{"id":110021,"date":"2017-12-04T13:25:00","date_gmt":"2017-12-04T13:25:00","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2023-01-08T10:57:10","modified_gmt":"2023-01-08T10:57:10","slug":"a-new-strategy-for-counterintelligence","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/2017\/12\/04\/a-new-strategy-for-counterintelligence\/","title":{"rendered":"A New Strategy for Counterintelligence?"},"content":{"rendered":"<div style=\"margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;\" class=\"sharethis-inline-share-buttons\" ><\/div><h3 class=\"post-title entry-title\" itemprop=\"name\"><\/h3>\n<div class=\"post-header\"> <\/div>\n<p>It hasn&#8217;t received a lot of attention (at least, not yet), but President  Bush has approved a new counter-intelligence (CI) strategy for the  United States. The Director of National Intelligence public affairs  office <a href=\"http:\/\/www.dni.gov\/press_releases\/20070327_2_release.pdf\">issued a press release on Tuesday <\/a>that outlined the new strategy, and its key objectives. They include:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Secure the Nation Against Foreign Espionage and Electronic Penetration<\/li>\n<li>Protect the Integrity of the US Intelligence System<\/li>\n<li>Support National Policy and Decisions<\/li>\n<li>Protect US Economic Advantage, Trade Secrets and Know How<\/li>\n<li>Support US Armed Forces<\/li>\n<li>Manage the Counterintelligence Community to Achieve Efficient Coordination<\/li>\n<li>Improve Training and Education of the Counterintelligence Community<\/li>\n<li>Expand National Awareness of Counterintelligence Risk in the Private as well as Public Sector<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Some  of the stated goals are hardly surprising; securing the nation against  foreign espionage, protecting the integrity of our intelligence system,  supporting the armed forces, and improving counter-intelligence  coordination are standard functions&#8211;tasks that CI organizations have  always performed. <br \/>What is interesting about the new strategy&#8211;or  at least, the bare details made public so far&#8211;is the apparent emphasis  on economic counter-intelligence, and increased cooperation with the  private sector. And, that shouldn&#8217;t come as a real surprise, since  economic and technical espionage represents one of the greatest security  challenges facing this nation. Former FBI Director Louis Freeh once  described economic espionage as &#8220;the greatest threat to national  security&#8221; since the Cold War. According to one estimate, the theft or  unauthorized transfer of trade secrets and proprietary data costs U.S.  businesses about $250 billion a <em>year,<\/em> or roughly half the total cost of the Iraq War to date. <br \/>The economic intelligence crisis has been well-documented in Steven Fink&#8217;s <em><a href=\"http:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Sticky-Fingers-Managing-Economic-Espionage\/dp\/0595301290\/ref=sr_1_16\/103-1756062-3520601?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1175184869&amp;sr=1-16\">Sticky Fingers<\/a>,<\/em> which details the problem in corporate America. But obviously, the  problem extends well-beyond the pilfering of trade secrets by a business  competitor, or a employee who tries to peddle his company&#8217;s most  sensitive information for profit. Increasingly, the theft of such data  is part of a state-directed effort that targets critical technologies,  or entire business sectors. The People Republic of China has been  conducting such operations on a massive scale for years. And, as  Washington Times reporter Bill Gertz notes in his book <em><a href=\"http:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Enemies-Americas-Steal-Secrets-Happen\/dp\/0307338053\/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1\/103-1756062-3520601?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1175185290&amp;sr=1-1\">Enemies: How America&#8217;s Foes Steal Our Vital Secrets&#8211;and How We Let It Happen<\/a><\/em>,&#8221;  Beijing has been quite successful in those efforts, allowing it to save  billions of dollars&#8211;and years of research time&#8211;by simply acquiring  (and copying) advanced U.S. technology. <br \/>But the Gertz book is  also an exploration of critical counter-intelligence failures that  allowed our enemies to steal key secrets. He recounts the career of Ana  Montes, the Cuban &#8220;mole&#8221; who worked as a senior intelligence analyst at  the Defense Intelligence Agency for two decades. Not only did Ms. Montes  pass extremely sensitive information to her bosses in Havana, she also  influenced U.S. government policies affecting Castro&#8217;s government. When a  DIA counter-intelligence official became suspicious of her activities,  he was initially ridiculed by his superiors and the FBI. <br \/>The  bureau&#8211;which runs domestic counter-intelligence efforts&#8211;receives  special scrutiny from Gertz, and decidedly so. Over the last decade, the  agency has been embarrassed by a number of bungles and blunders,  including one case where a Chinese operative seduced two FBI agents, and  persuaded both to pass sensitive information. In another example, the  bureau spent years harassing a CIA operative, convinced that he was a  Russian spy because he lived near a particular park. When the mole was  finally caught, it turned out to be FBI agent Robert Hanssen, who passed  sensitive counter-intelligence information to Moscow for years. Hanssen  also lived near the park, but escaped detection for years. <br \/>Which  brings us back to the nation&#8217;s &#8220;new&#8221; counter-intelligence strategy. Is  it viable? My first reaction is that the emphasis on economic  intelligence is long overdue. Our adversaries have been stealing us  blind&#8211;literally&#8211;for years, and the new strategy represents a needed  effort to combat that threat. I&#8217;m also encouraged by its outreach to the  private sector. For obvious reasons, many espionage rings target  commercial firms, particularly in the high-tech and information sectors.  To protect vital secrets, private firms need to be more aware of this  threat, and provide information on suspected penetration attempts to the  counter-intelligence community. That will provide a bigger picture that  may identify spy rings earlier, and prevent the compromise of critical  information. In that regard, the new strategy is a step in the right  direction. <br \/>But the plan has some serious problems. For starters,  we&#8217;re still stuck with a counter-intelligence system that divides  responsibilities between the CIA (for overseas operations) and the FBI,  which handles the domestic end. Historically, this &#8220;partnership&#8221; has  never worked very well, one reason that the strategy document calls for  improved coordination, training and education. But that raises another  question: do we have the luxury of time (and resources) to fix this  broken system, or would we be better off in creating a new agency,  combining resources from both the CIA and FBI (more on that in a  moment). Failing to address this fundamental, organizational issue is  the major flaw of the new strategy. <br \/>Additionally, I&#8217;d like to  know more about how the CI plan will deal with terrorist-related spy  efforts. As Mr. Gertz reported in his book, the U.S. has been targeted  by at least 35 terrorist organizations through espionage, and some of  those groups have proven adept at penetrating supposedly &#8220;secure&#8221;  organizations to gain information, or carry out attacks. Clearly, it&#8217;s  difficult to assess a strategy on the basis of a one-page press release,  but it would be interesting to know how the plan assesses that threat,  and how it addresses it. <br \/>Supporters of the new strategy might  argue that The National Counterterrorism Center (launched in 2003)  represents the right approach, bringing together personnel from  intelligence and law enforcement agencies to share information and  develop terrorism analysis. Unfortunately, the center remains hampered  by competing lines of control; look at its organizational lines, and  you&#8217;ll see that the NCTC works for both the DNI and the FBI director.  That reality provides a compelling case for creation of a single,  domestic intelligence agency, combining collection, analytical and  counter-intelligence functions. Sadly, that option seems unlikely, since  it would mean diminished roles (and resources) for both the CIA and the  bureau. <br \/>Finally, as with any &#8220;national strategy,&#8221; the devil is  always in the details. Getting the various players to cooperate and  share vital information remains a Herculean task. The prescribed  training program will be another massive undertaking, and building those  ties to the private sector will take time, too. All represent important  steps in the counter-intelligence struggle, but the strategy document  seems to ignore the essential question: can this plan actually work,  given the organizational flaws that exist in our current system?  The  Bush Administration clearly believes it can, but some of us remain  unconvinced.  Fixing counter-intelligence requires revolutionary, rather  than evolutionary, thinking. <br \/>***<br \/>I may be reading between  the lines, but the new CI strategy outline doesn&#8217;t say much about the  &#8220;other&#8221; players in counter-intelligence&#8211;the armed services. While the  Army, Navy and Air Force have long maintained CI elements, their role  has (traditionally) focused on investigating espionage cases involving  military personnel, or &#8220;external&#8221; spy operations aimed at military  targets. If I&#8217;m reading the outline correctly, it looks like the &#8220;new&#8221;  strategy envisions a similar role for military CI elements&#8211;and that  might be a mistake. Military counter-intelligence units have gained  valuable experience against insurgent groups in Iraq and Afghanistan,  and that expertise could be useful in tracking terrorist espionage  threats closer to home&#8211;assuming that legal requirements could be  satisfied.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>It hasn&#8217;t received a lot of attention (at least, not yet), but President Bush has approved a new counter-intelligence (CI) strategy for the United States. The Director of National Intelligence public affairs office issued a press release on Tuesday that outlined the new strategy, and its key objectives. They include: Secure the Nation Against Foreign [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1],"tags":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/110021"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=110021"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/110021\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=110021"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=110021"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=110021"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}