It is not unreasonable to ask, “Why have we not attacked the problem at its roots?” The answer is twofold. First, the priority will always be on those individuals who are trying to attack the United States. That will always take precedence over the longer-term issues. And, second, the issues involved in counter-radicalization are numerous and complex, and require a number of countries to take the right steps. The issues involve good governance; anti-corruption; economic development; social service provision, particularly education; religious tolerance; and a host of other issues. Most important, for every narrative of al Qa‘ida’s, there must be a counter-narrative delivered loudly and widely—by the United States and our allies, by governments in countries where young people are radicalized, and by Islamic scholars and clerics..
One of the best examples of success in this area is Indonesia—the home to the largest Muslim population on the planet. Between 9/11 and 2006, Indonesia suffered sixteen terrorist attacks, resulting in more than three hundred deaths. In the next eight years, there were only five attacks, causing fourteen deaths. And, as of early 2015, only about 150 Indonesians had gone to fight in Syria, a remarkably low number for its population and for its terrorist past. While excellent intelligence and law enforcement work have played a role—and these tools will remain vital, particularly as many terrorists will be released from prison over the next few years—so have the Indonesian government’s counter-radicalization programs.
At the core of Jakarta’s program is a willingness to work with any entity that can reach young people with the right messages. The program is systematic and reaches almost every part of Indonesian society. The messages are essentially two—that the extremist interpretation of Islam is not consistent with the Koran, and that there is great value in tolerance.
Religious organizations in Indonesia are popular within society and are therefore an important channel for delivering the government’s counter-narrative to al Qa‘ida. Jakarta, for example, works with imams and mosques to offer a variety of perspectives on Islam, particularly to youth and student groups. Schools are also a focus—courses emphasize inclusion and tolerance. All the world’s religions are now studied, not just Islam, and schools are working to provide multiple perspectives on some of the issues that have played a role in radicalization, such as the relationship between Israel and the Palestinians.
Popular culture is also used. The government communicates with young people through popular musicians who communicate carefully crafted messages aimed at counteracting radical ideas. Music with lyrics about tolerance as an alternative to extremism has become popular in Indonesia and indeed throughout Southeast Asia. All of this is supported by a variety of media—books, articles, newsletters, the Internet, television, and radio. TV and the Internet focus on urban populations. Radio stations reach rural areas.
All of this, of course, requires focus, effort, and resources. It needs to be done throughout the Muslim world. It needs to be led by the governments in question. And it needs to be supported by the United States.
* * *
To me this is the most important chapter in the book, because it is about the threat from al Qa‘ida going forward and what we need to do to deal with it. But in sharing my thoughts in this chapter, I do not mean to imply that international terrorism is the only national security issue facing the United States. Quite the contrary. Terrorism is only one of many security issues we are facing as a country. Al Qa‘ida, as dangerous as it is, is only one of the things that keeps me up at night.
I believe national security issues can be put into two bins—national security threats and national security challenges that, if not managed effectively, could become threats. In addition to terrorism, the threats we face include “cyber”—cyber espionage, cyber crime, and cyber warfare—Iran, North Korea, narcotics and human trafficking, the intelligence activities of our adversaries, and others. The challenges we face are also many and include the rise of China, the Cold War–like behavior of Russia, the future stability of key countries like Pakistan, and historic change in what is still the most important place on the planet—the Middle East.
Of the threats, two stand out to me—“cyber” and Iran. The online world of cyber is now the preferred method that intelligence services use in stealing national defense secrets. Several nations have the capability to attack our critical infrastructure—transportation, finance, energy, etc.—in a way that could literally bring our nation to a standstill. Cyber is used by both foreign governments and foreign companies to steal the intellectual property of American companies—to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars a year. Cyber crime, largely committed by organized crime groups, is now generating as much money as the illegal drug trade. And all of this is going to get worse as cyber tools spread to more adversaries and as even more advanced tools are developed.
On Iran, it is very easy to go immediately to the nuclear issue, but our problems with Iran are much deeper. Iran wants to be the hegemonic power in the Middle East; it wants, in short, to reestablish the Persian Empire, which at its height in 500 BCE controlled 45 percent of the world’s population. Moreover, many Iranian leaders believe that Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth. Iran itself practices terrorism as a tool of statecraft, and Iran supports terrorist groups that target Israel, including the most significant ones—Hezbollah and Hamas. Iran supports insurgent groups in the Persian Gulf that want to overthrow the governments there. It supports the Houthi insurgency in Yemen, which in early 2015 overthrew the legitimate government of Yemen. And on top of all that, is Iran’s nuclear program. Iran is going to be a problem for the United States for a long time to come.
Among the national security challenges, none is more important than China. The US-China relationship is the most important bilateral tie in the world. There are two sides to the relationship—one positive and one negative. The positive includes the economic relationship between China and the United States, which is vital to both countries’ futures. In addition, based on meetings I had with my Chinese counterparts, there are more global national security issues where our interests overlap than where they are in tension, creating opportunities to work together. The negative side includes the fact that China is a rising power relative to the United States—and that China wants a greater say and greater influence in East Asia, where the US is currently in the driver’s seat; it also includes the fact that each country needs to prepare for war against the other (because our militaries are in close proximity to each other). Each plans for such a war, each trains for it, and each must equip its forces with the modern weaponry to fight it. Both of these trends on the negative side of the equation lead to tension in the relationship. The key question—the key challenge—is how to mitigate the downsides while taking advantage of the upsides to push the relationship forward. This will be a major task of the next president. President Obama began this agenda with his Asia-Pacific rebalancing and in his conversations with Chinese president Xi, and our next president must aggressively move the agenda forward.
The United States, of course, is going to have to deal with all these problems, and doing so successfully is going to require many things—including first-rate intelligence. Why? Because intelligence has never been more important than it is today. That is because without intelligence, policy-makers cannot understand many of these issues, cannot make policy on them, and, in most cases, cannot carry out the policy they establish. Just think about it this way: almost any expert, using open sources, can provide real insights on the eurozone crisis, German politics, or the Japanese economy. But only the intelligence community can provide insights on the plans, intentions, and capabilities of al Qa‘ida, the status of the Iranian nuclear program, or the capabilities of North Korean missiles. In short, this is a critical time to be an intelligence officer.
Dealing with these issues will also require educating our allies and adversaries alike on what the United States is all about. I was struck during my thirty-three-year career how many mi
sperceptions there are of the United States and our policies. The Supreme Leader in Iran and the leadership of North Korea, for example, both believe that the United States wants to overthrow their regimes and is working to do so. That is not true. Russian president Putin believes that the United States was behind the protests in the streets of Kiev that began the Russia-Ukraine crisis. That is not true. The number of misperceptions and even conspiracy theories is large and worrying—because it both creates threats and makes managing them difficult.
* * *
I remember visiting with Afghan president Karzai in Kabul in late 2010 only a few weeks after WikiLeaks, an online organization that publishes secret information, posted on its website and disseminated to several news organizations thousands of US State Department cables. The documents were provided by Chelsea Manning, who was serving with the US military in Iraq. Many of the cables reported on discussions that US diplomats had with foreign leaders as well as our diplomats’ thoughts on a large variety of foreign policy issues. The damage to US foreign policy was immediate and significant.
When I walked into Karzai’s office that day, the first thing he said to me was “Congratulations, Michael.” I said, “Mr. President, congratulations for what?” “For WikiLeaks,” he said. I said, “Mr. President, I don’t follow you. I don’t understand.” He said, “WikiLeaks was a brilliant CIA operation. Now foreign leaders will not talk to the State Department; they will only talk to CIA. Great job.” I jokingly responded, “If only we were that good.” But to Karzai this was not humor. He really believed it. He really believed that CIA had leaked thousands of classified State Department documents to get a leg up in the bureaucracy. It was an example of the kind of misperceptions and conspiracy theories that abound in the world.
* * *
Successfully dealing with the national security threats and challenges facing the United States also requires US leadership. No other country on the planet has the resources or the credibility to play that leadership role. American leadership is a necessary condition for mitigating the many threats and dealing with the many challenges we face. And policy-makers—most important the president and the leadership in Congress—have a responsibility to educate the American people on the threats and the important role required by the United States.
Policy-makers must approach the threats and challenges this country faces with the same sense of urgency as the officers I worked with from our Counterterrorism Center. There is a sign as you enter an important office in CIA’s Counterterrorism Center. The sign is a picture of the burning Twin Towers on 9/11, and there are words printed at the top. Those words are “Today is September 12, 2001.” That is the mind-set with which CTC does its job today and it is the mind-set with which CIA combats all the threats I just talked about.
And finally, we can only mitigate the threats facing us and deal with the challenges if we are strong as a nation, and we can be strong only if our political leaders make decisions that move our economy and our society forward. Because at the end of the day the most important determinant of a nation’s national security is the health of its economy and its society. That is why it is vital for our leaders to come together, discuss the tough issues, compromise, and make decisions. Nothing is more important to our future security as a nation.
* * *
Let me come back to the two stories that opened the chapter. First, Steve and Kevin.
For his courageous actions on 9/11, Steve earned the Soldier’s Medal, the highest peacetime award for valor. In the immediate aftermath of the attacks, he became a casualty assistance officer, helping others through their times of grief. He continues to serve our country today at the Defense Intelligence Agency.
Following his recovery Kevin went on to serve on the 9/11 Commission, and he worked for CIA in our Counterterrorism Center, helping to keep our country safe from other attacks. He worked there until after Bin Ladin was brought to justice, and then he felt he could finally move on.
One more word about Kevin. In those early hours on September 11, the doctors were not sure Kevin would live. And for many months they were not sure that he would ever be able to have children. But Kevin and his wife eventually had three beautiful children, and, of course, they named their son Steve.
And finally, Father Mychal Judge, who, like Kevin and Steve, acted when he needed to act. On September 10, 2001, Mychal Judge gave his last sermon at the dedication of a renovated firehouse in New York City. He said,
That’s the way it is. Good days. And bad days. Up days. Down days. Sad days. Happy days. But never a boring day on the job. You do what God has called you to do. You show up. You put one foot in front of another. You get on the rig and you go out and you do the job—which is a mystery. And a surprise. You have no idea when you get on that rig. No matter how big the call. No matter how small. You have no idea what God is calling you to do. But he needs you. He needs me. He needs all of us.
Father Mychal, Kevin, and Steve. I believe that all three were heroes, that all three are true leaders, and that the actions of all three speak to us about the importance of the United States’s taking a leadership role in the world to deal with the very difficult issues that we are facing today, and will continue to face for a long time to come.
CHAPTER 14
Carved in Stone
I worked for the Central Intelligence Agency for thirty-three years. From day one I was motivated by the mission of the Agency—keeping the country safe—and that motivation only grew over time as the significance of what I was doing expanded. I was also driven by the dedication of the men and women who undertook the task of keeping the country safe each and every day. Early in the morning, around seven a.m., almost half of the Agency’s parking lot is already filled. And late into the evening, at seven p.m., still half of the parking lot is filled. I had officers turn down well-deserved promotions or spend months from away their families and friends because they were so committed to a particular operation or initiative.
I have never worked with more dedicated people. People frequently ask me about specific movies and television series about the Agency. “Is Homeland real?” they ask. “Did Zero Dark Thirty get the story right?” My answer is always the same: “No, not really, with one exception, and that exception is the passion that CIA officers bring to the job.” I usually explain that the passion for getting the job done that is demonstrated, for example, by the character Carrie in Homeland or Maya in Zero Dark Thirty is a dead-on accurate portrayal of the passion of many CIA officers, particularly those who work in our Counterterrorism Center.
That dedication, I think, was captured simply and beautifully in the written answer to a question on a job application by the son of one of the finest scientists in the history of CIA. The question was “If you had the opportunity to meet someone from the past or present, who would it be and why?” His answer: “If I had the opportunity to meet anyone, past or present, I would elect to meet the man my dad becomes when he goes to work every day at CIA. I love my dad because he is the very definition of fatherhood: stoic, strong, capable. His career at CIA has always been out of my view, save for the awards and promotions he has brought home. My father is one of the countless unsung heroes of the clandestine service. I would love nothing more than to meet my dad at work, because as far as I’m concerned, I would be meeting Superman.”
* * *
Throughout my career I found particular inspiration and motivation from the men and women who made the ultimate sacrifice—those CIA officers who lost their lives in the line of duty. The most special place at the Agency is the north side of the main lobby at CIA headquarters—the location of our Memorial Wall, with stars etched into the marble, one star for every hero who made that sacrifice. I worked by a simple motto—that what I did every day needed to live up to the sacrifices represented by those stars. And I posed that challenge to the new officers when I led them through their oath of office on their first day at the Agency.
When I became deputy director in Ma
y 2010, I insisted that we move the swearing-in ceremony to the main lobby at the main headquarters building, so we could hold it in front of the stars. I was given many bureaucratic excuses for why we could not do so—“It will take too much time to move the class back and forth between buildings,” “We will have to shut down the main entrance for an hour,” “We will have to set up chairs and a podium for each swearing in”—and on and on. In response to each attempt to push back on my directive, I simply said, “I don’t care. Just do it.” After several days of this routine, the opposition got tired of my refrain and gave up, and the swearing-in ceremony moved to the lobby, where it is still held today, with all new employees raising their right hands and taking the oath while facing the Memorial Wall.
In my speech to the new employees before administering the oath of office, I would tell them, “I want you to know that you are not about to join just any company, not just any government agency.” It was important, I said, that they fully appreciate that they were about to join an organization that conducts espionage as a business, stealing secrets around the globe and making sense of them for the president of the United States—all with the goal of making our nation safer. “There is no other agency like this in the United States government,” I would say. And I would tell them that what they would do every day would be extremely relevant because intelligence “has never been more important than it is today.”
The Great War of Our Time: The CIA's Fight Against Terrorism--From Al Qa'ida to ISIS Page 33
