July 19, 2004
FAILING BY LESS (via ef brown):
Tiny Agency's Iraq Analysis Is Better Than Big Rivals (DOUGLAS JEHL, 7/19/04, NY Times)
On Iraq and illicit weapons, the intelligence agency that got it least wrong, it now turns out, was one of the smallest — a State Department bureau with no spies, no satellites and a reputation for contrariness.Almost alone among intelligence agencies, this one, the Bureau of Intelligence and Research, or I.N.R., does not report to either the White House or the Pentagon. Its approach is purely analytical, so that it owes no allegiance to particular agents, imagery or intercepts. It shuns the worst-case plans sometimes sought by military commanders. [...]
With just 165 analysts, the bureau is about one-tenth the size of the Central Intelligence Agency's analytical arm. But its analysts tend to be older (most are in their 40's and 50's), more experienced and more likely to come from academic backgrounds than those at other agencies, and they are more often encouraged to devote their careers to the study of a particular issue or region. [...]
The bureau was apparently still wrong, along with other intelligence agencies, in asserting that Iraq possessed chemical and biological weapons. But Congressional officials say that over all, its recent record on Iraq has been better than that of its larger rivals, including the C.I.A., with more than 1,500 analysts, and the Defense Intelligence Agency, with more than 3,000.
The example of the State Department bureau, Congressional officials say, is being closely studied as the White House and Congress debate what changes may help intelligence agencies avoid additional failures.
Ah, sweet mystery of bureaucracy, where simply being less completely wrong than a rival makes you a model agency. Posted by Orrin Judd at July 19, 2004 11:21 AM
National security agencies defy the liberal
laws of bureacracy and perform better with fewer
resources, whereas the standard law of bigger
is better applies to all others.
The bureau was apparently still wrong, along with other intelligence agencies, in asserting that Iraq possessed chemical and biological weapons.
Aaaarrrgh, it ticks me off to still read this! A sarin shell went off in a roadside bomb. Dozens of other chemical shells have been found. Camouflaged ammo bunkers were found with many large drums of pesticide (a.k.a. chemical weapon precursors). Thousands of Iraqi troops had chemical warfare suits and nerve gas antidote injectors. We found the records of their illegal weapons programs, and scientists who worked in them are regularly murdered by Ba'athist holdouts. I guess we need the discovery of a bunker with a billboard proclaiming "Saddam's Illegal Weapons" before the Times et. al. will admit the obvious.
Posted by: PapayaSF at July 19, 2004 3:15 PMPapayaSF:
And what's more incriminating is Sadam admitted to having 1,000 liters of VX which have never been accounted for.
The truly amusing thing is that the sogenanten 9-11 commission is calling for a capo di tuti capi of intelligence as if one more layer of bureaucrats will solve the problem of too many bureaucrats.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at July 19, 2004 4:36 PMThe amusing thing to me is that if we invade Syria and find out that all Iraq's WMD are there, then this "best-performing" intelligence analysis group will turn out to be the worst-performing. But that won't be reported.
Posted by: pj at July 19, 2004 9:12 PMAlmost alone among intelligence agencies, this one, the Bureau of Intelligence and Research, or I.N.R., does not report to either the White House or the Pentagon. Its approach is purely analytical, so that it owes no allegiance to particular agents, imagery or intercepts. It shuns the worst-case plans sometimes sought by military commanders. [...]
With just 165 analysts, the bureau is about one-tenth the size of the Central Intelligence Agency's analytical arm. But its analysts tend to be older (most are in their 40's and 50's), more experienced and more likely to come from academic backgrounds than those at other agencies, and they are more often encouraged to devote their careers to the study of a particular issue or region. [...]
THIS ALL ADDS UP TO "INTELLIGENCE" BY IMAGINATIVE OPINION ARRIVED AT BY CONSENSUS OF CLOISTERED BUREAUCRATS LIVING IN THE WORLD OF THE MIND. TOTALLY OBJECTIVE AND NEVER INFLUENCED BY PERSONAL PHILOSOPHIES ... OH YEAH. THEY LUCKED OUT.
"The committee agrees with the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research alternative view that the available intelligence `does not add up to a compelling case for reconstitution.' "
WE SHOULD HAVE WAITED UNTIL A TEST FIRING BEFORE TAKING ACTION, AS WE ARE IN N. KOREA AND IRAN.
Posted by: genecis at July 20, 2004 10:20 AM