Two aspects have emerged in the privatization of U.S. intelligence. One is the government’s outsourcing of intelligence operations and functions to outside contractors and the other is the evolution in how information is collected. Under federal guidance, the Central Intelligence Agency can use contractors for intelligence analysis and gathering as permissible government activities.
What has already occurred in this field and its consequences were questioned and debated during a panel discussion Aug. 20 at the National Press Club in Washington. The issue gained renewed attention with news reports about a covert CIA program in 2004 employing the private security firm Blackwater USA, now renamed Xe Services, to capture al-Qaeda members.
Former Director Michael Hayden, who headed the CIA from 2006 to 2009, said a New York Times article on the subject reflected the view that the agency went to contractors when it sought to avoid responsibility for some activities. “That is absolutely not true,” he told the Press Club forum. “Agency officers, myself as director for example, have the same moral and legal responsibilities for the actions of government employees or contractors operating under our guidance.”
CIA Use of Government Employees and Contractors
He recalled that members of Congress would sometimes ask him if certain projects were performed by government employees or by contractors. Hayden usually replied he didn’t know because “a lot of the agency activities” involved the use of both. “We viewed contractors as an integral part of our workforce,” he said. For primarily management reasons, the CIA during Hayden’s tenure reduced the number of contractors by 15%.
Joseph Finder, author of novels on the link between espionage and business and the program’s moderator, brought up legal questions surrounding the government’s use of non-government contractors to perform terrorist threat assessments or sensitive intelligence work. Former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, another panelist, responded that if the government expects contractors to do the work, then it must give them a measure of protection to operate legitimately without being in legal jeopardy.
Government Need for Contractors for Efficiency, Flexibility, and Specialized Requirements
At the same time, contractors are needed for immediate and required skills, some necessary only at certain times, that the government doesn’t normally have, Chertoff maintained. Those can include speaking dialects from Africa or Southeast Asia. The CIA can use contractors with a lower security clearance - and who will have no future access to the agency - for a specific task, Hayden said.
However, the CIA could be faulted for going outside for skills that some might judge the agency itself should have, he added.
A huge historical shift has occurred regarding contractors, Jack Devine, a 32-year veteran who once directed CIA clandestine operations, said at the Press Club. In the 1990s, with the Cold War over, the agency reduced its budget and personnel by 25%, he noted. At the time of September 11, the agency was greatly understaffed and made a subsequent push for contracting.
Devine, now the president of Arkin Group, an international crisis management firm based in New York, said the Washington Post’s reporting of the outsourcing of an assassination program involving al-Qaeda leaders was contrary to his experience at the agency. He cited a need for contractors in technical areas.
CIA Can Benefit From Some Private-Sector Investigative Skills
Investigative skills are at a premium, Devine stressed, with the ability to collect and use information. But it is possible in the private sector to conduct the kind of surveillance, or request certain information, that would be harder for the agency to do because of its official position. Investigations are aided today, he observed, by such technology as blackberries, cell phones, audio devices, the ability to monitor computer use, and Google Earth. Privacy and individual state laws pose some limitations.
Finder asked Devine about the role of investigative work regarding a lawsuit filed by Electri International, a foundation for electrical workers, against Kroll, Inc., a private intelligence firm it hired for $15,000 to conduct a full background check on Texas financier R. Allen Stanford for potential investors. Stanford is now charged with running an alleged multibillion-dollar Ponzi scheme. Kroll is accused of failing to protect Electri from Stanford.
Based on his review of court records, Devine thought Kroll had looked at Stanford’s company, not at the individual. In his estimation, $50,000 is the going rate in the private investigative world to conduct a serious investigation, whereas $15,000 is probably more for very heavily weighted database research as a basic part of any reporting work.
In his present capacity, Devine pointed out that he could be sued on any report he writes if he doesn’t conduct a full investigation. Therefore he wants to ensure he is authorized and funded to provide the data that his clients request. Similar to his work at the CIA, Devine said he seeks to obtain information, validate it, stand by it, and accept the consequences.
The intelligence community is now looking at transnational issues that require investigative or police work, Devine observed. Consequently, the private sector is moving from investigations to high-end intelligence collection. Though he understand why some actions are done in-house and others are outsourced, Devine emphasized he always would try to do the work in-house, among other reasons, to build skills inside such as management training and working with foreign governments.
John Seidenberg - John Seidenberg has worked on newspapers, newsletters, radio news, and produced specialized news publications as well as freelance ...
