Moonage Political Webdream

I have often made reference to "the wall".  Some people really don’t believe that wall existed.  This is important to me because IMO, this "wall" led directly to the events of 9/11.  On June 4, 2002, I made a post on The Motley Fool that addressed the creation of the wall.  I am posting it here so I don’t have to look it up all the time ( TMF, FIX YOUR SEARCH ENGINE! )

It’s starts with this:

• A National Counterintelligence Policy Board (Policy Board) is hereby established and directed to report to the President through the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. The existing CI policy and coordination structure, the National Advisory Group for Counterintelligence, is hereby abolished and its CI functions transferred to the Policy Board.
• The Policy Board will consist of one senior executive representative each from DCI/CIA; the FBI; the Departments of Defense, State, and Justice; a Military Department CI component; and the NSC, Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Intelligence Programs.
• The Chairman of the Policy Board will be designated by the DCI in consultation with the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. The Chairman will serve for a period of two years. The position of Chairman of the Policy Board will be rotated among the CIA, FBI, and Department of Defense.
• The Policy Board will consider, develop and recommend for implementation to the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs policy and planning directives for U.S. counterintelligence. The Policy Board will be the principal mechanism for reviewing and proposing to the NSC staff legislative initiatives and executive orders pertaining to U.S. counterintelligence. This Board will coordinate the development of interagency agreements and resolve conflicts that may arise over the terms and implementation of these agreements.
• A National Counterintelligence Operations Board (Operations Board) will be established under the Policy Board with senior CI representatives from CIA, FBI, DOD, the Military Department CI components, NSA, State, Justice, and Chief of the National CI Center established below.
• The Chairman of the Operations Board will be appointed by the Policy Board from among the CIA, FBI, or DOD, and rotated every two years. The Chairmanship of the Policy Board and the Operations Board will not be held by the same agency at any one time. The Operations Board will discuss and develop from an operational perspective matters to be considered or already under consideration by the Policy Board. It will oversee all coordinating subgroups, resolve specific conflicts concerning CI operations and investigations and identify potential CI policy conflicts for referral to the Policy Board.

Counterintelligence Integration and Cooperation

• The Policy Board, with the assistance of the DCI and the cooperation of the Director of the FBI, the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of State, will establish a National Counterintelligence Center within 90 days of this directive.
• A senior FBI executive with CI operational and management experience will serve as the Chief of the National CI Center and a senior Military Department CI component executive will serve as the Deputy Chief of the National CI Center. These agencies will hold these positions for an initial period of 4 years, afterwhich, with the approval of the National CI Policy Board and in consultation with the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, the leadership positions will rotate, for 2 year terms, among the FBI, DOD and CIA. At all such times that the FBI does not hold the position of Chief, it will hold the position of Deputy Chief.
• The National Counterintelligence Center will be located, staffed and initially structured as recommended in PRD-44.
• The National Counterintelligence Center will implement interagency CI activities as described in PRD-44 and report to the Policy Board.
• The National Counterintelligence Center will serve as the interagency forum for complementary activities among CI agencies. The CIA’s Counterintelligence Center will serve as the CI component for the CIA and execute on behalf of the DCI his authorities to coordinate all U.S. counterintelligence activities overseas.
• The Chief of the CIA’s Counterintelligence Center Counterespionage Group will be permanently staffed by a senior executive from the FBI.
• CIA counterintelligence officers will permanently staff appropriate management positions in the FBI’s National Security Division and/or FBI Field Offices.

May 4, 1994, the ever diligent policy wonk of a president signed into effect by executive order, ergo by-passing Congress, the "U. S. Counterintelligence Effectiveness Executive Order 12333".

OK, so now let’s figure out who the National Security Council is that governs that policy making board:

The National Security Council is chaired by the President. Its regular attendees (both statutory and non-statutory) are the Vice President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Defense, and the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is the statutory military advisor to the Council, and the Director of Central Intelligence is the intelligence advisor. The Chief of Staff to the President, Counsel to the President, and the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy are invited to attend any NSC meeting. The Attorney General and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget are invited to attend meetings pertaining to their responsibilities. The heads of other executive departments and agencies, as well as other senior officials, are invited to attend meetings of the NSC when appropriate.

Clinton’s order, basically gave power to the NSC that it had since 1947 when Truman enacted it, however, expanded it to include just about anybody he wanted on the council. ( What does the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy have to offer in regards to counterintelligence and national security? ). However, he also gave policy making authority to the NSC whereas it had been done inside the various departments in the past.

This is the current structure of the NSC. I would quote the line that coordinates policy, but if you read it, there were a myriad of sub-committees that had policy making authority. I can see where this is confusing as hell. At the bottom of that link you will see how Bush re-organized it once again, stripping the policy making authority into very streamlined lines of authority. This looks like a very good move to me. However, I digress…..

Clinton’s first act as President was to appoint members to the NSC.

On January 21, 1993, in PDD 2, President Clinton approved an NSC decision-making system that enlarged the membership of the National Security Council and included a much greater emphasis on economic issues in the formulation of national security policy..

The National Security Council framework in the Clinton administration included an NSC Principals Committee, a forum available to Cabinet-level officials to discuss and resolve issues not requiring the President’s participation…

Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger, a longtime foreign policy adviser to Clinton…. became National Security Adviser in March 1997…. Berger initiated a review of principles that would guide the foreign policy of Clinton’s second term. These included the integration of Eastern and Western Europe without provoking tensions with Russia; promoting more open trade; improving defenses against such transnational threats as terrorism and narcotics; and promoting a strong and stable Asian-Pacific community by seeking trade cooperation with China and avoiding confrontation on human rights issues. In the spring and summer of 1997, the National Security Council became occupied with such issues as the ratification of the Chemical Weapons Treaty, NATO enlargement, the Middle East peace process, the U.S-Russian Summit at Helsinki, and the Denver Economic Summit.

OK, let’s look at Sandy Berger:
From an interview with Margaret Warner shortly after being appointed:

I don’t need to know everything, nor should I–should they feel compelled to pass everything up the line.

This part just blows me away:

MARGARET WARNER: Attorney General Reno today defended the FBI’s decision to refuse your NSC’s request for some counter-intelligence information about China’s alleged attempts to subvert the U.S. election, and this was information you’re asking for, for Madeleine Albright, the Secretary of State, before her first trip to China. Now, are you–are you comfortable with that? How do you feel about that, that the FBI would not give you the information?

SAMUEL (SANDY) BERGER: Well, the FBI is in a difficult position. Obviously, it has a law enforcement responsibility and a need to preserve the integrity of that law enforcement process. I would hope when there are matters touching on national security that there would be a willingness to share that information to the extent they deem appropriate.

OK, so Sandy Berger is the Director of the National Security Council, which coordinates information and policy of the FBI, the FBI immediately refuses to give the NSC information it has requested, and Janet Reno says that’s ok. Along the same lines, I never knew the FBI was law "enforcement", I was always under the impression they simply investigated. I know how the political process works, and how subordinates think and work. Janet Reno’s act right there gutted the authority of the NSC, which is the entity that is supposed to coordinate the FBI and CIA. If the NSC is unable to enforce its authority, then neither agency will feel compelled to respond to it. Therefore, there really is no policy authority for those agencies. Since Clinton placed a stop-gap between himself and the policy making board, and Berger did not feel compelled to stay on top of issues, and Janet Reno felt she had more authority over the FBI than the FBI’s policy making board, I can see how things got to where they did. Reno had already had a history of enforcing rights over the law ( see Gonzalez for a good example ), so I can see where a director within the FBI, who having no support from his policy making board, would not allow the potential violation of a person’s rights even though they were a foreign national and Clinton had signed a previous executive order allowing it. They were being directed by Janet Reno, not the President or the Director of the National Security Council, and Janet reno was not their supervisor. That’s screwed.

And to beat it all, the lawsuit that emasculated the NSC was over Albright’s efforts to normalize relations with China, at Diane Feinstein’s insistance. And now Feinstein wants to know what went wrong. Give me a break. I hope she finds out. If Congress can’t figure it out for her, I’ll give her a call myself.

I may have gotten some parts of this wrong, but I can’t see how anyone can get it right.

Technorati Tags: Fed Policy

Tags: Fed Policy

No Comments »

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed