Intelligence

Split of DHS, CIA Intel Functions Leaves Lawmakers Muddled

FOXNews.com - Politics - Split of DHS, CIA Intel Functions Leaves Lawmakers Muddled

Friday, February 27, 2004

WASHINGTON — One year after the Homeland Security Department (search) was opened to be a center for intelligence analysis, another shop overseen by CIA Director George Tenet (search) appears firmly ensconced as the intelligence community's leading brain trust.

That leaves some congressional members wondering who in the intelligence community is in charge of what.

The Homeland Security Department's inspector general warned in December that the main objective of the department's intelligence division - to centralize analysis and information about threats to the homeland - may be duplicated or trumped by other organizations, including the increasingly prominent Terrorist Threat Integration Center (search).

John Brennan, the threat center director who reports to Tenet, said his center fills 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 this new organization (Homeland) the responsibility for setting something up, with secure communications systems and networks and having a fully trained analytic cadre?" Brennan asked. "No, you don't want to do that. What you want to do is tap into that capability that already exists."

Some lawmakers are not convinced.

Congress created Homeland and its information analysis, or intelligence, division in November 2002 as part of the largest government reorganization in more than 50 years.

Congressional sources, speaking on 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 operating under Tenet's umbrella.

Lawmakers recently have been grilling 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, following up at a hearing this month.

Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., said: "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."

Homeland's inspector general cautioned in December that two groups, including the terrorist threat center, either "overlap with, duplicate or even trump" the department's responsibility 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 that the system works.

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

When 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 leads analysis operations, culling information from Homeland and other sources to develop 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 resources and hasn't hired all the employees that Congress funded.

"It's a joke," said Vince Cannistraro, a former CIA counterterrorism chief who 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 called Homeland's analysts inexperienced and reactionary.

A senior French official, speaking on condition of anonymity, 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 tends to "open the umbrella" at the hint of rain.

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

February 28, 2004 at 11:01 AM in CIA | Permalink | TrackBack (5) | Top of page | Blog Home