The DNA Problem in American Spying
By SAM TANENHAUS
NYT
This time, at least, disaster was averted. But the parallels between Christmas Day and Sept. 11, 2001, were inescapable: a radical Islamist, an airplane, explosives that came close to destroying innocent lives.
And — perhaps most alarming — the apparent failure of American intelligence to uncover an imminent terrorist attack despite what seemed ample clues.
So why were signals missed? Why can’t intelligence agencies communicate better with each other? Those questions hint at a puzzle that has been at the center of modern intelligence-gathering since it took shape, early in the cold war.
Then, as now, theorists and practitioners of intelligence sought a smoothly functioning, highly efficient and seamlessly integrated organization, or cluster of organizations. But they struggled at it, largely because the purposes to which intelligence were put were complex and at times contradictory.
(More here.)
NYT
This time, at least, disaster was averted. But the parallels between Christmas Day and Sept. 11, 2001, were inescapable: a radical Islamist, an airplane, explosives that came close to destroying innocent lives.
And — perhaps most alarming — the apparent failure of American intelligence to uncover an imminent terrorist attack despite what seemed ample clues.
So why were signals missed? Why can’t intelligence agencies communicate better with each other? Those questions hint at a puzzle that has been at the center of modern intelligence-gathering since it took shape, early in the cold war.
Then, as now, theorists and practitioners of intelligence sought a smoothly functioning, highly efficient and seamlessly integrated organization, or cluster of organizations. But they struggled at it, largely because the purposes to which intelligence were put were complex and at times contradictory.
(More here.)
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home