[Intelforum] Secrecy News -- 09/29/10

Wed Sep 29 13:54:12 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. 78
September 29, 2010

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

**      BEHIND THE CENSORSHIP OF OPERATION DARK HEART
**      INSPECTORS GENERAL TO HELP OVERSEE CLASSIFICATION
**      GAO GAINS A FOOTHOLD IN INTELLIGENCE OVERSIGHT

BEHIND THE CENSORSHIP OF OPERATION DARK HEART

By censoring Anthony Shaffer's new book "Operation Dark Heart" even though
uncensored review copies are already available in the public domain, the
Department of Defense has produced a genuinely unique product:  a
revealing snapshot of the way that the Obama Administration classifies
national security information in 2010.

With both versions before them, readers can see for themselves exactly
what the Pentagon classifiers wanted to withhold, and can judge for
themselves whether the secrecy they tried to impose can be justified on
valid national security grounds.  In the majority of instances, the
results of such an inspection seem disappointing, if not very surprising,
and they tend to confirm the most skeptical view of the operation of the
classification system.

The most commonly repeated "redaction" in Operation Dark Heart is the
author's cover name, "Christopher Stryker," that he used while serving in
Afghanistan.  Probably the second most common redactions are references to
the National Security Agency, its heaquarters location at Fort Meade,
Maryland, the familiar abbreviation SIGINT (referring to "signals
intelligence"), and offhand remarks like "Guys on phones were always great
sources of intel," which is blacked out on the bottom of page 56.

Also frequently redacted are mentions of the term TAREX or "Target
Exploitation," referring to intelligence collection gathered at a
sensitive site, and all references to low-profile organizations such as
the Air Force Special Activities Center and the Joint Special Operations
Command, as well as to foreign intelligence partners such as New Zealand. 
Task Force 121 gets renamed Task Force 1099.  The code name Copper Green,
referring to an "enhanced" interrogation program, is deleted.

Perhaps 10% of the redacted passages do have some conceivable security
sensitivity, including the identity of the CIA chief of station in Kabul,
who has been renamed "Jacob Walker" in the new version, and a physical
description of the location and appearance of the CIA station itself,
which has been censored.

Many other redactions are extremely tenuous.  The name of character actor
Ned Beatty is not properly classified in any known universe, yet it has
been blacked out on page 15 of the book.  (It still appears intact in the
Index.)

In short, the book embodies the practice of national security
classification as it exists in the United States today.  It does not
exactly command respect.

A few selected pages from the original and the censored versions of
Operation Dark Heart have been posted side-by-side for easy comparison
here:

	http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2010/09/dark-contrast.pdf

The New York Times reported on the Pentagon's dubious handling of the book
in "Secrets in Plain Sight in Censored Book's Reprint" by Scott Shane,
September 18:

	http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/18/us/18book.html

INSPECTORS GENERAL TO HELP OVERSEE CLASSIFICATION

The House and Senate this week approved legislation that will require the
Inspector General of each executive branch agency that classifies
information to evaluate the agency's classification program and to assess
its implementation of classification policies and procedures.  The new
measure should help to bolster the oversight of the national security
classification system, which is currently the sole responsibility of the
Information Security Oversight Office.

The provision was included in the "Reducing Over-classification Act" (HR
553), which was originally introduced by Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA) and
amended by Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and which generally seeks to promote
improved information sharing.

     http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2010/hr553.html

Despite its bold title, the legislation does not establish any new
criteria for assuring appropriate classification nor does it even define
the term overclassification.  Yet by enlisting the Inspectors General to
oversee agency compliance with current classification policies, the bill
could make a significant contribution to addressing the problem of
wrongful or unnecessary secrecy.

In particular, the IGs may be expected to monitor agency implementation of
the Fundamental Classification Guidance Review, the Obama Administration
initiative that is supposed to eliminate obsolete classification
requirements in each agency (as required by executive order 13526, section
1.9).  To date, there is no available evidence that agencies have made any
progress in performing the Reviews, which must be completed by June 2012.

GAO GAINS A FOOTHOLD IN INTELLIGENCE OVERSIGHT

The Government Accountability Office seems poised to play an increased
role in intelligence oversight, despite a series of legislative setbacks
and the Obama Administration's threat of a veto earlier in the year.

The issue remains alive in the FY2010 Intelligence Authorization Act which
was approved in the Senate on September 27 and which now appears likely to
be enacted into law, due to the sustained efforts of Speaker Nancy Pelosi,
Rep. Anna Eshoo, and Sen. Daniel Akaka, among others.  The Act (in section
348) requires the Director of National Intelligence to prepare a directive
on GAO access to intelligence community information -- thereby setting the
stage for a stable new role for the GAO in intelligence agency audits and
reviews.

	http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2010_cr/sen-fy10auth.html

In a letter to Congress withdrawing the threat of a veto (reprinted in the
record of the floor debate), ODNI General Counsel Robert S. Litt stressed
that the new directive would not imply any change in existing law or
authority for the GAO.  He added that the directive would also conform
with "relevant opinions of the Office of Legal Counsel."  However, the
only OLC opinion on the subject is from 1988, and it argued that GAO
access to intelligence information is "precluded" by law.  It hardly seems
likely that the new directive would affirm that view.

Instead, the required directive should be seen as analogous to the
recently updated Pentagon directive that permitted GAO access to highly
classified special access programs, suggested Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the
Senate Intelligence Committee chair.

"The GAO has produced very useful studies" on defense intelligence
matters, said Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr., at
his July 20 confirmation hearing.  "I think the GAO serves a useful
purpose for us."

_______________________________________________
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