CIA, Its Role, Its Assessment

Below is an interesting article regarding the CIA assessment regarding the status of Iraq. For those the think the appointment of Porter Goss is a good thing, I guess they will find comfort in this report. For those, like me that would trust the Bush administration with the classroom milk money, they might find some support as well..

Iraq faces descent into chaos, says CIA chief Report leaked as 1,000th US soldier dies in action Suzanne Goldenberg in WashingtonWednesday December 8, 2004The Guardian The Bush administration's robust assertions that the situation in Iraq would improve with next month's elections were badly shaken yesterday with the leak of a gloomy end-of-tour cable from the departing CIA station chief in Baghdad.
The bleak assessment, reported in yesterday's New York Times, warned that Iraq would descend even deeper into violent chaos unless the government was able to assert its authority and deliver concrete economic improvements.
It arrived on a day when US forces recorded the death of the 1,000th soldier to be killed in combat since the beginning of the war.
In all, 1,275 US service personnel have died since the invasion on March 20 last year. This figure includes accidents, suicides and other deaths not classed as killed in action. A total of 9,765 US troops have been wounded.
No official totals of Iraqi deaths are available. Estimates range from 14,000 to tens of thousands of civilians and around 5,000 troops.
The classified assessment was sent to CIA headquarters in Virginia late last month as the officer ended a year-long tour in Iraq. It was bolstered by a similar assessment from a second CIA officer, Michael Kostiw, who serves as a senior adviser to the agency chief, Porter Goss.
The outlook offered by the station chief echoes several similar warnings from officials in Washington and Baghdad. An intelligence estimate prepared for the White House last August said that Iraq's security situation could remain tenuous at best until the end of 2005, and warned the country was at risk of civil war.
But the latest warning is particularly ill-timed for the White House, which has been focused on assuring Americans that the situation in Iraq would improve with the coming elections. It is also a personal embarrassment for Mr Goss, a former Republican congressman who had made it his mission to stem the flow of embarrassing leaks from the agency.
In a memo last month, Mr Goss wrote that the agency had a dual task - to provide intelligence, and to support administration policies. "As agency employees we do not identify with, support or champion opposition to the administration or its policies," the memo said.
As station chief, the unnamed CIA official supervised more than 300 operatives, the largest intelligence operation since the Vietnam war, and their assessment carries authority.
While the senior US military commander in Iraq, General George Casey Jr, initially raised no objections to the CIA assessment, the New York Times reported that the US ambassador, John Negroponte, had filed a lengthy message of dissent in which he argued that the US had made considerable progress in controlling the insurgency.
Mr Bush did not directly comment on the CIA report yesterday, but in a speech to US marines in Camp Pendle ton, California, he described the war in Iraq as part of the global struggle against terrorism and warned: "As election day approaches, we can expect further violence from the terrorists.
"You see, the terrorists understand what is at stake. They know they have no future in a free Iraq, because free people will never choose their own enslavement. They know democracy will give Iraqis a stake in the future of their country."
Throughout the speech, Mr Bush referred to the insurgents, who are largely Iraqis opposed to the US occupation, as terrorists.
In conversations with reporters about the assessment yesterday, agency officials admitted that efforts to train local Iraqi security forces were not keeping pace with the growth of an increasingly violent insurgency. So far, the official strength of the Iraqi security forces is put at 83,000 although only 47,000 have been fully armed and trained.
The new Iraqi government could also expect a new wave of violence if the elections are boycotted by the Sunni minority.

Comments

Bob Cat said…
Says Bob:
____________

The insurgents are mostly Sunni Moslems who are a minority. They have ruled by force up until now. In a democratic Iraq, they will not hold power. They would rather destroy the democracy than see the Shiites rule.

It remains to be seen how many Sunnis would prefer democracy and Shiite rule to rule by Baathist thugs.

Times are tough in Iraq. We must perservere and hold elections, no matter what the Sunnis do.
_________________________
J.D. Kessler said…
Certainly it would be an encouragement to the insurgents to postpone the election. However, if the election doesn't produce a general sense that it was fair with the vast majority of the population, I wouldn't expect that anything is going to change.

Some have suggested the election will give Bush an exit strategy. They held elections, we created democracy, now we can leave. Unforetunately, I would be shocked if the election will change anything in terms of the insurgency. And I would further suggest that only a government supported by the vast majority of its citizens will have any creditablity with its populace.

Thus, by establishing an election date...probably to satisfy voters at home, the administration may have created its own monster.

Popular posts from this blog

Anger Management

War on Terror

Victory in Fallujah