The challenges at America's top spy agency

The al-Qaeda terrorist attack against the United States on September 11, 2001, was one of the biggest intelligence failures of all time, which might have been avoided if America’s spy agencies had worked more cohesively. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) was created in the aftermath of 9/11 to learn that painful lesson, and ensure that every one of America’s 18 intelligence agencies coordinates and cooperates with each other. But now this overseer of spooks - from FBI agents to military intelligence - is under attack by the Trump administration, senior Congress politicians and long-serving intelligence officers have warned. They are alarmed over the appointment of a new acting director for the ODNI who, before he took over the reins on June 19, had never had any experience of the secret spying world. The relatively-unknown Bill Pulte, a Trump loyalist, is head of the government’s federal housing finance regulator. He will be keeping that job, too, while joining the cabinet in his new senior intelligence role. Pulte, 38, arrived at the ODNI office at 1500 Tysons McLean Drive, Virginia, just outside the Washington DC border, with a list of names to be chopped, and his role appears to be to cut, cut, cut. The apparently arbitrary nature of the job losses has raised questions over whether the ODNI will be so undermined as to be ineffective, or whether it survives at all. The ODNI was set up by President George W Bush in April 2005, after the excoriatingly thorough inquiries that followed the 9/11 attacks. The investigations found that vital clues to Osama bin Laden’s plot to train terrorists in Florida to fly Boeing airliners and launch them like cruise missiles into the Twin Towers and Pentagon had been picked up by the FBI. Likewise, the CIA obtained covertly-acquired information - but the two threads were not connected in time. The ODNI has gone through many variations. It expanded to about 1,660 personnel, became too bureaucratic and has continued to rival the CIA for winning the ear of the president. But after the 9/11 catastrophe, most members of the US intelligence community would concede that a DNI remains an important post. But not if it’s filled by a man with no clue about intelligence matters. A former long-serving CIA officer told The Times: “I do think this an effort to, at the very least, significantly scale down the size of ODNI. Frankly, that’s not entirely a bad thing. It has ballooned in ways that was never intended since 2005. “The question is how they do it — will they go about it strategically or with a sledgehammer? There’s no question that we need a DNI, but a more tailored and rightsized ODNI wouldn’t be a bad thing at all.” A more alarmist interpretation of Pulte’s appointment as intelligence chief was delivered by Senator Mark Warner, Democratic vice chairman of the Senate intelligence committee, and Representative Jim Himes, Democratic ranking member of the House intelligence committee. “We are concerned that your record as director of the federal housing finance agency demonstrates a willingness to misuse your position, including your access to sensitive information, to pursue President Trump’s perceived political enemies and further his retributive political agenda,” they wrote in a letter to Pulte. They also warned that further job cuts (in addition to the 500 losses announced under Tulsi Gabbard who resigned from the DNI post last month) would “risk jeopardising the mission of an organisation explicitly created after 9/11 to prevent any future such terrorist attack”. The shake-up at the ODNI comes as Trump has repeatedly shown that, rather than listen to the advice of his own intelligence agencies, he prefers to operate on gut instinct and on occasions to seek the views of non-US spy chiefs who have their own particular furrow to plough. The classic example of this was in February, before the war with Iran. Binyamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, appeared with David Barnea, the head of the Mossad spy agency, a video screen during a national security meeting in the White House’s basement “situation room” and predicted that airstrikes would bring down the regime in Tehran and lead to a popular uprising. A day later, American intelligence analysts had interrogated the claims. John Ratcliffe, the director of the CIA, described the Israelis’ regime change scenarios as “farcical” while Marco Rubio, secretary of state and national security adviser, agreed they were “bullshit”, according to the New York Times. But Trump appeared to trust Netanyahu and Mossad more than the CIA’s own assessments, and the Israelis were proved wrong: Operation Epic Fury, the war started on February 28, did not create a revolution. Similarly, the White House was furious after leaked intelligence reports suggested that last year’s US-Israeli strikes on Iran had only set back Iran’s nuclear programme by a few months, rather than completely “obliterating” it, as the President had boasted. Former senior officials with long experience of working with the US intelligence community fear that Pulte’s appointment is part of Trump’s long-running battle with the alleged “deep state”. They shared the concerns expressed by Senator Warner and his House colleague over the the acting director’s qualifications and motivations. “I would say that there are arguments that the DNI experiment led to some bureaucratic bloating and the DNI was never given control over IC [intelligence community] budgets that would have allowed the occupants of the office to really oversee the entire IC as many hoped would be the case,” one former senior official said. “But whatever the arguments may be for reform, putting someone like Pulte in charge who has no knowledge of or experience with intelligence, not only violates the spirit but the letter of the law. “Even more troubling is the fact that Pulte is there to execute Trump’s retribution agenda against the alleged ‘deep state’ who drew attention to the extraordinarily unusual array of contacts between Trump’s 2016 campaign and envoys of Russia’s government. It is a gross politicisation of the intelligence structures and endangers US national security.” Trump has also tasked Pulte with investigating “rigged elections” as part of his intelligence agency role. Last week the acting director was reported to have installed a woman who worked on election monitoring for the Republican National Committee, as his chief of staff, raising further criticism. Senator Warner, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, remarked that Pulte’s office was supposed to be countering foreign threats, not importing “election denialism into the intelligence community.” Pulte’s tenure is expected to be temporary. Trump has nominated Jay Clayton, a federal prosecutor in New York, to be Gabbard’s permanent replacement. Clayton, 59, a former Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission and veteran Trump Administration official, is at least a more conventional choice for the role. “Few people anywhere in the Legal Community are respected at the level of Jay,” Trump said earlier this month in a Truth Social post announcing his pick. “I encourage the United States Senate to confirm Jay as soon as possible.” However an attempt by Democrats to speed up Clayton’s appointment before Pulte could begin work was also derailed by the president. As part of a political tug of war with his critics, Trump demanded that the Senate hold hearings to confirm Clayton’s replacement as US Attorney for the Southern District of New York before they interviewed him for the post of Director of National Intelligence. The question being raised on Capitol Hill is: how much damage can Pulte do as acting director before Clayton’s appointment comes up for confirmation by the Senate? PLEASE BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER. AMAZON, WATERSTONES, ROWANVALE BOOKS