be a change of spirit — an injection of elan that can come only from a change in the political world that oversees intelligence.

The days of condemning the CIA for getting its hands dirty must be truly behind us. Nor should we permit affirmative action to take precedence over getting the best possible information to our leaders. It’s a matter of victory or defeat.

Mona Charen is a nationally syndicated columnist.

Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide