CIA headed in the wrong general direction - by Roy A. Harrell Jr.
CIA headed in the wrong general direction
Agency should not be paramilitary force
Photo by JEAN-MARC BOUJU, AP2004
Former CIA Director David Petraeus, who resigned this month following an extramarital affair, may not even be missed in Langley, assuming that no classified information has been disseminated to America's enemies. Associated Press file
More than 50 years ago, my resignation from the Central Intelligence Agency was effectuated. The Company, as it had always been known, had become a bit too militarized and was not what some of its founders such as Allan Dulles envisioned.
Intelligence was collected but rarely analyzed coherently so as to contribute to enlightened policies. Much of what was collected by the Company lay unused, some of us feeling it is too expensive to collect this data, not to mention the risk involved.
Moreover the trend was in the direction of militarization, a task that could be more expertly done by the Department of Defense.
I chose, as an interim measure, to throw my hat toward a smaller but more focused intelligence-gathering group at the Department of State. These are decisions I never regretted and throughout my subsequent career I maintained a discrete but respectful distance from Company personnel.
There had been other military personnel at the CIA helm, including Gen. Bedell Smith, but without the lurid detail emerging from the FBI investigation that led to the fall of Director David Petraeus. There will be attempts to attach significance to the delay in informing President Barack Obama of the chief spy's plight up the Potomac River and elsewhere, but those behind such efforts probably will be disappointed.
Lots of conspiracy theorists in today's media try to establish a connection between the resignation of one of our most famous soldiers on Nov. 9 over an extramarital affair with his biographer, Paula Broadwell, and various congressional investigations into the deaths in Benghazi in September of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.
But while the CIA probably overrelied on the security supposed provided by Libyan militias, there seemingly is no evidence that rescue attempts were deliberately delayed by those in charge at CIA in Langley, Va., or the White House.
The shock and dismay caused by the departure of Petraeus might have been an unwelcome distraction from an election campaign that was going just as the president wished, but let us not forget that Petraeus was a real hero to the GOP. In some media accounts, he had even been seen as a possible vice presidential pick before his appointment as CIA director more than 18 months ago.
Today there is probably a lot of interest in what sort of legacy an extraordinary career has left. The stature of the general as the epitome of the modern soldier-statesman-scholar was rooted in both real achievement and to me represents a myth of his own making and possibly the creation of lots of others.
Back home after two tours in Iraq, he used the time well to digest a lot of lessons he had learned to rewrite the army's field manual on counterinsurgency. He had the notion that the operational priority should be providing security for ordinary people in Iraq, thence creating the conditions for a government under attack by an insurgency to earn legitimacy through the mere provision of goods and services hither and yon.
By late 2006, when faced with what looked like a descent into a bloody civil war in Iraq, many were ready to throw in the towel. However, former President George W. Bush, desperate to find a less disgusting denouement to this war, saw Petraeus, supported by a troop "surge," as some kind of lifeline for his reputation.
There are admittedly lots of fuzzy areas, notably how much of the success was due to Petraeus and how much to the rejection by Sunni tribal leaders of al-Qaida's ethnic cleansing that had begun before Petraeus' return in 2007. That is still being discussed, with no conclusions reached.
Petraeus may have been lucky, and he did seem to bend history around a narrative of a disaster that was certainly more or less true in troop numbers as some kind of lifeline for the president.
A mere two years ago, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, Petraeus' trusted deputy, was sacked in Afghanistan when he made some harsh remarks about the Obama administration. Obama sent for Petraeus to work his magic in Afghanistan and a time-specific surge was put in place.
The chances of a similar success in Kabul were not all that bright, but the objective was to kill as many Taliban as possible and that was dazzling, to say the least.
Petraeus handed over control to Gen. John Allen. But Allen was in a bizarre way brought into the Petraeus scandal, and now his confirmation hearing as the new supreme commander in Europe has now been put on hold.
It is amazing that both Petraeus and Allen had so much time to devote to personal emails.
After becoming director of the CIA, Petraeus became an enthusiastic advocate for a paramilitary strategy for the CIA, a process that had been in the works for well over a decade, much to the dismay of many people who had been affiliated in various capacities with the CIA.
Before news of his extramarital affair broke, Petraeus had asked for more aircraft to be added to the agency's fleet, which already has more than 45 drones. There is no accountability as far as can be determined regarding this new role. The CIA itself is now involved in killing terrorist suspects.
One would hope that whoever becomes the director will have the good sense to hand over the main responsibility for drone attacks to the Pentagon, thus re-emphasizing that agency's traditional and mandated role. There is certainly no role for the CIA in these endeavors.
Speaking as a former CIA employee, I would think Petraeus may not even be missed in Langley; his home life is beyond the scope of the current problem, assuming that no classified information has been disseminated to America's enemies.
Like lots of traditionalists who worked at the CIA, this writer would like and even yearn for a return to the CIA-mandated role rather than some paramilitary unit. Petraeus should not be missed in this role of director of Central Intelligence.
Roy A. Harrell Jr. of Ozona is a retired foreign service officer.
© 2012 San Angelo Standard Times. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Intelligence was collected but rarely analyzed coherently so as to contribute to enlightened policies. Much of what was collected by the Company lay unused, some of us feeling it is too expensive to collect this data, not to mention the risk involved.
Moreover the trend was in the direction of militarization, a task that could be more expertly done by the Department of Defense.
I chose, as an interim measure, to throw my hat toward a smaller but more focused intelligence-gathering group at the Department of State. These are decisions I never regretted and throughout my subsequent career I maintained a discrete but respectful distance from Company personnel.
There had been other military personnel at the CIA helm, including Gen. Bedell Smith, but without the lurid detail emerging from the FBI investigation that led to the fall of Director David Petraeus. There will be attempts to attach significance to the delay in informing President Barack Obama of the chief spy's plight up the Potomac River and elsewhere, but those behind such efforts probably will be disappointed.
Lots of conspiracy theorists in today's media try to establish a connection between the resignation of one of our most famous soldiers on Nov. 9 over an extramarital affair with his biographer, Paula Broadwell, and various congressional investigations into the deaths in Benghazi in September of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.
But while the CIA probably overrelied on the security supposed provided by Libyan militias, there seemingly is no evidence that rescue attempts were deliberately delayed by those in charge at CIA in Langley, Va., or the White House.
The shock and dismay caused by the departure of Petraeus might have been an unwelcome distraction from an election campaign that was going just as the president wished, but let us not forget that Petraeus was a real hero to the GOP. In some media accounts, he had even been seen as a possible vice presidential pick before his appointment as CIA director more than 18 months ago.
Today there is probably a lot of interest in what sort of legacy an extraordinary career has left. The stature of the general as the epitome of the modern soldier-statesman-scholar was rooted in both real achievement and to me represents a myth of his own making and possibly the creation of lots of others.
Back home after two tours in Iraq, he used the time well to digest a lot of lessons he had learned to rewrite the army's field manual on counterinsurgency. He had the notion that the operational priority should be providing security for ordinary people in Iraq, thence creating the conditions for a government under attack by an insurgency to earn legitimacy through the mere provision of goods and services hither and yon.
By late 2006, when faced with what looked like a descent into a bloody civil war in Iraq, many were ready to throw in the towel. However, former President George W. Bush, desperate to find a less disgusting denouement to this war, saw Petraeus, supported by a troop "surge," as some kind of lifeline for his reputation.
There are admittedly lots of fuzzy areas, notably how much of the success was due to Petraeus and how much to the rejection by Sunni tribal leaders of al-Qaida's ethnic cleansing that had begun before Petraeus' return in 2007. That is still being discussed, with no conclusions reached.
Petraeus may have been lucky, and he did seem to bend history around a narrative of a disaster that was certainly more or less true in troop numbers as some kind of lifeline for the president.
A mere two years ago, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, Petraeus' trusted deputy, was sacked in Afghanistan when he made some harsh remarks about the Obama administration. Obama sent for Petraeus to work his magic in Afghanistan and a time-specific surge was put in place.
The chances of a similar success in Kabul were not all that bright, but the objective was to kill as many Taliban as possible and that was dazzling, to say the least.
Petraeus handed over control to Gen. John Allen. But Allen was in a bizarre way brought into the Petraeus scandal, and now his confirmation hearing as the new supreme commander in Europe has now been put on hold.
It is amazing that both Petraeus and Allen had so much time to devote to personal emails.
After becoming director of the CIA, Petraeus became an enthusiastic advocate for a paramilitary strategy for the CIA, a process that had been in the works for well over a decade, much to the dismay of many people who had been affiliated in various capacities with the CIA.
Before news of his extramarital affair broke, Petraeus had asked for more aircraft to be added to the agency's fleet, which already has more than 45 drones. There is no accountability as far as can be determined regarding this new role. The CIA itself is now involved in killing terrorist suspects.
One would hope that whoever becomes the director will have the good sense to hand over the main responsibility for drone attacks to the Pentagon, thus re-emphasizing that agency's traditional and mandated role. There is certainly no role for the CIA in these endeavors.
Speaking as a former CIA employee, I would think Petraeus may not even be missed in Langley; his home life is beyond the scope of the current problem, assuming that no classified information has been disseminated to America's enemies.
Like lots of traditionalists who worked at the CIA, this writer would like and even yearn for a return to the CIA-mandated role rather than some paramilitary unit. Petraeus should not be missed in this role of director of Central Intelligence.
Roy A. Harrell Jr. of Ozona is a retired foreign service officer.
via cia - Google News on 11/29/12
 ABC News |
Petraeus Sex Scandal: Former CIA Chief Tells Friend He 'Screwed Up Royally'
ABC News One of David Petraeus' closest friends says the former CIA director admitted that he "screwed up royally" by having an affair with his biographer Paula Broadwell. Retired Brigadier Gen. James Shelton has been friends with Petraeus for more than three ... Former CIA Director Petraeus Blames His MistressNewsmax.com CIA headed in the wrong general directionSan Angelo Standard Times General Petraeus Should Not Have ResignedHarvard Crimson Christian Post -NBCNews.com (blog) -Huffington Post all 91 news articles » |
Comments
Post a Comment