|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
CIA Nominee Calls for Improved Human Intelligence, Analytic Capabilities By Mike Nartker WASHINGTON — U.S. Representative Porter Goss (R-Fla.), the White House nominee to lead the CIA, yesterday stressed the need to improve the agency’s human intelligence and analytic capabilities, saying it could take more than five years to do so (see GSN, Sept. 14). During a confirmation hearing held by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Goss said that by improving such capabilities, the CIA could prevent mistakes in the future such as those that led to the agency’s flawed assessment of prewar Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction. This summer, the Senate intelligence panel released a report saying that most of assessments contained in the CIA’s 2002 National Intelligence Estimate about Iraq’s alleged WMD efforts either “overstated, or were not supported by” the available information. “The two major things we learned is we didn’t have enough collection. Obviously, we all know we didn’t have that close-in access for plans and intentions, therefore we didn’t have enough for the analysts to work with. And what they did work with they did not work with in a creative enough way,” Goss said yesterday. When asked about the status of the CIA’s human intelligence capabilities, Goss gave the agency a score of three out of 10. While saying that some progress could be made on improving such capabilities within five years, he warned lawmakers that the “great bulk” of work needed would take even longer. “In terms of global eyes-and-ears coverage on the core mission, which is close-in access to the plans and intention of the enemy, the mischief-makers, and other things we need to know in this country for our national security, it’s a long build-out, a long haul,” he said. Goss also said there was a need to foster a less risk-adverse culture among intelligence analysts. “I certainly believe in the analytical side there is more hesitation about being bold and being innovative because a lot of people feel that they don’t want to take the risk of being wrong, of getting outside the box, of doing the daring, as it were, because they're worried the sky will fall on them,” he said. “A lot of people don’t understand that the nature of intelligence business is if you are going out for win-win situations, you don’t want to be in the intelligence business. That’s what it’s not about. You’ve got to take the risk,” Goss added. Goss said that if he were confirmed, he would give intelligence analysts “the chance to make mistakes out there.” “Frankly, if I am confirmed as DCI [director of central intelligence], I’ll probably be up here explaining to you, hopefully in closed session, about why something went wrong. But sometimes the things that only have a 50 percent chance of success are worth doing,” he added. Goss’s confirmation hearing was held yesterday as lawmakers work to implement the intelligence reform recommendations put forth this summer by the Sept. 11 commission — including the White House-backed proposal to create a national intelligence director to oversee the U.S. intelligence community. Democratic lawmakers yesterday questioned Goss’s commitment to reform, noting that he had not introduced legislation on the issue until the last few months. Goss, though, rejected such criticism. “I don’t think there’s any question about my commitment to reform. I’m totally committed. I wouldn’t be sitting here if I didn’t think we were going to have reform of the intelligence community and the opportunity,” he said. Goss, the former chairman of the House intelligence committee, sought to explain his lack of legislative history on intelligence reform, in part, because of a previous lack of “attention” on the issue. His explanation, though, resulted in a sharp rebuke from Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.). “Let me tell you, sir, I just think that’s a hit-your-forehead-kind of answer. You’re the chairman of the committee. Of course you can get attention if you lay out a bold, aggressive kind of proposal. And that’s what you get gavels for,” Wyden said. Goss, completing his eighth congressional term, is not seeking re-election to his House seat. He also faced questions over possible concerns that he would be too partisan if approved as CIA director. Among those raising such concerns was Senator Jay Rockefeller (W.Va.), the top Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee, who has long expressed concern that Goss was too political of a choice on the part of the White House. “You have made a number of statements relative to intelligence matters, many in the past year, that are highly, in my judgment, partisan and display a willingness on your part to use intelligence issues as a political broadsword against members of the Democratic Party,” Rockefeller told Goss yesterday. As an example, Rockefeller cited an op-ed piece on intelligence written in March critical of Democratic presidential nominee Senator John Kerry (Mass.) For his part Goss, who received praise and support throughout yesterday’s hearing from both Democratic and Republican lawmakers, pledged to be objective and nonpartisan. “You have my word on that,” he said. Goss also said that, if confirmed, he believed he could continue to serve as CIA director were Kerry to win the November presidential election. “That would be up to President-elect Kerry’s decision. But of course. I believe I can serve, do the job as the DCI that I have been nominated for, for any administration. The job is a capabilities job,” Goss said. While some Democratic senators have expressed concern over the White House’s choice of Goss as director of central intelligence, there has been no sign of outright opposition. According to reports today, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) has indicated support for holding a vote on Goss’s confirmation next week.
| ||||||||||
Back to top
