Intelligence

Amid debate on responsibility, CIA oversees threat analysis

Amid debate on responsibility, CIA oversees threat analysis

Friday, February 27, 2004
By Katherine Pfleger Shrader
The Associated Press

WASHINGTON — An office overseen by the Central Intelligence director now plays the key role of analyzing threats to the United States, even though the Department of Homeland Security was opened a year ago for that reason.
Lawmakers are asking pointed questions about who's in charge, amid worries the overlap and confusion that plagued intelligence efforts before Sept. 11, 2001, could recur.

Homeland's inspector general warned in December that a principal objective in creating the department's intelligence division — to centralize analysis and information about threats to the United States — may be duplicated or trumped by other organizations, including the increasingly prominent Terrorist Threat Integration Center, overseen by Central Intelligence Director George Tenet.

The threat center's director John Brennan, who reports to Tenet, said, however, that his center is filling a need spotted by the Bush administration to protect U.S. interests at home and abroad, pulling expertise from the CIA, FBI, Homeland Security and elsewhere. Homeland's mission stopped at the U.S. shore, he noted in an interview this week at CIA headquarters.

"Did you really want to give (Homeland) the responsibility for setting something up, with secure communications systems and networks and having a fully trained analytic cadre?" Brennan said. "No, you don't want to do that. What you want to do is tap into that capability that already exists."

Still, some in Congress are not convinced. In November 2002, Congress created Homeland and its information analysis, or intelligence, division as part of the largest government reorganization in more than 50 years.

Congressional sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said they were surprised when, just before President Bush's 2003 State of the Union, they learned Bush planned to announce another intelligence analysis center under Tenet's umbrella.

Lawmakers in recent weeks have repeatedly grilled administration officials about which agency is responsible for what.

In an October letter, Senate Government Affairs Chairwoman Susan Collins (R-Maine) and the panel's top Democrat, Michigan Sen. Carl Levin, asked how the intelligence community is operating — "to avoid any overlap, any confusion, any kind of uncertainty as to who has the principal responsibility," Levin said, after a hearing this month.

Said Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.): "The Homeland Security Act called for a robust intelligence fusion center within the Department of Homeland Security, but the administration created a separate threat center ... which does not truly break down the turf barriers among intelligence agencies."

In December, Homeland's inspector general cautioned that two groups, including the terrorist threat center, either "overlap with, duplicate or even trump" the department's responsibilty for centralizing terrorist threat information.

"Ensuring that DHS has access to the intelligence that it needs to prevent and/or respond to terrorist threats is, under such circumstances, an even harder challenge than it would otherwise be," the report said.

Brennan, Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge and other officials insist, however, the system is working.

The threat center "is fulfilling DHS's mission," Brennan said. "We don't see ourselves as a competitor at all."

Asked at a hearing Wednesday about duplication, Ridge replied: "Some people call it duplication, others call it competitive analysis." He said diverse opinions help the process.

Brennan says his shop is the lead analysis operation, culling information from various sources, including Homeland, to create threat reports for policy makers. Ridge and other officials can ask for more, or use the information to determine the nation's color-coded threat level or recommend air marshals.

Critics note that Homeland lacks resource and hasn't hired all the employees Congress has funded.

"It's a joke," said Vince Cannistraro, a former CIA counterterrorism chief who still maintains contacts in the intelligence community. "What do you gain by having a DHS intelligence shop?"

Privately, even some in U.S. law enforcement and intelligence circles have quietly called Homeland's analysts inexperienced and reactionary.

Internationally, a senior French official, speaking on condition of anonymity recently, said that while the French have had a good working relationship with the FBI and CIA, Homeland officials are far less experienced and sometimes appear overly cautious. The official said the department's reflex is to "open the umbrella" at the hint of rain.

Brennan, though, insists Homeland did a "superlative job" handling aviation threats over Christmas. But some allies may still be getting used to dealing with new players, he acknowledges.

"People are probably out of their comfort zones in some of these areas," Brennan said. "But DHS has some very important responsibilities."

© 2004 Associated Press — All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

February 28, 2004 at 11:00 AM in CIA | Permalink | TrackBack (6) | Top of page | Blog Home