[Intelforum] Secrecy News -- 04/26/10

Mon Apr 26 10:03:32 EDT 2010

Format Note:  If you cannot easily read the text below, or you prefer to
receive Secrecy News in another format, please reply to this email to let
us know.

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2010, Issue No. 33
April 26, 2010

Secrecy News Blog:  http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/

**      EXPORT CONTROL POLICY AS A GUIDE TO SECRECY REFORM
**      A LOOK AT CHINA'S USE OF AIRSHIPS

EXPORT CONTROL POLICY AS A GUIDE TO SECRECY REFORM

"The problem we face," said Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates last week,
"is that the current system, which has not been significantly altered
since the end of the Cold War, originated and evolved in a very different
era with a very different array of concerns in mind."  He was talking
about the U.S. export control process, but with minor differences he might
just as well have been speaking about the national security classification
system, since an increasingly obsolete model of security underlies both
policy regimes.

"America's decades-old, bureaucratically labyrinthine system does not
serve our 21st century security needs or our economic interests,"
Secretary Gates said April 20 at an event hosted by Business Executives
for National Security.  "Our security interests would be far better served
by a more agile, transparent, predictable and efficient regime.  Tinkering
around the edges of the current system will not do."

     http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2010/04/gates-export.html

The White House expressed a similar view in an April 20 fact sheet. The
current U.S. export control system, it said, "is overly complicated,
contains too many redundancies, and tries to protect too much."  The scope
of export controls is so broad that it "dilutes our ability to adequately
control and protect those key items and technologies that must be
protected for our national security.  The goal of the reform effort is 'to
build high walls around a smaller yard' by focusing our enforcement efforts
on our 'crown jewels'," the White House said.

    http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2010/04/wh-export.html

In fact, the export control system is so messed up, senior defense
officials told reporters at an April 19 press briefing, that "the system
itself poses a threat to national security."

    http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2010/04/dod-export.html

The Administration's proposed solution for export control policy is based
on principles of simplification, consolidation and a focus on the highest
value items to be controlled.  This translates into a single export
control list, a single licensing agency, a single enforcement agency, and
a single information technology system for the entire export control
program.

A similar approach could be applied to classification policy, perhaps in
the following way.

A single classification system:  Currently there are two parallel
classification systems, one for general national security information,
based on executive order, and one for nuclear weapons-related information,
based on the Atomic Energy Act.  In many areas of defense and foreign
policy, the two systems overlap, generating unnecessary complexity and
confusion.  The dual classification systems also significantly complicate
the declassification process.  Moving to a single classification system
would simplify the classification process, facilitate training of
personnel, and increase declassification productivity.  A useful interim
step would be to transfer the nuclear weapons classification category
known as "Formerly Restricted Data" (FRD) into the general national
security classification system so that FRD records -- on topics such as
stockpile size and weapon storage locations abroad -- could be handled and
declassified just like other records containing national security
information.

A consolidated set of classification guides:  Currently there are nearly
three thousand classification guides in government that prescribe what
information is to be classified and at what level.  Instead there could be
maybe three-- one for defense operations and technology, one for
intelligence, and one for foreign policy (and perhaps one more for nuclear
weapons information if the two classification systems are combined).  This
kind of consolidation would help promote standardization across agencies,
including ease of correction and change of classification policies.  It
would also facilitate oversight and enforcement of proper classification
practices.

An enhanced oversight mechanism:  If there is going to be increased
uniformity and consistency in classification across the government, then a
strong oversight mechanism will be needed to adjudicate and resolve the
inevitable conflicts that will arise among individual agencies, and the
deviations between policy and practice.  The existing Information Security
Oversight Office could help fulfill this role if the President grants it
the power and the responsibility to overrule erroneous or unwise
classification decisions.

A drastic reduction in scope of classification:  Just as the export
control system "tries to protect too much," the same is true in spades of
the classification system.  (Random example: The total dollar cost of the
CIA's CORONA satellite program, which ended in 1972, is still considered
classified information.)  "Frederick the Great's famous maxim that he who
defends everything defends nothing certainly applies to export control,"
Secretary Gates said last week.  The corresponding view in classification
policy is Justice Potter Stewart's familiar statement that "when
everything is classified, then nothing is classified...."  The forthcoming
Fundamental Classification Guidance Review that was required by executive
order 13526 should help to reverse the growth of the classification system
over the next two years.  But other targeted measures may also be needed to
achieve the optimum classification state of "high walls around narrow
areas."

"The proposition that a more focused and streamlined system actually helps
our national security can go against conventional wisdom," Secretary Gates
said.  Nevertheless, "I believe it is the right approach, and it is
urgently needed, given the harmful effects of continuing with the existing
set of outdated processes, institutions and assumptions."

The Obama Administration is just beginning to consider the possible
outlines of a future classification system that is "fundamentally
transformed."

"I ... look forward to reviewing recommendations from the study that the
National Security Advisor will undertake in cooperation with the Public
Interest Declassification Board to design a more fundamental
transformation of the security classification system," President Obama
wrote when the latest executive order on classification policy was issued
on December 29.

A LOOK AT CHINA'S USE OF AIRSHIPS

China's interest in the use of airships -- balloons, blimps and various
other lighter-than-air aircraft -- was discussed in a new report from the
National Air and Space Intelligence Center (NASIC).

Airships have been used in China for disaster relief, since they were able
to reach distant areas when ordinary transportation was impaired, and for
construction in mountainous or unstable areas, the report said.  High
altitude airships may also be considered for wide area surveillance, early
warning detection, or other military applications.

See "Current and Potential Applications of Chinese Aerostats (Airships),"
NASIC OSINT Topic Report, March 23, 2010 (For Official Use Only):

     http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/china/aerostat.pdf

The U.S. has deployed airships along the border with Mexico to aid in drug
interdiction, and in support of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.  See
"Potential Military Use of Airships and Aerostats" by the late Christopher
Bolkcom, Congressional Research Service, September 1, 2006:

     http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RS21886.pdf

_______________________________________________
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

The Secrecy News Blog is at:
     http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, go to:
     http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/subscribe.html

To UNSUBSCRIBE, go to
     http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/unsubscribe.html

OR email your request to saftergood at fas.org

Secrecy News is archived at:
     http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html

Support the FAS Project on Government Secrecy with a donation:
     http://www.fas.org/member/donate_today.html

_______________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web:    www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email:  saftergood at fas.org
voice:  (202) 454-4691