Reflections of a retired Baby Boomer
Topic: Flight 253, Intelligence Failure?
In the aftermath of the recent failed Christmas day terrorist attack by a young Nigerian man, the airwaves and print media are once again filled with cries of “intelligence failure”. As I watched the talking heads give their “expert” analysis of the situation, I felt my frustration level rising; primarily because most really did not seem to have an understanding of how the intelligence community operates and how complex the problem of intelligence analysis is. They talked in sound bites and screamed at each other as they competed for air time. I kept hearing both politicians and the media saying the intelligence community failed to connect the dots, the intelligence agencies still were not collaborating and very little had improved in the way the intelligence community conducted business since 9/11. They seemed to be under the impression that the “dots” were obvious and should not have been missed.
Was the incident an intelligence failure? Yes, but not in the way most of the reports have portrayed it. My concern is if you don’t understand how a system works, how can you make the best recommendations to fix it? The critics also failed to acknowledge how well intelligence has worked in recent years. In the aftermath of 9/11, I was frequently asked by concerned citizens, how could they be reassured the problems had been fixed. I replied because there had not been another major attack on U.S. soil. Because of the way the intelligence community conducts business, you rarely hear about the successes. You don’t always want to acknowledge your success because you want to give the “bad guy” as little information as possible on how you’re doing business.
During an interview with CNN today John Brennan, Assistant to the President on Homeland Security and a former member of the CIA, stated the intelligence community working with the FBI has stopped a lot of terrorist plots long before they’re executed. He didn’t provide any details, probably because of security concerns. I think the public and the media are highly suspicious of the intelligence world. This is partly because of the secrecy that shrouds the way the intelligence community operates and partly because of past abuses. Consequently, when Brennan doesn’t provide details of what terrorist activities have been prevented, some probably think he’s either not being truthful or being defensive or both. The public and media understand why military leaders are not more forthcoming about their plans as they prepare for military action and less familiar with the reasons the intelligence community doesn’t like to publicize the details of successful operations. Of note, since 9/11 the intelligence community has been pretty open about how they’re organized, problems they’re facing and what they’re working on to solve them. Check out their web sites if you have the time or interest; that should be a requirement before you can be a “talking head”.
I believe the failure to connect the “dots” was because they were a handful among billions of pieces of data. In a 2007 article he wrote for Foreign Affairs Magazine, then Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell stated: “The U.S. intelligence community collects more than one billion pieces of information every day.” (www.foreignaffairs.com) In that same year Dr. Michael Wertheimer, Assistant Deputy Director of Intelligence for Analytic Transformation and Chief Technology Officer, stated: Of the data we’re collecting, that is genuinely intel, not fluff – it’s already been filtered and selected – we’re only analyzing about one ten-millionth of the data we’re collected today; one ten-millionth.” (http://www.dni.gov/speeches/20070905_speech.pdf)
Of that data there are many real and/or potential threats and many that are not. When you look at the data, you can’t just focus on information you’re looking at today you have to somehow figure out if it’s connected to something you saw yesterday, last week, last month or even years ago. The intelligence community also has to ensure the analysts looking at the information have the right background and training to understand the significance of what he or she is looking at. Just because you receive some information does not mean it’s accurate. It could be misinformation. It could be some terrorist wannabes. They talk trash and make threats but don’t have the capability to carry anything out.
Analysts of today not only have to be experts in their areas of specialty but also have to be digitally smart. Analysis doesn’t do any good if it just sits in your computer. You have to know how to get it to the people who need it in a format they can use. I remember one of the governments talking “heads” said the head of one of the intelligence agencies should have personally delivered the information to the heads of the other agencies. He obviously didn’t understand how collaboration works. Personal contact and briefings are just one form. In today’s environment it’s usually too slow. While an intelligence person if giving someone a one on one update, additional information is coming in that may make his presentation out of date. Technology is used to pass the bulk of the information from agency to agency and to the decision makers. The challenge is the ever increasing amount of data requires continuous upgrades in the communications architecture in order to keep the information flowing to the individuals who need it in the time and format they require. The upgrades not only need to focus on the flow of the information but also on the analysis and screening of data. You can’t sort through one billion pieces of data a day without help from computers. You need to invent systems than can help out.
The January 2010 issue of National Defense Magazine has an excellent article, “Military ‘Swimming in Sensors and Drowning in Data’”, that illustrates this point. The article states: “Unpiloted aircraft in the skies over Iraq and Afghanistan collect full-motion video. Satellites…take images from space. Signals Intelligence experts eavesdrop on the chatter of insurgents who maybe planning to bomb civilian targets. Also in the mix is low tech human intelligence – information gleaned by spies from informants or during interrogations…Synthesizing all these collection disciplines and disseminating them quickly is the challenge facing the military.”
Quoting Lt. Gen. David Deptula, Air Force chief of staff for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, the article goes on to say: “Today, there is one video feed for every unpiloted aircraft combat air patrol, also known as an ‘orbit’. An orbit is defined as one 24-hour continuous mission. Currently, the Air Forces flies 39 orbits over Afghanistan and Iraq every day. The goal is to reach 50 orbits by 2011. Within a couple of years, unpiloted Mq-9 Reapers carrying the new wide area airborne surveillance sensors will be able to track up to 12 different targets simultaneously…The iteration after that will jump to 30 and there are plans to eventually reach 65. That’s an increase from 39 possible feeds to more than 3,000”.
The article is just talking about some of the intelligence issues faced while working Iraq and Afghanistan. Imagine factoring in all the data collected on all of the other national security problems and issues the intelligence community is looking at.
When you put the problem in context I think the intelligence community is doing a remarkable job. Is it perfect? No. Can improvements be made? Yes. There are many hard working people both in industry and government working every day to solve these problems. The reality is because of the nature of the problem intelligence failures are inevitable. In a war, and that’s what we’re involved in, there will always be loss of life; however, there is no doubt in my mind that there are countless people within the intelligence community striving to do their best to help us win this war on terror. My hope is that the policy makers in Washington make sure any changes or recommendations in how the intelligence community operates are based on a thorough understanding of how it functions and not just faulty perceptions.
I recommend that President Obama and key members of his staff take a tour of the intelligence communities. I don’t mean the VIP thing. I would like to see them spend just one day sitting by the side of an intelligence analyst and going over all of the information this young person sees on a daily basis. Only then will they gain a true understanding of the issues at hand. About 4 years ago, I was invited to observe a war game. I spent about a week and had free rein to roam wherever I wanted. I parked myself by the side of the young analysts. On their computer screens they were not only screening intelligence traffic while also simultaneously had about 25 different chat rooms open monitoring intelligence collection being done by multiple platforms and individuals. That’s just one example of how collaboration works in today’s environment. This is a constantly evolving process and I’m sure they’re monitoring even more things today. I was pretty good in my day but don’t know if I could survive in today’s environment. The question the media and politicians need to be asking is how we can improve the collaboration process not repeating the mantra “you’re still not collaborating and nothing has changed since 9 /11”.
The President and his team need to see this personally. Not some VIP tour which typically gives the visitor a 50,000 foot view of how an organization operates. It’s not enough for the decision maker to read intelligence reports. In today’s environment they need to have a good understanding of what’s involved in the collection and analysis of that information. If President Obama and his staff they can find time to hit the golf course and basketball court and attend sporting events they can find time to first hand witness true intelligence analysis and not the brief overview they get from a VIP tour. Hey, I’m just saying….
