Source: BBC
Not sure what to make of this story. Given the fiasco that was Iraqi WMD, the US intelligence services are in desperate need of reform.
On the surface it makes sense to move all the departments (which, according to the 9/11 report, appear to be continually working against each other) under the direct control of one central authority. However, if this authority is to be little more than the President’s “yes man” then it’s debatable how much benefit such reform might offer. As a rule, intelligence agencies across the world regard political interference as anathema so it isn’t surprising to find more than a few dissenting voices toward Bush’s plans.
As a side note, despite Rumsfeld’s protestations of innocence in this matter, I think it’s now becoming increasingly apparent that he’s living on borrowed time under Bush. Whether the promotion of Condoleeza Rice will hasten his departure remains to be seen.
Not sure what to make of this story. Given the fiasco that was Iraqi WMD, the US intelligence services are in desperate need of reform.
On the surface it makes sense to move all the departments (which, according to the 9/11 report, appear to be continually working against each other) under the direct control of one central authority. However, if this authority is to be little more than the President’s “yes man” then it’s debatable how much benefit such reform might offer. As a rule, intelligence agencies across the world regard political interference as anathema so it isn’t surprising to find more than a few dissenting voices toward Bush’s plans.
As a side note, despite Rumsfeld’s protestations of innocence in this matter, I think it’s now becoming increasingly apparent that he’s living on borrowed time under Bush. Whether the promotion of Condoleeza Rice will hasten his departure remains to be seen.
Quote:
| President Bush and congressional leaders say they will try again to pass a bill on intelligence reform which was blocked at the weekend by conservative Republicans said to be close to the Pentagon. On the face of it, this looks like an embarrassing setback for President Bush. Speaking in Chile, where he has been attending the Asia-Pacific summit, he said: "I was disappointed that the bill didn't pass. "I look forward to going back to Washington to work with the interested parties to get it passed". But it was blocked on Saturday because of opposition from conservatives from Mr Bush's own Republican party and - it is said - his own defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld. Some observers describe it as an old-fashioned "turf war". The bill would create a new national director who would oversee all the US intelligence agencies. Currently 80% of the estimated $40bn intelligence budget is controlled by the Pentagon. So too are most of the key agencies which actually gather most of the intelligence, like the National Security Agency (NSA), which runs the US network of spy satellites. Mr Rumsfeld's aides strenuously deny that he has been lobbying behind the scenes against the bill. But the Pentagon is known to have concerns that, as the biggest consumer of intelligence, the access of its commanders to information may be jeopardised in the future. Supporters of the bill say the Pentagon's concerns have been addressed. Mr Rumsfeld has himself insisted that he backs the president's position. But he is known to have reservations about how intelligence reform is carried out. Intelligence reform itself has considerable political momentum and sensitivity, because of the attacks of 11 September 2001. The current bill is based on recommendations from the widely-applauded 9/11 Commission. And indeed, there is an impatience among many in Congress to be seen to be acting, because of worries that US public opinion may react adversely to further delay. Embracing intelligence reform became an important test in the US presidential election campaign. So both President Bush and his Democratic rival, John Kerry, endorsed the idea of creating a new national intelligence director. But some sceptics have questioned whether there has been a rush to reform for political reasons, and that mistakes could be made. Congressional leaders say they will try to get the bill passed again in early December. So the next couple of weeks may reveal how committed President Bush is to this proposal. Some opponents are already calling it a key early test of his second term. |
