National Security and Intelligence
|
TOOLBOX
   Resize
|
Thursday, December 21, 2006; 3:30 PM
Washington Post intelligence reporter Dana Priest was online Thursday, Dec. 21, at 3:30 p.m. ET to discuss the latest developments in national security and intelligence.
Dana Priest covers intelligence and wrote "
A transcript follows.
____________________
washingtonpost.com: Dana Priest's discussion has been delayed due to an unexpected commitment. Please join us today at 3:30 p.m. ET
_______________________
Dana Priest: hi everyone. sorry, I'm late but I've been out on interviews
_______________________
San Diego, Calif.: Isn't it time for the US to go back to other countries and ask for assistance in creating a stable situation in Iraq? France, Germany, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, all could probably contribute more to the effort than they are at the moment.
Dana Priest: But they won't, especially now that it all looks so bad. France was always opposed, Germany too, pretty much. Saudi Arabia now says it will arm one side if it looks like they are in big trouble. This is one reason that having a real and strong coalition to begin with is so important because when things turn sour it's pretty much too late to start getting help.
_______________________
Portland, Maine: Thanks, Dana, for your fine work and that of other Post Reporters.
How long do you think it will be before the label "War on Terror" is dropped and something that more accurately describes the struggle we fact get adopted? It seems to me the problems we face in the Middle East are functions of conflict between what we perceive and pursue as our "national interests" and the sovereign aims of other nations, all complicated by factionalism within those nations.
Dana Priest: It is already starting to happen and I would suspect it will continue in the mainstream media. I try to use the term Counterterrorism Operations as much as possible or just the campaign against terrorism.
_______________________
Chicago, Ill.: What do you think troop increase in Iraq will do to the morale of Reserves and active members?
Dana Priest: Well, not improve it at all because these folks are already stretched beyond belief.
_______________________
Va.: I find it odd that Gates wants to reduce DOD intelligence assets when the prime function of the CIA is political intelligence. CIA was never good at military intelligence. Gates should know, HE WORKED AT CIA...
Dana Priest: What he is opposed to, it seems, is the DOD getting involved with covert ops and moving into the political intel arena, not downsizing their military intelligence work. the problem is, there are few straight militaries involved in terrorism and certain elements within DOD certainly wanted in on the main activity.
_______________________
Chicago, Ill.: Can you answer a simple question, that never seems to be answered very well. Just who is it that is killing our troops, and just who are we killing? Are the militias planting all these IEDs? Or is that the work mostly of the Sunni Al Qaeda types? And when we hear that our military has killed a number of insurgents, are we killing shia militia fighters? Sorry for all the questions.
Dana Priest: Unfortunately it is not a simple question. The answer is: all of the above and many more groups/individuals that we are no aware of. Sunni and Shiite militias, roving bands of thugs, foreign terrorists (who are really now the minority actors), etc. It is a very fluid, very chaotic situation. In that sense, it is worse that the classic civil war where the sides were easily perceptible.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.: Ms. Priest,
This may be out of your purview, but perhaps not.
What do you think will happen in Turkmenistan after the death of Turkmenbashi? What does this mean for natural gas supplies to Russia (then ultimately Ukraine and the rest of Europe)? Can we expect a drawn-out civil war or struggle for power? Could there actually be a peaceful transition to a new (perhaps freer?) government? Turkmenbashi was allegedly cozy with opium runners from Afghanistan...could the next government crack down on that?
The stability of Turkmenistan has enormous potential to impact the stability in Afghanistan and Central Asia but we're not hearing too much about it in the U.S. press.
Thanks!
Dana Priest: I've been to the capital of Turkmenistan and it was about the strangest place I'd ever visited. The architecture was like the emerald city of OZ but the police kept everyone away from the government buildings so it was deserted. One reason you're not hearing much is because it is such a closed society and government that I'm sure the USG is not sure what's next. Personally speaking, I shed no tear over his departure from this earth. He was a dictator who was severely harsh on even potential critics and their families. Recently there was an awful story about the regime's treatment of suspected journalists. I'll see if I can get it posted. You are also right that there are big stakes in the gas arena so I'm hoping that in the coming weeks The Post will be able to answer you're questions more fully.
_______________________
Kansas City, Mo.: I've read that our military is using up a lot of weapons and ammo in Iraq. Any chance the violence between the Shia and Sunnis will slow down due to both sides using up their weapons? Are they getting new weapons and ammo or is it leftovers? Also I remember reading in '04 about weapons cache not being guarded - is that what is supplying people?
Dana Priest: No chance they'll run out anytime soon, unfortunately. the unguarded weapons caches from Saddam Hussein's era were huge. there's also, apparently, a steady supply from Syria and Iran.
_______________________
Gaithersburg, Md.: Hello Dana,
Would you comment on the possible impact of the appointment of Defense Secretary Gates on the relationships between members of the intelligence community, namely CIA and DOD operational elements? It is my understanding that DOD has taken on a larger role in intelligence operations over the past year or two. What kinds of such operations have been taken away from CIA and will such a trend continue under Gates?
Thank you and good day.
Dana Priest: If, and this is a big if, if he gets around to this issue I think what you will see if the non-traditional DOD intel units, the clandestine collection units stood up under Rumsfeld, will be mouthballed. It wasn't that things were taken away from CIA so much as assets were added at the Pentagon...actually at the Joint Special Operations Command.
_______________________
washingtonpost.com: A Cry for Help in Turkmenistan, ( Post, Dec. 16)
_______________________
Zurich, Switzerland: It seems that the Bush administration will seek to make "one last push" in Iraq by sending additional troops. At least, that's what this newspaper seems to be reporting.
But the U.S. populace already seems to have soured on the war and with Democrats in control of Congress, even if the President does get his one last chance...What next?
What happens six months from now when nothing has changed in Iraq or the violence has gotten worse?
How ugly can this get with President Bush getting boxed in with absolutely no options left except admitting defeat and pulling out or staying the course, which the country will reject but which Bush will likely stick adamantly to?
Dana Priest: If things work out as you predict, my prediction is that President Bush will blame the Iraqis and say we did all we could to help train them to take over their own destiny, but they just could not get their act together.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.: The Post had an excellent article earlier this week about a Pentagon report on Iraq which included a Pentagon chart showing that Iraqi "sovereignty" started after we got rid of Hussein. However, wasn't Iraq a sovereign nation before we occupied it? If so, shouldn't The Post have noted the chart's misrepresentation of recent history or can the Pentagon revise history at will?
Dana Priest: Good point.
_______________________
Atlanta, Ga.: Thanks for the informative chats and Merry Christmas. How much significance do you attach to these reports in the last day or two concerning opposition by the Joint Chiefs to the Iraq "surge" idea. Do you believe their views, if accurately reported, reflect the predominant opinion within the military and how likely is it that the chiefs or other senior officers will become more emphatic in letting their views be known? The "surge" seems to be the direction the President is leaning towards, but it's hard for to imagine that notion being viable if the senior military leadership believes it's a bad idea.
Dana Priest: Merry Christmas to you.
It's sort of the reverse tussle. At the beginning of the war, it was the military saying we need more troops. Now it's the opposite. It's no longer unusual to have these disagreements work their way into the public domain. I do believe this is the predominant view at the top military level. Throwing troops at the problem without a realistic plan for them, is inviting more casualties, the argument goes. I don't see senior officers quitting over this, but perhaps the pressure will force the White House to prove these new troops will have a discreet, definable mission.
_______________________
Charlottesville, Va.: Dana - it seems as if only the generals (e.g., Abizaid, Casey) get to retire and get out of Iraq while the rest of the troops get called back over and over again through these involuntary call-ups, extended tours, etc. With the likelihood of a 'surge' coming (escalation, in other words), do you think the soldiers and their families will start becoming a major political force to say 'enough is enough'?
Dana Priest: They could, but I don't yet see that happening. Military troops and their families are very loyal to this president, even with all the problems. But it could happen. Certainly the veterans groups and others who are just a step away from active duty have become more publicly skeptical.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.: We're not winning-we're not losing.
I assume that means we're currently playing at a tie. Should we expect not winning-not losing to last like we have our Korean War truce except instead of staring down each other we're shooting and getting shot at?
Dana Priest: Or we just leave without a DMZ.
_______________________
Rockville, Md.: Japan recently upgraded its "Defense Agency" to full ministry status. Unofficially, there has been rising debate over their "nuclear option". How does the U.S. Intel community respond to these developments? Are we watching Japan more closely now?
Dana Priest: I don't really know the answer but my guess is, no, the intel community is not really watching Japan more closely. They are not doing anything but Iraq, and Osama bin Laden and a little Taliban and some North Korea and Iran.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.: This seems like a lot of debate for only 20 or 30 thousand troops. Is it possible that the real debate runs deeper and that this talk of a buildup is actually a surrogate debate for a discussion about invading Iran? Just seems like a lot of furor over such a small number of troops.
Dana Priest: Not a chance.
_______________________
Washington, D.C. and Turkmenistan: Wow, that Turkmenistan story is horrible. It sounds worse than Iraq at its worst under Saddam, perhaps only as bad, but horrible. Did the U.S. ever considering invading that country? There's oil there, isn't there?
Dana Priest: It was never on the Freedom Agenda that I heard. A couple of reasons: Russia, Russia and Russia.
_______________________
Anonymous:"We are trying to put together a package of new ways of doing things that will lead to faster progress," Gates is quoted as saying in today's Post.
To me, "faster progress" implies there already is progress, just not fast enough. Now that he has been confirmed, is that an indication that Gates is reversing to the "we are winning" line of thought dear to the President? Forget about the "grave and DETERIORATING situation"?
Dana Priest: Well, that kind of thing tends to happen once the nominee, whomever it is, makes it to the other side (inside rather than outside). It doesn't really mean a thing yet. Just happy talk. Doesn't mean he's oblivious. I think it means he needs a little time.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.: We keep reading headlines that say the Joint Chiefs think one thing and the White House thinks something else. I can figure out who the Join Chiefs are, but who is the White House? Is this really meaning the President, or is it meaning that some mid-level staffers are "second guessing" the entire military establishment? Thanks!
Dana Priest: No, it probably means the president's national security team, including NSC director, Cheney, Rove and other NSC level staffers who know of the White House's position at the moment.
_______________________
Fairfax, Va.: So are the military guys really speaking their mind now that Rumsfeld is gone? It's so strange when before Bush kept saying he'd increase troop level if only the generals would tell him so. But they were so afraid of Rumsfeld to tell Bush so. Now that the generals say they don't want more troops and Bush seems to be saying he'll send more troops anyway. Surreal no?
Dana Priest: Yes it is.
_______________________
Pittsburgh, Pa.: Will there be a discussion in the new Congress about how under-resourced our diplomatic corps is? Or will the Rumsfeldian militarization of our diplomatic missions continue?
Dana Priest: It will continue for the moment and probably much longer. We'll be in crisis mode for sometime and real, systemic change won't happen under those conditions.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.: Thanks for doing these chats and happy holidays to you. What is your take on the criticism of the ISG recommendation for embedding US troops with Iraqi Army units that it's a recipe for mass-hostage taking? It makes sense to me, but...
Dana Priest: You too. Unfortunately when you think for a moment about it, I just don't think it can work for the reasons you state.
_______________________
Bridgewater, Mass.: Hi Dana,
I know there's a shooting war going on, but Putin's Russia looks like a bigger potential problem. They've certainly started acting more aggressively - bullying their neighbors, using regulatory powers to pressure Shell over Sakhalin-2, developing missiles to defeat the U.S. missile shield. And then there's the Litvinenko case, and what happened to Yuschenko in the Ukraine. All this new-found oil wealth doesn't seem to be making them fat and happy. Do you pick up any sense of increased interest at Langley?
Dana Priest: Interest? You bet. Action? I dunno about that. (I don't mean covert action, I just mean collection of info/intel)
_______________________
Mamahuhu, Beijing, P.R. China: Hi there,
With American public opinion vehemently against the proposed "surge" in Baghdad, as well as against the to be announced expansion of the U.S. army (e.g. the negative, or even hostile online comments and reactions to today's WP headline article "Contention Increases on Troop Numbers in Iraq"), do you think the Democrats in Congress will support G.W.Bush in his plans, that will apparently need a new short term 100bn USD budget allocation on top of the +500bn USD already spent, or do you expect stiff Democratic opposition to these plans, more in accordance to the general negative trend in U.S. public opinion??
Dana Priest: Hi Mamahuhu! Love that name! I would expect stiff opposition to a surge, especially since, politically speaking, the Dems have the generals of their side and will not, therefore, have to take a risky stance.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.: So, how much did Hank Crumpton tell you about the Black Sites such that you did that fluff piece on him in The Post? Just like him to let that woman in the Agency take the fall for his corrupt behavior. By the way... he wasn't that valuable in Afghanistan.
Dana Priest: Washington DC. Re HC: You are mixing me up with one of the other broads at the paper. I'm all ears on other things though. Cheers.
_______________________
Chicago, Ill.: So who's deciding on troop levels in Iraq? From reading Peter Baker's article this morning, and just from my own memory, it's obvious that Bush has flip-flopped. The generals used to decide. Now the Decider decides. What the heck is going on?
Dana Priest: The Decider has always decided except when he decided not to decide and left it to the military. That's basically it.
_______________________
Berea, S.C.: Dana - Any thoughts about what Sandy Berger had in his drawers?
Dana Priest: Lots of erasers?
_______________________
College Park, Md.: Hello Dana,
When is a 'surge' an escalation?
Dana Priest: when it lasts more than three months.
_______________________
Dana Priest: Some of you are writing me books! Questions that are four paragraphs long just aren't going to work. Sorry. Anyway, I have to run off again. I guess we'll all be celebrating the holidays next week so I won't be here to chat. I wish you all some relaxing and peaceful moments, especially those in harm's way. Until next year....Dana
_______________________
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.
