HPSCI Writes Sternly-Worded Letter Report on JSOC Activities

Steven Aftergood catches the House Intelligence Committee bitching about the Defense Department conducting covert operations under the guise of "Operational Preparation of the Environment," and thereby avoiding any oversight over those activities.

The Committee notes with concern the blurred distinction between the intelligence-gathering activities carried out by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the clandestine operations of the Department of Defense (DOD). Congress chartered the Committee for the purpose of conducting oversight of all intelligence activities of the U.S. Government, including all programs funded under both the National Intelligence Program and the Military Intelligence Program.
In categorizing its clandestine activities, DOD frequently labels them as "Operational Preparation of the Environment” (OPE) to distinguish particular operations as traditional military activities and not as intelligence functions. The Committee observes, though, that overuse of this term has made the distinction all but meaningless. The determination as to whether an operation will be categorized as an intelligence activity is made on a case-by-case basis; there are no clear guidelines or principles for making consistent determinations. The Director of National Intelligence himself has acknowledged that there is no bright line between traditional intelligence missions carried out by the military and the operations of the CIA.

Clandestine military intelligence-gathering operations, even those legitimately recognized as OPE, carry the same diplomatic and national security risks as traditional intelligence-gathering activities. While the purpose of many such operations is to gather intelligence, DOD has shown a propensity to apply the OPE label where the slightest nexus of a theoretical, distant military operation might one day exist. Consequently, these activities often escape the scrutiny of the
intelligence committees, and the congressional defense committees cannot be expected to exercise oversight outside of their jurisdiction.

This recalls something Sy Hersh has reported on–in which CIA partnered with JSOC to destabilize Iran, but only CIA activities were included in a finding (and therefore briefed to Congress).

But the scale and the scope of the operations in Iran, which involve the Central Intelligence Agency and the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), have now been significantly expanded, according to the current and former officials. Many of these activities are not specified in the new Finding, and some congressional leaders have had serious questions about their nature.

[snip]

Senior Democrats in Congress told me that they had concerns about the possibility that their understanding of what the new operations entail differs from the White House’s. One issue has to do with a reference in the Finding, the person familiar with it recalled, to potential defensive lethal action by U.S. operatives in Iran. (In early May, the journalist Andrew Cockburn published elements of the Finding in Counterpunch, a newsletter and online magazine.)

The language was inserted into the Finding at the urging of the C.I.A., a former senior intelligence official said. The covert operations set forth in the Finding essentially run parallel to those of a secret military task force, now operating in Iran, that is under the control of JSOC. Under the Bush Administration’s interpretation of the law, clandestine military activities, unlike covert C.I.A. operations, do not need to be depicted in a Finding, because the President has a constitutional right to command combat forces in the field without congressional interference. But the borders between operations are not always clear: in Iran, C.I.A. agents and regional assets have the language skills and the local knowledge to make contacts for the JSOC operatives, and have been working with them to direct personnel, matériel, and money into Iran from an obscure base in western Afghanistan. As a result, Congress has been given only a partial view of how the money it authorized may be used. One of JSOC’s task-force missions, the pursuit of “high-value targets,” was not directly addressed in the Finding. There is a growing realization among some legislators that the Bush Administration, in recent years, has conflated what is an intelligence operation and what is a military one in order to avoid fully informing Congress about what it is doing.

“This is a big deal,” the person familiar with the Finding said. “The C.I.A. needed the Finding to do its traditional stuff, but the Finding does not apply to JSOC. The President signed an Executive Order after September 11th giving the Pentagon license to do things that it had never been able to do before without notifying Congress. The claim was that the military was ‘preparing the battle space,’ and by using that term they were able to circumvent congressional oversight. Everything is justified in terms of fighting the global war on terror.” He added, “The Administration has been fuzzing the lines; there used to be a shade of gray”—between operations that had to be briefed to the senior congressional leadership and those which did not—“but now it’s a shade of mush.”

In other words, the language in the Committee Report appears to speak directly of this practice from Bush–to claiming that covert ops that look an awful lot like intelligence activity is actually intended to "prepare the battle space"–all to elude Congressional oversight.

But HPSCI doesn’t seem all that worried about it. As Aftergood points out, HPSCI issues a rather weakly-worded threat to legislative if DOD continues the practice.

Based on recent discussions, the Committee is hopeful that DOD will be more fulsome in its reporting. In the future, if DOD does not meet its obligations to inform the Committee of intelligence activities, the Committee will consider legislative action clarifying the Department’s obligation to do so.

Shorter HPSCI: "Mr. Former Spook guy working for Obama? Don’t use Dick Cheney’s tricks to freelance!! Or we’ll, we’ll, we’ll, we’ll legislate."

Tough stuff coming from Congress, as always.

image_print
  1. Styve says:

    Excellent post! Is this what went down in Honduras, too? Are these Bush residue creating trouble for Obama?

  2. kgb999 says:

    It’s been increasingly apparent that the bulk of the torture program was carried out through JSOC and somehow hidden in a grey area between military and intelligence oversight. Nama, Tiger, Blacksmith, Mercury, Diamondback/Glory, etc. all were sites of large scale systemic torture. Nama made a heavily redacted appearance in the SASC report but everything else was addressed generically as “SMU-TF”.

    I was pretty depressed that Levin let the whole thing slide during the McChrystal hearings. He is on both Armed Services Committee and the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations and Intelligence – the nexus of the programs. He clearly knows that McChrystal was knee-deep in this stuff and said nothing. That was the golden opportunity to crack the truth wide open. But there was hardly a whimper from the press.

    I’m very very curious about “Project 22b” which appears to be the mission specifically designed to hide the torture program from congress … from the SASC detainee report:

    At the August 12, 2002 meeting, JPRA created a special program which it called Project 22B, to “limit JPRA distribution of sensitive activities in support of [REDACTED]. In his memo, Col Moulton wrote that protecting information associated with these activities was “of paramount concern” to [REDACTED] and noted that “[REDACTED] anticipates a congressional investigation into this activity at some time in the future.” (pg.38)

    I’ve never heard a journalist ever ask for more information on this issue.

    • Mary says:

      And Taguba flagged outright over and over the need for a thorough MI investigation for war crimes.

      Obama could have used the picture requests as a perfect opportunity to do what Taguba has said for years now should be done. He could have said that he is not releasing the pictures but would appoint someone like Taguba to conduct a thorough investigation including operational and charging recommendations. But he didn’t and he won’t. Keep in mind that there is every reason to believe that chunks of what he is doing in Pakistan wouldn’t pass most legal muster – using CIA and DOD to bomb civilian dwellings without warning or evacutation opportunity in a country that is listed as being our ally. The more he digs in on some of those kinds of policies (bc he is now intent on *winning* some version of an Af-Pak war) the less he is able to ever try to fix any of the existing wrongs and the more he’s drawn into owning them.

      BTW – since Congressional “legislation” as a reaction now not only typically includes amnesty for all crimes committed but also expanded Executive Branch power to commit crimes, I’m sure that threat of legislating leaves everyone shaking in their shoes.

      • Hmmm says:

        Obama could have used the picture requests as a perfect opportunity to do what Taguba has said for years now should be done. He could have said that he is not releasing the pictures but would appoint someone like Taguba to conduct a thorough investigation including operational and charging recommendations. But he didn’t and he won’t.

        I share the frustration. At the same time, it occurs to me that one possible reason why Obama has not yet done anything with the picture request might, perhaps, be that up until the time that he does do something with it, he will still have something to hold over the heads of an awful lot of people. And he may need something else from those people, and/or need to restrain them from doing some other awful thing.

        Or else, he could just be a total sellout about the pictures, as many have already concluded.

    • Rayne says:

      Since I’m poking around in national security directives and executive orders, I should point out that at least two of Bush’s directives made the separate of intelligence very muddy. Very nearly expect to see the words, “Mi casa es su casa” with regards to WMD intelligence in NSPD-17, for example.

    • MarkH says:

      brought to you by the people who think words have no set meanings and that the Constitution is just ink on paper, like some Rohrschach test

  3. skdadl says:

    Pedantry (not re EW’s text, but HPSCI’s):

    Based on recent discussions, the Committee is hopeful that DOD will be more fulsome in its reporting.

    Gah. That awful use of fulsome. It is now so common that it is turning up in dictionaries, but it is wrong, and furthermore just the kind of wrong that the terminally puffed up choose on purpose. /pedantry

  4. Blub says:

    I’ve wondered whether Rummy et al left behind cells of their loyalists within the armed services (General Boykin-type extremists – fundies who embrace the full measure of neocon doctrines). They had these people coop the Justice Dept. Why not the DOD?

  5. emptywheel says:

    skdadl

    There was a point during drafting where that passage looked to me for a moment like it was Hersh’s and I flipped out. “Fulsome” from Hersh? Yeah, I know he’s getting older, but I was sure he wouldn’t use it.

    And then I looked closer and figured out the problem.

  6. greenwarrior says:

    i don’t really want to complain or anything, but does the united states of america really need to be bombing afghanistanis and pakistanis?

    • Blub says:

      yep. bombing brown people is enshrined in the founding documents of our great nation. “shores of Tripoli and halls of Montezuma” an’ all that.

      • fatster says:

        And don’t forget all those millions of American Indians who had to be destroyed, too.

    • Mary says:

      We are awaiting a “more fulsome” *g* explanation on that from the President and the HPSCI. Once Reyes finshes figuring to that Sunni/Shia, al-Qaeda/Hezbollah thing, he’ll get back to us.

      • skdadl says:

        I hear the train a comin’
        It’s rolling round the bend
        And I ain’t seen the sunshine since I don’t know when,
        I’m stuck in ______

          • skdadl says:

            Yes, I was funnin’. I was just toddling off and thought I would toss one more fulsome joke into the mix.

            fatster @ 39 & 40: I somehow missed that CCR song, because I had to look Lodi up. Sounds like a good place to be stuck irl — all that wine.

            • cinnamonape says:

              You’d need lot’s of wine coolers. Gets damn hot in the Summer. Sadly I don’t think Lodi had all the wineries back in those days.

  7. ART45 says:

    ”fulsome praise” is disgusting because it is insincere (or excessive)

    don’t disagree

    was just taking a shortcut to the conclusion

  8. MadDog says:

    I, like many, too often neglect to read the fine print of these turgid legislative compendia like the HPSCI report, but that is just one of the tactics employed to disguise and hide “in plain sight” stuff like this:

    SEC. 416. REQUIREMENT FOR VIDEO RECORDING OF INTERROGATIONS OF PERSONS
    IN THE CUSTODY OF THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY.

    (a) In General.–The Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949 (50
    U.S.C. 403a et seq.), as amended by section 412 of this Act, is further
    amended by adding at the end the following new section:
    “requirement for video recording of interrogations of persons in the
    custody of the central intelligence agency
    “Sec. 25. (a) In General.–Except as provided in subsection (b),
    the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency shall establish
    guidelines to ensure that each interrogation of a person who is in the
    custody of the Central Intelligence Agency is recorded in video form
    and that the video recording of such interrogation is maintained–
    “(1) for not less than 10 years from the date on which such
    recording is made; and
    “(2) until such time as such recording is no longer relevant
    to an ongoing or anticipated legal proceeding or investigation
    or required to be maintained under any other provision of law.
    “(b) Exception.–The requirement to record an interrogation in video
    form under subsection (a) shall not apply with respect to an
    interrogation incident to arrest conducted by Agency personnel
    designated by the Director under section 15(a) that are assigned to the
    headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency and acting in the
    official capacity of such personnel.

    So, take that Jose Rodriguez!

  9. skdadl says:

    Isn’t this manoeuvre by DoD very like something that Feinstein has talked about, except I’m not going to get the details for SSCI right. The intelligence agencies (all? one in particular?) have been ducking SSCI oversight by shifting their reports (somewhere?) to make them look like matters of funding, which convinced the SSCI that an intelligence oversight subcommittee should be incorporated into the appropriations committee … Somebody fix that up for me, but she has explained something like that to us.

  10. ART45 says:

    A typical bullshit federal law.

    It says the CIA shall do X, unless Y applies.

    Y is determined within the discretion of the CIA director.

    Congratulations Article II branch. You’ve been infiltrated, corrupted, and basically assured of re-election.

    When will progressives come to grasp that the only way to attack this shit is to institute a don’t-vote campaign. Which is the only way to hold fire to fucks elected to office in Washington, D.C.?

    There are some across-the-divide possibilities here.

    Working within the system? Go to sleep for 10 years. Wake up. See what you find.

  11. fatster says:

    Loo Hoo @ 7. Better yet, since they seem to have forgotten, why not write a ”How-To” book?

  12. MadDog says:

    And isn’t this an oxymoron?

    …Sec. 311. Permanent authorization for the Pat Roberts Intelligence Scholars Program…

  13. x174 says:

    Afterwood, Hersh, JSOC. . . & don’t forget Cheney’s “executive assassination ring.”

    http://dailycensored.com/2009/…..tion-ring/

    funny. now that the Bush felons are out of office all the little birdies want to sing. i wonder what that signifies.

  14. behindthefall says:

    Remember when Osprey tiltrotor aircraft were deployed to Iraq? Was it just last year? Those things are useless as cargo haulers and even as practical troop carriers, according to what I can find on the Web, but they might be just the ticket (for people of a certain cast of mind) for getting people deep in or out over a border during dark hours.

    I suspect that one might learn a fair bit about the “preparing the battlefield” activities if one knew what those Osprey were doing. I suspect, too, that there is very little evidence of their even being in Iraq, that they are not used in mundane, everyday situations, that they are not sitting around visibly in numbers on various pads. That they have kind of “seeped” into the desert. Of course, I’m probably wrong, but it would be interesting to see how our tax dollars are being put to work in that instance.

    • x174 says:

      there is a questionable assumption in your insight: that the military is a rational entity.

      • behindthefall says:

        Mmmm — it’s just that the line that the Marines are the ones operating the Osprey and that they’re being used to haul junk around in Western (!) Iraq smells to me like a cover story the CIA might want to have out there. (Then, I’m influenced by having seen two of the critters in New York state blasting by just above the trees shortly before their deployment; think: whoever is flying them doesn’t regard them as a trash hauler but as a special-purpose hotrod.)

        • MadDog says:

          You are not wearing a tinfoil hat.

          The CV-22 variant is in fact used by the Special Operations Command folks. That Wiki entry has this:

          CV-22B
          Air Force variant for the U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM). It will conduct long-range, special operations missions, and is equipped with extra fuel tanks and terrain-following radar.

          And you can read more about it in the Air Force CV-22 Factsheet:

          …Primary function: Special operations forces long-range infiltration, exfiltration, and resupply…

          • behindthefall says:

            That’s why I said, “Follow the Ospreys, and you’ll find out what the CIA et al. are doing to prepare the battlefield in Iran.”

  15. Stephen says:

    With the passing of time the evil doers become better and better at mixing and stirring the cauldron. Pretty soon we will not be able control, let alone know what they are up to. Waiting for Obama to correct the situation is pointless.

  16. fatster says:

    Headline: “NSA Shields Government Networks With More AT&T Secret Rooms

    We just celebrated the Fourth and they continue to undermine all that we celebrated. Mebbe I’ll take a break and drive down to Lodi tomorrow and clear my head (and heart) in the smoggy valley air of a state that is rapidly falling apart.

    • whitewidow says:

      Is now obligatory to quote a “civil liberties advocate” as saying it’s all okay?

    • Hmmm says:

      From your linked article:

      In May, President Obama declared that the government’s “pursuit of cybersecurity will not include — I repeat, will not include — monitoring private sector networks or internet traffic. We will preserve and protect the personal privacy and civil liberties that we cherish as Americans.”

      Welp, all you have to do to make that a distinction without a difference is to route a private sector network’s traffic into a government network. Y’know, like with a splitter room?

      • fatster says:

        It’s mind-boggling, isn’t it? Here you have this brilliant article by Marcy (does putting “brilliant” and “Marcy” in the same sentence constitute a redundancy?) about the legerdemain regarding ‘covert ops’ and ‘intelligence activity’ and then I have to stumble upon that article!

    • behindthefall says:

      “Anthrax War also investigates the mysterious deaths of some of the world’s leading anthrax scientists, including Dr. David Kelly, the UK’s top military microbiologist, the Soviet defector Dr. Vladimir Pasechnik, and Dr. Bruce Ivins,” the CBC continues. “The FBI claims – despite the doubts of highly ranked U.S. officials – that Ivins was the only person behind the U.S. anthrax murders.”

      … from that article. What’s the adage? “Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action”? Kelly, Pasechnik, Ivins — that’s 3.

      I’m feeling suspicious tonight, aren’t I?

  17. questioneverything says:

    Gosh, the congress is threatening to legislate! Can you believe it? Throw them all out and if you must legislate, reform the campaign finance laws. It won’t happen until the American people understand what is really happening–legal bribery to the highest bidder.

  18. MarkH says:

    The President signed an Executive Order after September 11th giving the Pentagon license to do things that it had never been able to do before without notifying Congress. The claim was that the military was ‘preparing the battle space,’ and by using that term they were able to circumvent congressional oversight.

    Who gave the President authority to pass on to DoD to avoid oversight? It seems a lot like Bush signing an authorizing form when the AG refused to allow spying.

    Where did Bush think his authority came from?

    Also, it appears we came very close, under Bush, to having war with Iran. At the time we sensed it, but this shows they were indeed set on it. One can only wonder if they would have gone as far as to plant nuclear materials to provide a rationale for whatever Hell Bush had in mind. Would we have ‘discovered’ Saddam had hidden his nukes in Iran?

    Now we hear about “hot pursuit” of individuals (supposedly) running from AfPak to hide in Iran.

    Indeed, are there Bushies in the CIA or JSOC who are intentionally creating trouble for everybody?

    • Rayne says:

      Bush and his junta likely believed the AUMFs (Public Laws 107-40 re terrorism and 107-243 re Iraq) in concert with the NSDs 9 and 17 gave them ample authority to move efforts from CIA to DIA/DOD. We the people should have been pressing to modify/yank and reissue limited AUMFs in light of the changed circumstances on the ground and the length of time since the originals were issued. Eight years for the “war on terrorism” and six years for the Iraq War are far too long without revisiting the goals and the tools used to achieve them.

      LooHoo (55) – Maybe we ought to get her one of these, or one of these two variations, to accompany the lunchbox…

  19. MarkH says:

    I can’t say what it is about having the DoD under new management that makes me more confident, but I am. I hope that’s born out in practice.

  20. bobschacht says:

    Special bulletin from Santa Clarita, CA: Local stores are selling a lunch box for young girls with the writing, “Pixie Dust Hits the Spot” embossed on the sides. I considered buying one for EW, but chickened out. Possible overstock from aides to a certain ex-VP?

    Bob from HI
    currently in Santa Clarita area (Castaic, at the moment)

    • Loo Hoo. says:

      Buy it for her. I can see her at her next award dinner toting her laptop and her lunchbox!

      She could use it as a purse. Put it under her notes at the podium! The possibilities are absolutely endless.

      Airport security would take a bit longer, perhaps…

      (and skdadl is funning)

  21. Lindy says:

    There’s a diary up on DK about David Kelly’s death (UK bio-weapons inspector). Didn’t he correspond with Judy Judy Judy? I remember wondering at the time if she didn’t have something to do with his death.

  22. BoxTurtle says:

    The only way I’ll be impressed with an HPSCI letter is if it’s written on the back of a subpoena and delivered by a Sheriff.

    Boxturtle (But I’m a commoner. That wouldn’t impress an elected or appointed offical)

  23. cinnamonape says:

    So should the same hold true of former Marxists (or still card-carrying Maoists) who are in power? That hasn’t been US policy for more than half a century. It would mean never meeting or speaking with with Jiao-ji Bao or Medvedev.

    Constitutionally and legally Zelayo’s still President. The fact that the military and members of the opposition feared that the Constitutional referendum might actually pass by 2/3rds vote suggests just how unpopul√r this coup likely is amongst the Honduran people. ‘Course whatta they know…they’re just “peon Indios”.