Counterintelligence posts vacant

washington times ^ | February 10, 2006 | Bill Gertz

[strategofr]

The top ranks of government counterintelligence agencies are empty due to resignations and retirements amid a dispute over the role of counterspying, U.S. intelligence officials say. The most senior U.S. government counterintelligence official -- presidential appointee Michelle Van Cleave -- resigned last month after the office of the National Counterintelligence Executive (NCIX), which she headed, was made part of the new Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI)...

Intelligence officials said the failure to fill the top posts is a sign of bias against counterspying by senior intelligence officials under DNI John Negroponte and at other agencies. It goes against the recommendations of a presidential commission that called improving efforts to counter foreign spying an urgent priority. The Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction stated last year that "while our enemies are executing what amounts to a global intelligence war against the United States, we have failed to meet the challenge." It said counterspying efforts "have remained fractured, myopic, and only marginally effective." Former FBI Counterintelligence Chief Dave Szady, who left Jan. 27 for a private-sector job, said in a recent interview that the threat from foreign spies "is worse now than it was in the Cold War."

Copyright © 1999 - 2006 News World Communications, Inc. http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20060210-123648-8710r.htm

[strategofr]

Mmmm...

[darkwing104]

Hissy fit...

[McGavin999]

presidential appointee Michelle Van Cleave

Which president appointed her?

[Cicero]

President Bush, in 2003.

http://www.nacic.gov/about/van_cleave.html

[elli1]

Hissy fit...

Possibly.

Or just a move out of a dead end position (she's working at DOD now), considering the integration/ consolidation, etc. in intelligence.

Van Cleave, of California, is currently the Special Assistant to the Under Secretary for Policy at the U.S. Department of Defense.

Source

[siunevada]

In particular, the current DNI mission manager for collection, Mary Margaret Graham, who left as head of counterintelligence at the CIA last year, regards counterintelligence as a support function.
Counterintelligence "needs to remain a strategic mission rather than a support activity," a second intelligence official said. "We have to stay ahead of foreign intelligence services that are out there going after our secrets."

I'm not really up on the jargon but "support function" doesn't sound quite right.

[Larry Lucido]

Counterintelligence posts vacant

The Counterintelligence Moderator is deleting them.

[strategofr]

"I'm not really up on the jargon but "support function" doesn't sound quite right."

You are correct. Support function means: a routine function, like maintaining a building---as opposed to designing a new one. Counterintelligence, on the other hand, is one of the most important functions in our government. Naturally, those members of our government under Leftist or Russian influence seek to denigrate the importance of counterintelligence---or alternately, to undermine it in some fashion.

[Reily]

In government bureaucratic language anything that is 'support' means a 'secondary mission' not a 'primary mission'. Bureaucratically that means its budget is cut first if there is budget pressure, 2nd or 3rd pick of equipment and personnel, in summary not an equal player in the organization.
Counter-Intelligence has always been the 'odd-man out' in the US Intel community. The FBI traditionally treats it as another 'cops & robbers' mission (It isn't !) and other agencies view it as an after-thought (and of course it shouldn't be !). Maybe a US version of MI5 is a good idea, I don't know enough of the inner details (an if I did I couldn't say!) to have an answer. If you read the books(books that don't have a political agenda!) that chronicle the development of US intelligence since its formation at the end of WW2 you get the feeling its more of a 'hodge-podge' then anything that was rationally planned. Many intel failures may have their true beginnings in this rather then anything else.