T2 B8 Warren Rudman Fdr- Meeting Soundbites- Interview Summary- Questions 683

8/14/2019 T2 B8 Warren Rudman Fdr- Meeting Soundbites- Interview Summary- Questions 683

1/9

To : Team 3From: Mike HurleySubject : Sound Bites from Meeting with Warren RudmanDate: November 19, 2003

I attended a Team 2-initiated session with former Senator Warren Rudman onThursday, November 13. Rudman issued a report on catastrophic terror along withGary Hart. He was also Chairman of th e PFIAB. Here are afew highlights from lastweek's meeting: Thecurrent threat is asymmetric. Our structures need to respond to that. The 1C is a major problem. DoDcontrols too much of IC's budget. DoD tries to control everything. If you want to know what the "big suckingsound is, it's DoD." OnRumsfeld: "Rummy is a cocky, smart assertive guy. Not as smart as hethinks he is, none of us are." We don't need a newbureaucracy. Massive reorganizations create more layersand more lines of authority. William Cohen wrote an important op/ed piece in 2000 about 8 or 9 monthsbefore the end of the Clinton administration. People fail more than systems. Weneed the right people. There is no substitutein the operating room, th e court room, the war room, the Situation Room, etc., forquality dedicated people. (Note: "It's the people, Stupid.") Butpeople need to be recruited, motivated, promoted, rewarded. Though Rudman lamented that people in high positions tend to lack important

historical knowledge. Against creating an Mi-5. There is a local element to law enforcement. It'sailabout relationships of trust. An MI-5-like department could be put within theFBI. But for God's sake, don't create a new separate bureaucracy. Need to ensure the right people are running these organizations.


2/9

Problem with TTIC is that agencies won't send their best people there. So, itwon't have the right personnel.

No one was focused on what Hart-Rudman said. Nobody paid any attentionwhatsoever. Rudman pointed out that the Commission, by doing its job well will be harshlycriticized. We should not worry about that. Rudman was against the Office of Homeland Security in the W hite House. It'snot necessary. This should be under the NS C. O ur enemy is not broken down byinternational vs. dom estic bounda ries. To fight the enemy we should not bearbitrarily divided either. Suggestions on how to roll out the report:ensure you have a pre-release;major press conference;Get members of Congress to come B e on all the talk showsO/ed pieces ready to go, and tee'ed up.


3/9


4/9

UNCLASSIFIEDthat his com mande rs were receiving sufficient intelligence. Post-9/11 CIA support formilitary operations in Afghanistan was a great success story.As to how to ascertain whether the DCI or the Secretary of Defense exert true authorityover the 1C, Senator Rudm an said, "Follow the mone y and you will find the power."DoD is an "avaricious shark" and tries to grab everything it can. DC I Tenet is veryfrustrated by it but will not say so publicly. The "giant sucking sound" is the sound ofDoD "slurping up 1C functions." People in DoD lack historical knowledge abou t the 1C.For example, DoD has seriously underfunded the National Reconnaissance Office(NRO). M r. Scheid noted that there used to be a "fence" around the budget of theNational Foreign Intelligence Program (NFIP) but that fence has been dismantled.Senator Rudman agreed an d cited the example of the NRO Director, who is now dual-hatted as an official of the Dept. of the Air Force. DoD "has truly become the 800 Ibs.gorilla." Joan Dempsey lacked sufficient respect in the 1C to do her job as DeputyDirector of Central Intelligence for Com mu nity Managem ent. But the Dept. ofHomeland Security will not become another 800 Ibs. gorilla seeking attention from andcontrol over the 1C.Senator Rudman noted that there is a lot of intelligence done in other places aside fromthe CIA and DoD. For example, the Department of Energy (DoE) has a significantintelligence operation, even thou gh the PFIAB "debunked" DoE's handling of the WenHo Lee issue and showed that D oE intelligence is "dysfunctional."Creation of the Terrorist Threat Integration Center (TTIC) is a great idea if you get theright people. How ever, a CIA or FBI employee who is bright and up-and-coming youwill not want to go to TTIC, and if you are a senior manager you will not want to sendyour best-and-brightest to TTIC. Indeed, TTIC has had serious staffing problems. Mr.Scheid noted that the DCI's Counterterrorist Center (CTC) faced the same issues when itstarted. Senator Rudm an suggested that TTIC's structure be codified in statute. He saidthat what the Commission says about TTIC could be the most significantrecommendation that it makes.Massive reorganization or creation of new organizations in the 1C will create"Frankenstein." The DCI should be given "concurrent budget authority" over all the 1C,including DoD and DoE entities. It is politically infeasible for the DCI to receive hisow n authority. O f course, shared authority is no guarantee that the DCI w ill havesufficient power. The Arm ed Services Com mittees will probably oppose any increase inthe DCI's authority; he was amazed when he came to Congress to find that whenMembers are appointed to Committees, they then become advocates for the agencies theyare overseeing.The PF IAB shou ld not do oversight of the 1C. The PFIAB was created by PresidentEisenhower because he was suspicious of the 1C. The PFIA B under PresidentEisenhower was more aggressive than it is today. President Carter did not even have aPFIAB. The PFIAB is squarely within the Executive Office of the President and

UNCLASSIFIED


5/9

UNCLASSIFIEDtherefore should no t be legislated by C ongress, eve n if the po int of that legislation is tomake it more aggressive.Senator Rudman thought that the CIA had given up too much and needs closerconnections with SIGINT and IMINT.HOMELAND SECURITYHe opposed creation of the White House's Office of Homeland Security (OHS) andbelieves that the National Se curity C ouncil (NSC) staff should have a portfolio fo rhomeland security. Gen. Gordo n, who handles hom eland security issues at the NSC,lacks the clout of National Se curity Advisor R ice and has been marginalized. Yet oncesomething is created in government, it is never eliminated. OHS should have beeneliminated after th e creation of the Dept. of Hom eland Security.The idea of a U.S. MI-5 "scares him very much." When CIA was created, the FBI andth e American Civil Liberties Union were "soul brothers" to keep the C IA out of domesticintelligence. Yet it seems that D oD is now trying to do some do mestic intelligence (e.g,.via th e Total Information Awareness project) that CIA is forbidden to do. SenatorRudman asked rhetorically why DoD was doing TIA and what a counterterrorismdatabase has to do with support for military operations. Mr. Lede rman suggested thatDoD may see developing a counterterrorism as an integral part of force protection.The Adm inistration created a Dept. of Hom eland Security that is too big. The D ept. ofHomeland Security needs to b uild analytic skills, but analysts in the D epartmen t willmostly be analyzing products. There needs to be mo re central oversight of the Dept. ofHomeland Security.The FBI is very good at counterespionage and has had excellent collection. FBI has greatcollection with State and local police. Having an M I-5 as a separate civilian organizationwould lose the State and local collection links and capabilities that the FBI has takenthree decades to build. Cops only like to talk to cops - they have a culture all their own.Cops will only be forthco ming with cops. Major espionage cases were broken by tipsfrom State and local law enforcement.The FBI is case-based, driven by FBI agents' desire fo r "stats." There is no reward foranalysts in the FBI. The FBI needs to institutionalize the analysts' career path. Perhapsthe FBI should crate an agency within the FBI that is responsible for assignment, training,and recruiting of analysts and can elevate them to high-level po sitions. As to whether theDrug Enforcement Agency (DBA) is a model for a counterterrorism agency, SenatorRudman noted that DBA had a lot of growing pains and has done som e reckless things.The FBI has been ge tting better at sharing inform ation, but it depends on having the rightpeople. There is no substitute fo r having competent, dedicated people.

UNCLASSIFIED


6/9

UNCLASSIFIEDAs for oversight, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) and the HousePermanent Select C omm ittee on Intelligence (HPSC I) should conduct oversight ofdomestic intelligence. The Judiciary Comm ittees lack staff an d training to conduct suchoversight but could develop it. M r. Ben -Veniste suggested that oversight should be doneby all three branches of government, that the FBI is trained in Constitutional protectionbu t that the extent to which the A ttorney General (AG ) exercises oversight depends uponthe AG 's personality. We are a government of laws and individuals, Mr. Ben-Venistesaid. Senator Rud man said that there needs to be a watchdog over FBI domesticintelligence because the Dept. of Justice's internal security office has become acheerleader for the FBI. No one pays attention to the Dept. of Justice Inspector-General.In sum, there should be a domestic intelligence agency within the FBI, with incentives forFB I agents to become analysts and robust oversight.CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHTSenator Rudm an thought that in general the oversight comm ittees have done all right.Having frameworks for oversight is useful, but a lot depends on the personalitiesinvolved. Senator Shelby as chairman of the SSC I harassed DCI Tenet andmicromanaged the 1C. Senator D eConcini as chairman of the SSCI had a terriblerelationship with DCI W oolsey. How ever, Senator Boren as chairman of the S SCIworked well with the 1C, and Senators W illiam Cohen and Bob Kerrey were positiveinfluences.He wou ld not be surprised is there were no Congressional hearings on counterterrorismbefore 9/11. The oversight committees should always be focused on major policy issues.SSCI/HPSCI term limits should be maintained. Th ey do not interfere with institutionalmemory because Members are replaced on staggered terms. While it takes time forMem bers newly appointed to the Committees to educate themselves regarding theenormity of detailed information, if there were no term limits then ill-qualified Mem berswould stay on for a long time. Senator Rudm an thought that the majority of Members ofCongress favored term limits except for the Members already on the Committees.9/11The attack on the U.S.S. Cole signified "a great big arrow pointed in our direction." Noone in government was focused on counterterrorism before 9/11 (except for SenatorCohen, whowrote an op-ed on the subject) - but should they have been? There weresigns of an impending attack, but he cautioned the C om mission against imposing 20/20hindsight in its inquiry.Intelligence is at best a "dicey business." In baseball, if you bat .400 you are inductedinto the Hall of Fame, while in intelligence if you bat .925 you are considered a failure.He noted that the FBI's bank robbery unit, established in 1925 or so, has not succeeded inpreventing bank robberies. The 1C will never be able to do 100% prevention - even

UNCLASSIFIED


7/9

UNCLASSIFIEDIsrael cannot do 100% prevention, and Israel is a small country with a excellentintelligence services. 9/11 was not an intelligence failure - there were three reports onaircraft as weapons amidst millions of reports on various subjects.

UNCLASSIFIED


8/9

Questions For Former Senator Warren RudmanPurpose: The Senator testified before the Joint Inquiry on topics including theIntelligence Community's architecture, establishment of the Dept. of Homeland Security,overall homeland security priorities, and Congressional oversight. The purpose of thisinterview is (1) to delve further into the Senator's views on the IC's architecture andCongressional oversight, (2) to update his views on homeland security priorities, and (3)to explore the role of PFIAB in conducting oversight of the 1C.The Architecture of the Intelligence Community1) What do you think the fundamental role of the DCI is - to serve as the President's

principal intelligence adviser, or to be the steward of the nation's nationalintelligence assets?

2) In your testimony before the Joint Inquiry, you stated that creation of anUndersecretary of Defense for Intelligence would be "a terrible idea" because"Secretaries of Defense have been trying to run the Intelligence Community inthis town for 25 years" and that if the USDI is created, "you just as well dismantleth e Intelligence Community as we know it and call it what it is, the Department ofDefense." In your experience, what have Secretaries of Defense done to try tocontrol the 1C? And how would yo u assess the performance an d effect of theUSDI to date?

3) In your testimony before the Joint Inquiry, you supported expanding the DCI'sauthorities. How do you respond to the argument that the DCI does not need newauthorities because he is not fully exercising the authorities that he already has?Why do you think that the DCI lacks authority, an d what more authority does th eDCI need?

4) Do you still believe that the FBI is capable of conducting domestic lawenforcement, or do you think that a new domestic security service is needed?Should that service report to the DCI or the Attorney General?

5) Are there any other ways in which the IC's architecture should be altered in orderto combat terrorism while maintaining capabilities against state actors?

The PFIAB1) What is the PFIAB's role in oversight of the 1C? To what extent did the PFIABfocus on the IC's counterterrorism capabilities? If the 1C is centralized, do youthink that the PFIAB can provide oversight of the IC's protection of civil libertiesan d privacy, or should the PFIAB focus on strategic issues and a new body becreated for civil liberties oversight?

Homeland Security1) Do you believe that the Homeland Security Council in the White House should befolded into the NSC in order to bridge the foreign/domestic divide?


9/9

2) How well is the DH S functioning and integrating its various components?3) In your testimon y before the Joint Inquiry, yo u stated th at tw o other priorities fo rhomeland security are training the National Guard for consequence man agem entand increasing port security. How w ell have we don e on these issues, and havenew, high prio rity issues emerged?

Congressional Oversight1) As you kn ow , the statute creating the 91 1 Com mission spec ifically requires theCommission to make recomm endations concerning Congressional oversight, hiyour testimon y to the Joint Inquiry, you talked about how Congress has tended toget into the details and not deal with larger strategic questions concerningintelligence. Why has Congress tended to focus on de tails rather than strategicissues? How has this o rientated affected the 1C's performance? How canCongressional oversight of intelligence be improved?

2) In your testimony to the Joint Inquiry, you discussed the need for c onsolidatedoversight of DHS so that senior DHS officials would not have to spend the bulkof their time testifying bef ore Congress. How would you assess Congress'sperformance on homelan d security oversight to date? Should the Hou se SelectComm ittee on H omeland Security be m ade permanen t, and should the Senatecreate an equivalent body?

T2 B8 Warren Rudman Fdr- Meeting Soundbites- Interview Summary- Questions 683

Documents

Transcript of T2 B8 Warren Rudman Fdr- Meeting Soundbites- Interview Summary- Questions 683