| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Ralph Peters: Smart Intel Pick |
| 2005-02-18 |
| PRESIDENT Bush just made a very promising choice for our first national intelligence director: Ambassador John Negroponte. Thinking creatively, Bush picked someone who has had to rely upon intelligence, rather than an insider who can't see beyond the system's self-satisfied, mammoth bureaucracy. Normally, a diplomat would be a terrible choice to drive intel reform. Too many diplos just don't have the punch to make things happen. Negroponte's different. He's a hitter. With experience in Honduras during Central America's years of crisis, as well as in Mexico, the Philippines, the United Nations and now Iraq, this guy knows what it means to be blindsided by bad intel. His Baghdad sojourn will have brought him up to date both on the intel system's improving capabilities and its remaining inadequacies. Based on his track record for getting things done — blood on the floor be damned — Negroponte may be just the right man to provide top cover for Porter Goss, the Director of Central Intelligence, who's been shaking up the CIA and forcing essential changes. |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #6 Peters is saying what I have been saying all along - except he is far more eloquent than I am. The "old boys club" way of doing things has prevented the development of top-flight analysts. The system supports more of a patronage path than a meritocracy (i.e. its typical Government in terms of payscales and promotions). And patronage goes to the Ivy Leaguers from their Ivy League bosses, for the simple reason that they beleive they are better educated than anyone coming out of any "state college" type of system, which is not the case anymore, at least not for intel work. They need to stop recruiting the Ivy League types, and get out into red-state country and pick the cream of the crop there. Because out in red-state country, you rise on your own merits far more often than on patronage and family connections. That would be a good first step in restocking after cleaning house. The interesting thing will be who replaces Hayden at NSA. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2005-02-18 11:52:03 AM |
| #5 Peters is saying what I have been saying all along - except he is far more eloquent than I am. The "old boys club" way of doing things has prevented the development of top-flight analysts. The system supports more of a patronage path than a meritocracy (i.e. its typical Government in terms of payscales and promotions). And patronage goes to the Ivy Leaguers from their Ivy League bosses, for the simple reason that they beleive they are better educated than anyone coming out of any "state college" type of system, which is not the case anymore, at least not for intel work. They need to stop recruiting the Ivy League types, and get out into red-state country and pick the cream of the crop there. Because out in red-state country, you rise on your own merits far more often than on patronage and family connections. That would be a good first step in restocking after cleaning house. The interesting thing will be who replaces Hayden at NSA. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2005-02-18 11:52:03 AM |
| #4 Tinystan ..heh, heh! |
| Posted by: 2b 2005-02-18 5:19:14 PM |
| #3 I would disagree about priorities. Eliminating the deadwood is one thing, but the desire to do this is a longstanding one in the Intel community. In this case, Negroponte is *first* going to have to completely re-write the task organization of "the 15". To explain: take the NRO, for example. Negroponte will first ask, how *did* the NRO function, in past? Probably with a direct link to the President's National Security Council, just like the other 14. Then, if the NSC found something interesting, they might funnel just the tiniest bit of information to a different organization, say the NSA, and tell them to "check it out". This is tremendously wasteful in time, effort, energy and resources. If there is a cross-pipeline of information between agencies, then when a focus is ordered on something, it gets *intense* scrutiny and input from all 15 agencies. A good comparison would be the "Goldwater" reorganization of the Pentagon, to *make* the armed forces integrate with each other (post Granada Invasion screw-up). This would mean that, in future, let's say something interesting is discovered by someone to be happening in the country of Tinystan. All 15 agencies start compiling data, collating it, and developing a picture: the NRO says "we now have current photos of the site"; the NSA says "we have intercepted a LOT of electronic traffic and discovered these things"; and the CIA says "lots of known terrorists have suddenly decided to vacation in Tinystan", etc. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-02-18 2:09:23 PM |
| #2 Peters is saying what I have been saying all along - except he is far more eloquent than I am. The "old boys club" way of doing things has prevented the development of top-flight analysts. The system supports more of a patronage path than a meritocracy (i.e. its typical Government in terms of payscales and promotions). And patronage goes to the Ivy Leaguers from their Ivy League bosses, for the simple reason that they beleive they are better educated than anyone coming out of any "state college" type of system, which is not the case anymore, at least not for intel work. They need to stop recruiting the Ivy League types, and get out into red-state country and pick the cream of the crop there. Because out in red-state country, you rise on your own merits far more often than on patronage and family connections. That would be a good first step in restocking after cleaning house. The interesting thing will be who replaces Hayden at NSA. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2005-02-18 11:52:03 AM |
| #1 wow..ralph peters and VDH all in the same day. A dose of Steyn and I can take in a deep breath of sanity. |
| Posted by: 2b 2005-02-18 11:15:42 AM |