National Security and Intelligence

Washington Post intelligence reporter Dana Priest was online Thursday, Oct. 12, at 12:30 p.m. ET to discuss the latest developments in national security and intelligence.

Dana Priest covers intelligence and wrote " The Mission: Waging War and Keeping Peace With America's Military " (W.W. Norton). The book chronicles the increasing frequency with which the military is called upon to solve political and economic problems.

The transcript follows.

____________________

Dana Priest: Hello everyone. Lot's to discuss. Let's begin.

_______________________

Crestwood, N.Y.: Good afternoon:

According to Fred Kaplan's article in May 2004 Washington Monthly, the Bush Administration abandoned Clinton's program which had bottled up N. Korea's fuel rods, because the Koreans admitted cheating on another part of an agreement with regard to uranium, and that when Bush walked away and turned up the blustering rhetoric, the Koreans simply unlocked the fuel rods and processed them into plutonium, which was easier than uranium for bomb-making purposes. As with Richard Clarke's warnings pre-911, anything with a Clinton stamp on it, according to Kaplan, was abandoned by Bush, to our huge detriment. Your take?

Dana Priest: I would tend to agree there was a knee jerk reaction to discard everything Clintonian. The irony, now, is that Bush is claiming "we already tried that and it didn't work" when explaining why he will not accept bilateral talks. The "we" he is talking about is the Clinton team. That's a first.

_______________________

Rockville, Md.: So the President says no military attack on North Korea. Does that leave the door open for South Korea? I don't think so, since they would probably use U.S. aircraft and perhaps naval fire to accomplish an invasion. Do they (the South Koreans) have a chance if it gets to war?

Dana Priest: I don't think the president actually ruled out a military attack. He always says "everything is on the table" although at this point he is stressing negotiations, multilateral ones of course.

_______________________

Richmond, Va.: Here is a theory that has been postulated for North Korea's pursuit of its nuclear program and the subsequent testing of the bomb. It goes like this: NK paid special attention to Europe's "incentives" to Iran for promising to stop its nuclear program. Since NK is much poorer than Iran -- desperate in so many areas -- NK might have calculated that the ignoring the West's pleas to stop its program would trigger the same kind of incentive talks. While the negotiations for everyone to "save face" would be complex, the idea behind it might be as simple as that theory. What do you think?

Dana Priest: Very possible. It's called extortion in less polite company but the idea is the same. A poor man's way of getting help from rich countries without having to change the political nature of the government.

_______________________

Valley Forge, Pa.: Ms. Priest, with China and Russia backing off their tough language towards North Korea, why won't the US or other powers call them out? If they are not helping solve the situation, maybe they are part of the problem? Both Russia and China have enabled NK.

If China wants to be considered a major power, then solve the situation.

I don't believe the Chinese are upset about NK having nukes - it's another country lined up against the U.S.

Dana Priest: I don't agree. I think China is more upset than you say. After all, a destabilized region (i.e. a nuclear-armed Japan would not be in China's interest). I think the North stepped over the line with this test and we will see China putting more pressure on them than before. As for Russia, it's not as clear.

_______________________

West Orange, N.J.: How real, facetious, or cynical is China when it claims that it cannot control N. Korea or that it doubts general trade sanctions would help deter its nuclear program? Isn't China's real fear that N. Korea could implode, be absorbed into S. Korea, and cease to be its surrogate "cat's paw" in the region to keep the U.S. and other nations off balance?

Dana Priest: Yes and that's why they fear sanctions that would starve and already starved population. Freezing travel, bank accounts, and other perks of the powerful may be the only way to go.

_______________________

Zurich, Switzerland: What do your sources tell you about the state of trans-Atlantic relations today? I see the US is in danger of losing its closest allies over Iraq. Just doesn't seem worth it.

Dana Priest: I don't think they are nearly as bad as you imply. There's far too much at stake, like all the other issues in the world.

_______________________

Logansport, Ind.: Hi Dana and thanks for taking my question. Given the nuclear testing by North Korea and the fact Iraq is a quagmire, can the GOP claim superiority on national defense this year?

Dana Priest: As long as the GOP and the Prez can successfully parley these matters into Fear, Fear that the terrorists will come here, Fear that North Korea will only get worse if you engage them, then yes, they will continue to look stronger than the Democrats.

_______________________

Harrisburg, Pa.: We on the state level know that our National Guard has been stretched too thinly: if there should be a major disaster in Pennsylvania, too many of our troops are overseas for an adequate response. I also read about the Generals who criticize that there are not enough troops in Iraq to achieve our military objectives and how we've already lost parts of the country, perhaps permanently. Now that Iran and North Korea see we are stretched, they appear to be more likely to act in defiance of any American threats. So, what are the plans, if any, to deal with the lack of troops?

Dana Priest: Recruitment bonuses and new Madison Ave-created advertisements. It's not exactly a long term plan, but it is supposed to help with recruiting targets--a for a pretty penny. I don't see a long term plan.

_______________________

Downingtown, Pa.: Hi, Dana. Your Q&A is top-notch. Regarding North Korea as its threat may develop over the next decade or so: Should the U.S. not be pressing Japan to assume heavier, even primary, security responsibilities for NE Asia? And become a real contributor elsewhere? Build a first class, mobile, sizable armed force: Britain times three or four should be well within Japan's capacity.

Dana Priest: Thank you. But slow down on a militarized Japan. That would surely set off China. US leadership is very much needed in the region to buffer all these very long-held suspicions and distrust.

_______________________

Toronto, Canada: Is there validity to reports that Teheran has convened an emergency war council to discuss a possible attack by the U.S. because of the deployment of the USS Eisenhower to the Persian Gulf? If so, why is this so under the radar in the general press?

Dana Priest: I don't think so. If that's what they are doing, then they've misread what is a pretty usual set of naval exercises.

_______________________

Glenmont, Md.: Dana,

Can you help me sort out this North Korea thing? Short of a military invasion -- what options, really, does the United States have to stop North Korea from developing nukes? If Bush isn't willing to back up his rhetoric with serious action, then it seems that he's only making matters worse. Set me straight.

Dana Priest: We have not options to forcible stop them from developing nukes accept crippling military action. That's the thing about being a sovereign nation. No one gets to force you to do anything. They can pressure. They can cajole. They can bribe. They can bomb and invade, in extremis. That's why diplomacy is so important and yet it remains such an underrated skill and profession.

_______________________

Denver, Colo.: I heard James Baker say the other day that he and the first Bush administration felt that it was important to talk to your enemies as well as your friends. He made many trips to Syria during his time as Secretary of State. Isn't all the tough talk and lack of communication hurting this administration?

Dana Priest: Seems so, if current events are any evidence.

_______________________

Hayward, Calif.: Does the United States have good contacts with North Koreans? I would think helping to organizing some kind of resistance in North Korea might be an important alternative to trying to cajole Kim Jong Il himself? For example, I would think surely we have the financial resources to bribe most of the military officers.

Dana Priest: Very tricky. North Korea is one of the most closed societies on earth. The US does not have the kind of contacts to even begin to do what you suggest.

_______________________

Ashburn, Va.: Hello,

The only solution I see to our involvement in Iraq is that we get the rest of the world, especially the West, to share more of the responsibility for getting Iraq stabilized. Unfortunately, it seems that we are more and more isolated in that effort as the "coalition" withers away. Do you agree with my assessment and could you please comment?

Dana Priest: Yes I do. I just don't see our traditional allies, many of whom disagreed with the Iraq invasion to begin with, now stepping into what many observers see as a civil war. This begs the question, how does an outside force make a civil war more civil and less war, if you get my drift. Very difficult indeed. We could do it in Kosovo, preemptively, because the level of violence never became so great.

_______________________

West Coast: Thanks for your great chats, The BEST!!! Having just read that only 33 FBI agents out of over 12,000 are reasonably proficient in Arabic, I was curious how many agents speak Korean. I'd think there are no shortages there, right? I'd think Korean-Americans would be less reticent to participate in translating North Korean data compared to Arabs combing over Arab calls from Detroit to relatives in the Middle East. Your opinion? Thanks.

Dana Priest: I assume you are correct but I don't know the FBI stats on that. North Korea is uniformly despised by South Korean so recruiting Korean-Americans would not be as hard as recruiting Arab-Americans who seem to have mixed feelings over US efforts/invasions/intentions in the Middle East.

_______________________

Ottawa, Canada: It would seem that the real question for China is whether they want a collapse of the North Korean state in the short term or a nuclear armed and militarized Japan in the near future. Japan would be capable of creating the most advanced military in the world if it wanted to. This should give pause to China and everyone else.

Dana Priest: Boy, that's some choice!

_______________________

Kansas City, Mo.: With the resurgence of the Taliban in Afghanistan it seems that is the place the U.S. should be fighting, however I understand the administration has other areas of concern. What about the rest of the world? If Osama bin Laden set up attacks on the U.S. from Afghanistan, shouldn't others be concerned about similar attacks and why are more nations sending troops to stabilize the country?

Dana Priest: They are. NATO now is in command of forces in Afghanistan. I think that reflects an understanding of how important the effort there is.

_______________________

Marlborough, Mass.: What exactly can anyone do with regards to a rogue state like NK ? They have NOTHING to lose (what exactly do they have ?) ..

It appears that we're going from DefCon 1 to DefCon 5 in the event that NK sells or uses their nukes or otherwise provokes their neighbors. Can you weigh in here ?

Dana Priest: One has to assume that all leaders, no matter how seemingly bizarre, have their own survival in mind when they act on the world stage. NK isn't invading anyone and it announced its intention to test a nuclear weapon, probably so other countries didn't read it as an imminent threat. Gen. Hayden, director of the CIA, said as much.

_______________________

New Jersey: Dana, what is up with the military declaration that the current troop levels might be maintained in Iraq until 2010? I see absolutely no way for that to happen. So, was this remark intended as a shot across James Baker's bow? Was it meant to give military cover to Bush (who, I noticed, said yesterday that he was ready to change if change were needed). I can't figure out any reason to give such an unrealistic timetable.

Dana Priest: Lowering expectations?

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: No one has yet suggested that the DPRK test was a tactical nuclear weapon, but this is feasible and dreaded. A tactical weapon is a battlefield weapon which would wipe out conventional forces between the DPRK forces and Seoul. Brookings has estimated that the old USSR had about 22,000 tactical nukes at its close. The sophistication to make and test a tactical nuclear weapon is essentially one of computer modeling, which has increased as megahertzes have become gigahertzes in processing speed. Every "expert" I've seen that argues against it being a tactical warhead test cites the DPRK's own statements of intent, and then goes on to call Kim Jong Il a crazy liar.

Dana Priest: I asked an intelligence person this very question and got "no" for an answer. There are several possibilities for the smallness of the explosion: 1-maybe it was set off in a cavernous location where the true nature of the blast was muffled, 2-it was a big nuke but not a successful test, 3-It was a conventional weapon. Intel folks say it "is not likely" it was a small nuke. Also, they still cannot confirm that it was, indeed, a nuclear test...I'm getting suspicious now, given the time that has passed. As you know, the US can get air samples from anywhere in the world to detect radioactive particulars. Nothing so far.

_______________________

Silver Spring, Md.: So the deployment of the U.S.S. Eisenhower to the gulf is a routine military exercise?

Dana Priest: I do believe that's what I read in today's Washington Post. Let's see if we can find the clip for you.

_______________________

Las Vegas, Nev.: Hello Dana!

With the Chinese not having much sway and the S. Koreans "Sunshine Policy" broken, the Clinton era accords abandon. Doesn't anyone really have much of a choice but to accept the NK having Nukes? Everything else has failed or hasn't shown much in positive results.

Also with this being more like the case, shouldn't this unfortunately emboldened Iran to continue on with it's Nuke work?

Thanks and wonderful Q/A today.

Dana Priest: Thanks. Well, I certainly wouldn't give up yet! Iran is all the more reason to dissuade NK that this is a bad idea, and that there are good reasons and much to be gained from being part of the international community. Pie in the sky, perhaps, but I just don't think the administration has given it all they got yet.

_______________________

West Coast: What is your take on condemning North Korea without mentioning Pakistan? Surely if this were a true threat we'd be pursuing sanctions against both countries. In fact, if it were a real issue, wouldn't we demand Khan's arrest, as well as sanctions against Pakistan for helping the North Korean program?

Dana Priest: No, it doesn't get you anywhere. The world is full of double standards and erasing them isn't going to necessarily make the place safer. So we don't condemn Pakistan because, well, it's too late and it's too volatile a situation. If we lose Pakistan to the Islamic extremists we would have even less leverage than we do now.

_______________________

Pasadena, Calif.: The world likes to call the leaders of Iran and N Korea madmen. I say they have simply outmaneuvered the West, and there is a method to their "madness." Recognizing them as smart might be the first step. Your take?

Dana Priest: I totally agree. It's complete naivete to dismiss world leaders as such. Never underestimate the enemy should be lesson number one. I cringed with Defense Secretary Rumsfeld called the Iraqi insurgents dead-enders. To some extent all these characters are rational actors, they are acting in what they perceive of as their self-interest, not ours.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: There are North Korean spies in the U.S. but no U.S. spies in North Korea. Maybe either the Clinton folks or the Bush people can explain to you for us.

Dana Priest: I would think that's pretty simple to explain. The US is an open society. Lots of diplomats, students, tourists, businessmen move freely around here. Not so in North Korea.

_______________________

Munich, Germany: Personally, I was very disappointed at the efforts of the Chinese government to curb North Korea's nuclear bomb program.

Are there any official contacts between China's intelligence service and the CIA or DIA?

Dana Priest: I believe there are, but the decisions are all taken at a much higher, political level...where there are even more contacts.

_______________________

Munich, Germany: Has there been any consensus on the seismic data on the North Korean bomb test? At the lower end of the estimates, 3.58-3.7 on the Richter scale, this is much lower than the 4.2 to 4.5 that was expected.

If the test partially failed, then this is probably why the North Koreans want to do a second test.

Dana Priest: Very possible, I'm told by intelligence officials, although no preparations are being detected as of this writing.

_______________________

Dana Priest: Thanks for joining me everyone. Catch you next week!

_______________________

Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.