"Sometimes
there are things beyond our control, but there are also occasions of
sloppiness and neglect and people in senior positions are never held
responsible."
"Do your job and don't be lazy. It's a willingness to say we are not as perfect we think we are. That's a positive thing.No one at the end of the day is being held responsible when things go south with an agent,”\"
Douglas London, former agency operative
The
elite corps of American counterintelligence officials are concerned and
they have reason to be. The most successful sources of intelligence are
those who are embedded within the source of interest. When individuals
can be persuaded that it is in their interests to spy on their own
countries' politicians, military and intelligence agencies and convey
secret information to someone who acts as their agent, whether persuaded
for ideological, sympathetic or pecuniary interests, the intelligence
derived from such sources are the most insider-valuable.
When
such operatives are counter-persuaded by their own intelligence
services to continue to act as though they are secretly involved in
spying for a foreign nation, but in fact pick up valuable information to
pass on to their own national intelligence services, that's a
double-loss for the original intelligence agency. They have lost a
valuable informant, and that informant has in turn betrayed the source
that convinced them to betray their country. They become a source of
identifying other Humint agents and consequences flow.
The
CIA, hugely dependent on intelligence brought to them by suborned
insider informants began to realize that China was imprisoning and even
killing Chinese citizens who had agreed to provide classified Chinese
information to them either for financial gain or having been persuaded
ideologically to betray their country. And nor is China the only country
that has managed to infiltrate a system that convinces nationals to
betray their own nation.
Recently
officials in the CIA issued a warning to every one of its stations and
bases globally, alerting them to the fact that an alarming number of
informers recruited from other nations to spy for the United States were
captured or killed. That the top-secret cable was leaked by those
knowledgeable of its contents and the matter it highlighted is yet
another symptom that all is not as it should be within the agency.
Dozens
of instances of foreign informants killed, arrested or compromised over
the past several years has clearly alarmed the counterintelligence
mission center of the C.I.A. The highly classified brief cable meant for
internal eyes only laid out specific numbers of agents executed by
adversarial counterintelligence services in countries such as China,
Russia, Iran and Pakistan where C.I.A. sources have been hunted down,
many transformed into double agents.
Such
troubling and highly secret details are not meant to meet the public
eye, highlighting as they do a state of poorly-performing tradecraft,
uncertain yet trusted sources; underestimation of foreign intelligence
agencies' resourcefulness, and assuming too much in swiftly accepting
recruits as informants, failing to pay sufficient attention to the
potential for counterintelligence risks.
The
sheer number of compromised informants recently demonstrates amply the
increasing professionalism of other countries in their use of innovative
techniques such as biometric scans, facial recognition, artificial
intelligence and tracking the movements of C.I.A. officers by hacking
tools, for the purpose of discovering sources. In other words, the
performance of C.I.A. agents appears to be compromised by their own
unfounded opinion of their superiority over their intelligence-gathering
counterparts.
Case
officers earn promotions through their performance in recruiting new
informants. Frontline spies are anxious to earn promotions. Taking
necessary precautions to ensure that reliable counterintelligence ensues
is not rewarded. And so, the cable emphasized to C.I.A. case officers
they should be focusing not merely on recruiting but on security issues
including adequately vetting informants with a view of evading
adversarial intelligence services. Ensuring that reliable operations
ensue appears to be an expendable afterthought since promotions are not
typically based on such indexes as for example, discerning whether an
informant really may be working for another country.
Finally,
perhaps reluctantly, the memo hinted at agency underestimation of its
antagonist counterparts in the belief that its officers and tradecraft
are superior to those of other intelligence services. And having to
finally admit to themselves that other intelligence services targeted by
the U.S. are just as skilled in hunting down informants. And then there
is the issue of American agencies for whom intelligence gathering is
primary and who fail impressively to monitor their own decision-making.
In
particular, the decisions made by the F.B.I., the C.I.A., and the U.S.
Department of the Interior to avail themselves of drones manufactured in
China. At the very time that the United States frowns on nations in its
democratic orbit acquiring Chinese-produced technology, warning of
Beijing's call to all its nationals, including those living and doing
business abroad, of their loyalty obligation to the Chinese Communist
Party, it is inexplicable that these intelligence-gathering agencies
would compromise themselves in this way.
If Huawei Communications,
the flagship darling of communications technology for China is viewed
as an intelligence threat that must be kept out of Western nations' 5G
communications upgrades to ensure that Beijing cannot continue business
as usual in infiltration of the West and securing government, military
and trade secrets, why the neglect on drones made in China with the very
same information-gathering potential?
Infamously, all
countries spy on each other. Poking into other countries' politics,
militaries, academia, science and technology, business interests, social
and cultural issues. Some far more deeply than others. China in
particular is known for its habit of lifting classified information from
government sources by compromising technological devices with AI, along
with encouraging their expatriates living abroad to be involved in
local and federal politics, business, cultural events, and university
teaching positions.
"Given everything we know about the Chinese Communist Party and its
companies, there is absolutely no excuse for any [American] government agency to
use DJI drones, or any other drones manufactured in countries identified
as national security threats."
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), Vice
Chairman, Senate Intelligence Committee
Chinese police send a box via drone in a photo op on March 9, 2021 in
Zhoushan, Zhejiang, China. The Secret Service and FBI purchased 27
drones from Da Jing Information (DJI), a Chinese Communist Party
controlled manufacturer that sits on a Trump-era Department of Commerce
Entity List. (Image: TPG/Getty Images)
This represents a general opinion site for its author. It also offers a space for the author to record her experiences and perceptions,both personal and public. This is rendered obvious by the content contained in the blog, but the space is here inviting me to write. And so I do.
<< Home