James Clapper has effectively been working for John Brennan during Obama's first term. Now the president wants Brennan to be the Director of the CIA. In that position Brenan would be one of Clapper's statutory subordinates in his role as Director of National Intelligence. Does that make any sense?
The position of DNI has been given most of CIA's former functions in coordinating the actions of the IC as well as the writing of National Intelligence Estimates.
CIA has been properly limited to the "ownership" of the National Clandestine Service. CIA is unhappy with that and seeks continuously to break out of the "box" that it finds itself in. It's fascination with the drone war over Pakistan is a reflection of that psychology.
John Brennan is a vigorous 57 year old executive. If he returns to CIA will he be content to work within the present IC structure or will he seek to restore the ancien regime in the community.
Would it not make more sense to put Brennan in charge of the whole community as DNI? pl
Well IMHO that would depend on what the powers that be want the community to do, or not do.
Posted by: Charles I | 11 January 2013 at 10:56 AM
Charles I
IMHO the IC should be doing intelligence work. In other words gathering, analysing and disseminating information not conducting robot airplane campaigns and other lethal tasks that belong in DoD. The argument that the Pakistan drone effort requires a finding and therefore is the business of the CIA is just lawyerly nonsense. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 11 January 2013 at 11:31 AM
Wouldn't the CIA want some presidential lawyerly nonsense for CYA in any event, wheter or not they want the program? which I assume is the most exciting that they do since riding into Afghanistan on horseback.
And would the DOD be happy to carry the potential legal can should the program's chickens come home to roost?
And isn't the drone program so potentially fraught that it has a foreign policy element best kept within the Whitehouse and out of DOD?
Why is the CIA rather than DOD running it?
Posted by: Charles I | 11 January 2013 at 12:39 PM
I think it will be necessary to explore the pro and con with respect to PL's recommendation. I do have some familiarity with the IC and the statute that "reformed" it.
I personally am not a fan of John Brennan or what appears from open sources to have been his career path leading to the position of Chief-of-Staff of the DCI!
Yet I think PL's point has huge relevancy for the future of IC and CIA.Therefore I think it needs addressing. Could it be that the President did not think the reversal of reporting authority significant? Another sign of amateur night in the WH and Obama's administration.
In the end based on current knowledge I would defer to PL's recommendation based on his current understanding of the present state of the relationship between the CIA and DNI!HIS recommendation carries great weight with me. Did not take my syncophant pill this AM either.
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 11 January 2013 at 03:06 PM
WRC
Thanks. It is important to remember that the business of the IC is INFORMATION. When you let the IC do things that are not that, the agencies start to decline in capability. let the killers kill. Let the knowers seek to know. I have been both. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 11 January 2013 at 03:11 PM
And in Yemen too, the drone programme is not only failing its also getting into mission creep by targeting people outside the leadership of AQAP. Where is it to end? Perhaps it will end with the CIA taking the blame for all failures of US policy in Yemen rather than just those of collection. Is it stretching itself thin just for the "fun" of the kill?
Posted by: MartinJ | 11 January 2013 at 03:20 PM
What's the deal with Brennan's story about Bin Laden engaging in a firefight and using a woman as a human shield?
Do you think he was given bad information or did he think it was a good idea to "spice it up" to win the support of the people who watch TV.
That left a bad taste with me along with the fake picture of the situation room.
Does he get a pass on that? I know nothing about the man but I don't trust people who tell stories.
Posted by: John Adamson | 11 January 2013 at 03:58 PM
This sounds like a sensible recommendation. Why did CIA ever have anything other than a collection/analysis/dissemination role?
Posted by: Fred | 11 January 2013 at 04:15 PM
Speaking of information what is happening in Mali? France is supporting the government against groups linked to 'al-Qaeda' (Yet in Syria are supporting groups linked to AQ trying to oust the Syrian government?!).
I believe one of the contributors here gave a background towards the end of last year, perhaps he or others could give us an update?
Posted by: Fred | 11 January 2013 at 04:19 PM
Col Lang
Off topic - but various outlets are today reporting that the French military has gone to Mali today to confront the AQ and affliates . Wonder if the US is in support of the French there ?
Posted by: Alba Etie | 11 January 2013 at 04:38 PM
fred
CIA was created in the image of OSS/SOE. These were primarily covert action units, not intelligence groups like MI-6. The OSS "old boys" were keen to get out from under the supervision of the JCS where OSS had been, so they influenced the government to write the National Security Act of 1947 to give CIA the roles they liked. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 11 January 2013 at 04:56 PM
In the last week, Islamist forces began pushing out of Azawad and towards Bamako. My guess is that France correctly realized that AQIM and Ansar Dine could be in Bamako long before the African Union (AU) military force would be ready to intervene. It was either do something now or see AQIM in total and absolute control of Mali... probably long before this Summer. Both the Malian government and the head of the AU asked for direct western military intervention to stem the Islamist advance.
I'll probably post something tomorrow about the situation.
Posted by: The Twisted Genius | 11 January 2013 at 07:07 PM
Thanks TTG. I re-read your October post, an update would be appreciated.
Posted by: Fred | 12 January 2013 at 08:23 AM
I suspect that everyone in SpyKerVille is happy with current arrangements..Including John Brennan..now at the Top Floor of His Game...E I E I Oh My...Besides either the DNI or DDNI have Have to be a Active Duty Commissioned Officer ..50 USC&403-3A..and James Clapper seems to be the Favorite General at the Moment..and the DDNI is a "Civilian"...Stephanie O'Sullivan over from the Farm...where she was an Associate Deputy Director of CIA and Head of the Directorate of Science and Technology..
So ..I think it will be a Cozy Co-Op between DNI and DCI and all those Military and Tinkers and Tailors who like to play with Space Age Toys and Things that fly from the Bee Hive..That Crave Flash..Bang..Booms..Big Screen TVs...Havoc in Real Time..and having thier Hair turn Grey playing Star Wars...will all get thier 2013 Super Power Fix..Oh Well..If the Real World People knew the TRUTH..it would Probably "Scare the Shit out of Them"...so..To Thine Own Self Be true..because No one else Will..
Posted by: Jim Ticehurst | 12 January 2013 at 08:17 PM
Jim Ticehurst
Clapper is not an active duty commissioned officer. He is long retired unless he has been recalled to active duty. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 12 January 2013 at 08:41 PM