Limited Intelligence

U.S. intelligence services missed a “Wal-mart of private-sector proliferation.”

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


OK, so let’s get this straight. The Iraq Survey Group, whose chief, David Kay, just quit, has come up empty in its search for Iraqi WMDs. (The Bush administration professes itself confident that the weapons will turn up “eventually,” even as it diverts resources away from the hunt.) Meanwhile, Mohamed ElBaradei, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, says he’s astonished at the scale and complexity of Libya’s successful efforts to get hold of materials and blueprints for nuclear weapons designs. The IAEA’s work in Libya and Iran has already uncovered what ElBaradei has called a “Wal-Mart of private-sector proliferation” involving “things being designed in one country, manufactured in two or three others, shipped to a fourth, redirected to a fifth,” with Pakistan as the key supplier and North Korea a major buyer. “The sophistication of the process, frankly, has surpassed my expectations,” ElBaradei said.

It has also surpassed the expectations of the U.S. intelligence community, which, in its eagerness to prove the existence of non-existent weapons in Iraq, completely missed the existence of real weapons elsewhere. (Remember, too, that the first the CIA knew of India’s and Pakistan’s nuclear progress was when, in 1998, both countries actually tested their bombs.)

All of which is to say, What’s up with U.S. intelligence?

Kay, himself a CIA alum, regularly popped up on network news in the run-up to the war to advocate regime change on the grounds that Saddam surely had (not might have, not will have) weapons of mass destruction. Now he’s just as sure that no such weapons existed, certainly not on the eve of the U.S. invasion.

Kay said:

“I’m personally convinced that there were not large stockpiles of newly produced weapons of mass destruction. We don’t find the people, the documents or the physical plants that you would expect to find if the production was going on.”

Kay faulted the CIA’s intelligence in Iraq, calling it a mistake to try to gauge Iraq’s weapons programs without the use of CIA spies. During the 1990s, the CIA had gotten intelligence by infiltrating U.N. weapons inspection team. But in 1998, Iraq stopped cooperating with the inspectors (in part because, Iraq claimed (accurately!) that the U.S. was using the inspections process to spy on them) and what intelligence there was seemed to go stale. Kay said the CIA had no idea how badly chaos under Saddam’s leadership had corrupted Iraq’s weapons capabilities. “The system became so corrupt, and we missed that.”

But the flaws in U.S. intelligence system revealed by this go beyond Iraq. Libya’s, and most likely Iran’s, nuclear ambitions were served by a sophisticated black market offering weapons designs, technical advice, and thousands of sensitive parts — and nobody had a clue!

ElBaradei said:

“It’s obvious that the international export controls have completely failed in recent years. A nuclear black market has emerged, driven by fantastic cleverness. Designs are drawn in one country, centrifuges are produced in another, they are then shipped via a third country and there is no clarity about the end user. Expert nuclear businessmen, unscrupulous firms, and perhaps also state bodies are involved. Libya and Iran made extensive use of this network.”

David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security, a non-profit organization dedicated to international security issues, says that the essential precondition for such a black market to flourish is a break-down in intelligence:

“The fact that Libya could go out and buy an entire centrifuge plant without anyone detecting it is startling. It represents a failure of the export-control system, and most certainly a failure of intelligence.”

All this raises two disturbing questions: 1) What else don’t we know? and 2) Can we ever again trust information from the U.S. intelligence services? It’s far from clear what the answers are.

WHO DOESN’T LOVE A POSITIVE STORY—OR TWO?

“Great journalism really does make a difference in this world: it can even save kids.”

That’s what a civil rights lawyer wrote to Julia Lurie, the day after her major investigation into a psychiatric hospital chain that uses foster children as “cash cows” published, letting her know he was using her findings that same day in a hearing to keep a child out of one of the facilities we investigated.

That’s awesome. As is the fact that Julia, who spent a full year reporting this challenging story, promptly heard from a Senate committee that will use her work in their own investigation of Universal Health Services. There’s no doubt her revelations will continue to have a big impact in the months and years to come.

Like another story about Mother Jones’ real-world impact.

This one, a multiyear investigation, published in 2021, exposed conditions in sugar work camps in the Dominican Republic owned by Central Romana—the conglomerate behind brands like C&H and Domino, whose product ends up in our Hershey bars and other sweets. A year ago, the Biden administration banned sugar imports from Central Romana. And just recently, we learned of a previously undisclosed investigation from the Department of Homeland Security, looking into working conditions at Central Romana. How big of a deal is this?

“This could be the first time a corporation would be held criminally liable for forced labor in their own supply chains,” according to a retired special agent we talked to.

Wow.

And it is only because Mother Jones is funded primarily by donations from readers that we can mount ambitious, yearlong—or more—investigations like these two stories that are making waves.

About that: It’s unfathomably hard in the news business right now, and we came up about $28,000 short during our recent fall fundraising campaign. We simply have to make that up soon to avoid falling further behind than can be made up for, or needing to somehow trim $1 million from our budget, like happened last year.

If you can, please support the reporting you get from Mother Jones—that exists to make a difference, not a profit—with a donation of any amount today. We need more donations than normal to come in from this specific blurb to help close our funding gap before it gets any bigger.

payment methods

WHO DOESN’T LOVE A POSITIVE STORY—OR TWO?

“Great journalism really does make a difference in this world: it can even save kids.”

That’s what a civil rights lawyer wrote to Julia Lurie, the day after her major investigation into a psychiatric hospital chain that uses foster children as “cash cows” published, letting her know he was using her findings that same day in a hearing to keep a child out of one of the facilities we investigated.

That’s awesome. As is the fact that Julia, who spent a full year reporting this challenging story, promptly heard from a Senate committee that will use her work in their own investigation of Universal Health Services. There’s no doubt her revelations will continue to have a big impact in the months and years to come.

Like another story about Mother Jones’ real-world impact.

This one, a multiyear investigation, published in 2021, exposed conditions in sugar work camps in the Dominican Republic owned by Central Romana—the conglomerate behind brands like C&H and Domino, whose product ends up in our Hershey bars and other sweets. A year ago, the Biden administration banned sugar imports from Central Romana. And just recently, we learned of a previously undisclosed investigation from the Department of Homeland Security, looking into working conditions at Central Romana. How big of a deal is this?

“This could be the first time a corporation would be held criminally liable for forced labor in their own supply chains,” according to a retired special agent we talked to.

Wow.

And it is only because Mother Jones is funded primarily by donations from readers that we can mount ambitious, yearlong—or more—investigations like these two stories that are making waves.

About that: It’s unfathomably hard in the news business right now, and we came up about $28,000 short during our recent fall fundraising campaign. We simply have to make that up soon to avoid falling further behind than can be made up for, or needing to somehow trim $1 million from our budget, like happened last year.

If you can, please support the reporting you get from Mother Jones—that exists to make a difference, not a profit—with a donation of any amount today. We need more donations than normal to come in from this specific blurb to help close our funding gap before it gets any bigger.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate