Saturday, April 22, 2006

Why Secrets Matter

Within a few weeks, fired CIA officer Mary McCarthy will take her place in the pantheon of liberal heroes. Democratic politicians, left-leaning pundits and analysts in the drive-by media will hail her "courage" in exposing secret CIA prisons in eastern Europe, and providing that information to the Washington Post. There will almost certainly be a book and movie deal; I'm sure Joe Wilson's literary agent will be in touch, if he hasn't called already. However, timing for those media events will probably depend on whether Ms. McCarthy spends any time in jail for her "disclosures."

Of course, the real issue in the McCarthy scandal is how much damage her leak caused to national security. CIA officials have already stated that the disclosure caused "significant" damage to intelligence collection and analysis efforts, and strained relations with the countries that allowed the CIA to operate terrorist prisons on their soil. We'll probably never know the real extent of the damage, and that's just as well. As we've stated, on numerous occasions, a democracy must have some secrets, information that is so vital that it must be protected at any cost.

Consider the example of Ultra, the top secret WWII code-breaking operation initiated by the British that (eventually) included the U.S. as well. Ultra allowed the Allies to read virtually all German message traffic; as a result, we often knew what the Germans were going to do in advance. Ultra was, quite literally, the secret that won the war. It was protected at great cost--often measured in lives. During the German "Blitz" of 1940, Ultra revealed that the Luftwaffe was planning a massive bombing raid on the city of Coventry. Winston Churchill could have ordered the evacuation of the city to save lives, but that action might have compromised the existence of Ultra. The city's population remained in place, the Germans carried out their raid, and more than 1,000 British civilians died. But Ultra remained secure, and as a result, thousands of Allied lives were saved over the course of the war.

Playing fast and loose with national secrets carries a steep price. While the media often claims that classified "scoops" don't jeopardize our security, there is ample evidence to the contrary. We wrote about the cumulative impact of intelligence leaks to the press a few months back, noting an intel study that assessed the effects of sensitive disclosures over the past decade. I had a chance to review the study a few years back. I won't go into the details--nor will I reveal the identity of its author--but its revelations were stunning. The "leak" of classified information may cause a media tempest for a few days (and political ramifications for a season), but the ultimate, security impact is measured in compromised programs, blown sources, heightened enemy deception efforts and decreased collection through our intel sources and methods. Today, perhaps more than ever, the unauthorized disclosure of intel information results in the possibility of more surprise attacks down the road. In the most extreme instances, the disclosure of vital secrets could even jeopardize our national survival.

On FNC this morning, an anchor-ette opined that the McCarthy episode (and the potential prosecution of journalists who publish classified information) might have a "chilling" effect on the news media's ability to do its job, and the public's right to know. From my perspective, the leaking of classified information and a reduced ability to predict (and deter) future attacks is even more chilling.

9 comments:

Patrick said...

Excellent point. The media acts as if it's "duty" overshadows all other priorities, including public safety. Horsehockey, to quote war hero Sherman Potter. The media needs some chilling, in my opinion.

Glenmore said...

IIRC Ultra was almost compromised when Adm. Gallery captured U-505 (on display now in Chicago, I think). I think standing orders were to sink rather than capture. He did not/could not know the reason for such an order, but failure to follow it could have been catastrophic. Same logic for seemingly 'well-intended' leaks from Langley.

Mrs. Davis said...

To me the real issue is, How many more McCarthys are there at CIA/NSA?

Also, how well did Tenet know her?

Pierre Legrand said...

May I ask why its taken so long to weed this "person" out of the CIA? Is it considered OK by the Counter Intelligence operation for CIA agents to divulge anything about their careers to reporters? Sorry to be dense but it seems to me that we should have been after those folks a long time ago.

Or am I completely offbase to have expected Counter Intelligence to have busted these "persons" long ago.

Andrew said...

You can't really compare the secret prisons to Ultra. The outing of the prison program did nor reveal any sources or methods for gathering intelligence. The damage was political and also hurt our reputation with the foreign intelligence agencies we were working with.

Pierre: Sometimes it can take a while. You have to give everyone in the program a polygraph - probably multiple polygraphs, since they are so unreliable.

John (Useful Fools) said...

The actions of Mary McCarthy are nothing less than an attack on representative democracy by an unelected bureaucrat!

If she seriously felt it was her constitutional duty to torpedo the programs, she should have tried within the system (including notifying properly cleared Congressional personnel). If that didn't work, she should have gone public - she should have been willing to take the consequences of her action.

The cowardly actions of an anonymous leaker of highly classified informaiton cannot be justified (unless authorized by an a superior legally empowered to declassify it).

The military has a related issue: willfull disobedience of a direct order is allowed under some circumstances. But the circumstance has to be very special - such as the prevention of a war crime. Furthermore, the burden of proof is *strongly* on the offender to show that the necessity of that very grave action is high enough to justify potential weakening of the military command system.

Certainly intelligence agencies should have a similar high standard.

In a democracy, her kind of leaker is not at all justified, but rather constitutes a grave crime against the constituton - elevating the bureaucrat over the democratically elected official.

DiscerningTexan said...

I am so glad I ran across Rick Moran's blog and found you. Obviously you are a great source who knows what he is talking about. I will be a regular visitor. Keep up the great work,

rhodeymark1 said...

While the Clinton's seemed to act and react out of ham-fisted impulse, one hopes the POTUS in this case is doing a slow burn and is in no mood for forgiveness. It is certainly high time to account for the latter in enemies, foreign and domestic.

M. Simon said...

U-505 is now beached at the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago.

It is a fine tour. Catch it if you can.

The whole museum is worth several days of effort. Then there is the Breasted (the real Indiana Jones) Museum in the neighborhood and the University of Chicago. May also I suggest the Moore sculpture near the site of the first atomic pile on the UC campus.