Anyone read these books, comments? 3) Convene a small round-table one week-end afternoon, with the authors of the following books: Bruce D. Berkowitz and Allen E. Goodman, BEST TRUTH: Intelligence in the Information Age (Yale, 2000). Loch Johnson, Bombs, Bugs, Drugs, and Thugs: Intelligence and America's Quest for Security (New York University Press, 2000) Robert D. Steele, ON INTELLIGENCE: Spies and Secrecy in an Open World (AFCEA International Press, 2000) Gregory D. Treverton, Reshaping National Intelligence for an Age of Information (Cambridge University Press, 2001) > > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE > http://www.oss.net/Papers/white/ChineseIntelligence6April.doc > > PRESIDENTIAL INTELLIGENCE IN RELATION TO CHINA > AND THE WORLD: SPIES, SATELLITES, SENSIBILITY > AND STRATEGY—A SHORT DISCUSSION > > Washington, D.C., Apr 06/PRNEWSWIRE/ -- According to Robert Steele, > a 25-year veteran of the national security community and author of ON > INTELLIGENCE: Spies and Secrecy in an Open World (AFCEA, 2000), a group of > retired foreign affairs, defense, and trade officers, including senior > national intelligence officers, is beginning to form in order to ask > Congress and the public to press for a dramatic reform to government > intelligence operations and how the U.S. studies foreign countries like > China. > > "The U.S. electronics surveillance airplane that has recently caused the > President so much grief in relation to China, like the U.S. bombing of the > Chinese Embassy in Belgrade, are representative of the larger failure of the > U.S. Intelligence Community to adapt to the modern world." Steele, long a > champion of commercial geospatial information including tourist maps (which > would have helped avoid the bombing of the Chinese Embassy), is also a > strong advocate for backing away from 1970's surveillance technology that no > longer provides the returns to risk ratio or returns to cost ratio that > guide the U.S. Intelligence Community in its investments. "Neither > satellites nor airborne surveillance technologies today provide the return > on investment the U.S. taxpayer expects from an intelligent government. > U.S. military intelligence and U.S. national intelligence are both on > 'automatic pilot', running mindlessly down channels we established in the > 1970's. It is time we stop and think about the future of Presidential > intelligence and how national intelligence can support sensibility and > strategy." > > Steele, who has also suggested that misguided U.S. Intelligence Community > strategy and related investments in too much technology and too little > thinking are to blame for keeping the President in the dark about real-world > ground truth, is a proponent for the reconstruction and globalization of > intelligence to create a web-based international intelligence sharing > network that would permit U.S. leaders and the public better to understand > history, culture, current events, and emerging threats including > non-traditional threats. "The U.S. Intelligence Community, as presently > configured, is incapable of meeting our most urgent needs." Steele recently > wrote to the President on behalf of a larger group—a copy of that letter is > at http://www.oss.net/Papers/white/LettertothePresident.doc. > Additional information is at www.oss.net and www.oss.net/OSS01. > > SOURCE OSS, Inc. > -0- 04/06/2001 > /CONTACT: Robert Steele, OSS CEO, > 703-242-1700, or [EMAIL PROTECTED]/ > /Web site: www.oss.net/OSS01. > > ============================================== > > 23 March 2001 > > The President > The White House > Washington, D.C. 20500 > > Dear Mr. President: > > I am a 25-year veteran of our national security community, founder of > OSS.NET, and the author of the recently released ON INTELLIGENCE: Spies and > Secrecy in an Open World (AFCEA, 2000). I am writing to express my concern > that your Administration will be the victim of avoidable crisis and surprise > on several occasions, for the simple reason that our national intelligence > community has lost touch with 95% of the relevant information—the > information that is not secret and is readily available through the private > sector. > > The Indian-Pakistani nuclear tests, the Macedonian revolution, and Sudan are > among the varied recent disasters for which ample advance warning has been > available in open sources of information. Facing you in the very near > future are some non-traditional threats, including an energy catastrophe, > severe water shortages and ethnic conflict along the Slavic-Islamic and > Sino-Slavic borders, and collapse of the global public health system. > > The intelligence paradigm—the paradigm for informing the President—has > changed. Instead of requiring satellites and spies to steal secrets from > the Soviets, today we need a global network of overt experts, an army of > linguists, vast data processing farms for seeking out the significant from > within the flood of openly available information sources, and considerably > more dedicated mid-career analysts steeped in the history, culture, and > personalities of their domain. > > The Intelligence Community you have inherited does not give you that, and > this means that you personally are receiving less than 20%—some would say > less than 5%—of the relevant information you need to be effective as > President. > > The bi-partisan Aspin-Brown Commission, after hearing my testimony and > seeing the results of "the Burundi Exercise" in 1995, in which one man > out-performed a $30 billion dollar community, overnight, with six telephone > calls that produced journalists, academics, political-military studies, > tribal orders of battle, Russian military maps, and commercial imagery less > than three years old, agreed with my assessment and addressed this matter in > their report. > > They stated for the record that our access to open sources of information is > "severely deficient" and that this should be "a top priority for funding" > and a "top priority for DCI attention." It has not been. Instead, our > intelligence community leadership is perpetuating the patterns and > pathologies of the past, and is recapitalizing a multi-billion dollar > satellite collection capability, while continuing to spend almost nothing on > processing, analysis, or access to open sources of information. > > Even if open sources where to be considered a mere insurance policy, a > prudent President would demand that action be taken to cover this gap in our > global access to critical sources of foreign affairs, defense, and trade > information. > > I began to understand this gap when I spent $10 million of the taxpayers' > money as the senior civilian responsible for creating the U.S. Marine Corps > Intelligence Center, our Nation's newest national intelligence production > facility. I was stunned to discover, after a lifetime in the secret world, > that what I really needed to produce policy, acquisition, and operational > intelligence for expeditionary operations (most in Third World lower tier > countries) was not secret, not online, and not available from our national > intelligence community. > > Instead I found that almost everything I needed—and especially so at the > strategic and estimative levels of intelligence—was available, for a price, > from the private sector. Unfortunately, neither our Marine Corps budget nor > the intelligence community budget provide adequate funds for regular direct > out-sourcing to the private sector; the intelligence community does not have > the cultural open-mindedness nor the knowledge it needs to fully leverage > private sources; and we still suffer from an industrial-age security system > that constrains reasonable people from talking to one another, discreetly, > without a lifestyle polygraph. > > I have spent the past ten years working this issue, and am pleased to say > that the countries of China, Israel, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, > Russia, South Africa, Sweden and the United Kingdom are making good > progress. The United States of America is not making good progress. In > part because of the persistence of the military-industrial complex and its > dependence on building expensive technical solutions instead of intelligent > human solutions, and in part because of our budget process, where it is > easier to "go along" with programs from the past that are already in the > "base" and not subject to Congressional review, it is my belief that nothing > short of sustained and energetic Presidential interest will reform national > intelligence and improve intelligence support to the President. > > I believe you are falling prey to the mistaken belief that all is well, for > the understandable reason that people you trust are telling you that > everything is fine. They are wrong. They are surely well-intentioned and > loyal, but they are wrong and their mistaken assurances will cost you > politically, economically, and militarily at some point in the next few > years. > > >From the Hoover Commissions to the Church Commission to the Schlesinger > Commission to the Aspin-Brown Commission to the recently concluded > Commission dealing with national imagery and mapping, the conclusions are > clear: the disconnects between intelligence, foreign affairs, defense, and > trade are hurting us; and we are spending way too much money on secret > collection and not nearly enough on processing, analysis and open sources. > I believe you need to make this one of your top three agenda items, for the > simple reason that an uninformed President is going to make more mistakes, > and pay a higher political price, than one who demands the best that > America's distributed national intelligence community—one including the > private sector knowledge base—can offer in the way of knowledge. > > Our secret intelligence community is spending $30 billion a year focusing on > the 5% of the information they can steal, while ignoring the 95% of the > relevant information that is not online, not in English, and yet vital and > very relevant to your strategic decisions. For less than 5% of the current > intelligence budget, you can tap into the $300 billion private sector > intelligence network, and double the relevance and value and timeliness of > critical information tailored to your needs. > > I respectfully recommend that you consider three specific actions: > > 1) Ask the Vice President to explore the merits of an Open Source > Intelligence Program (OSIP) focused on Global Coverage, with an emphasis on > Third World and non-state threats. > 2) Ensure that the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB) > includes at least two iconoclasts and that all members are qualified. > 3) Convene a small round-table one week-end afternoon, with the authors of > the following books: > Bruce D. Berkowitz and Allen E. Goodman, BEST TRUTH: Intelligence in the > Information Age (Yale, 2000). > Loch Johnson, Bombs, Bugs, Drugs, and Thugs: Intelligence and America's > Quest for Security (New York University Press, 2000) > Robert D. Steele, ON INTELLIGENCE: Spies and Secrecy in an Open World > (AFCEA International Press, 2000) > Gregory D. Treverton, Reshaping National Intelligence for an Age of > Information (Cambridge University Press, 2001) > > I hope this letter actually reaches you. I write with the interests of the > Republic foremost in my mind, and with great concern that the 1970's secret > intelligence bureaucracy you have inherited will not serve you well in the > much more complex 21st Century, where non-state actors control most of the > knowledge. > > Sincerely yours, > > Robert D. Steele > OSS CEO > Please let us stay on topic and be civil. To unsubscribe please go to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs -Home Page- www.cia-drugs.org OM Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
