[Intelforum] Secrecy News -- 11/14/11
IntelForum Mailing List
intelforum at lists101.his.com
Mon Nov 14 11:03:01 EST 2011
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
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2011, Issue No. 105
November 14, 2011
Secrecy News Blog: http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/
** A NEW INTELLIGENCE ORG ON CLIMATE CHANGE IS NEEDED, DSB SAYS
** CIA SEES "LITTLE LIKELIHOOD" OF FINDING DOCS ON SECRECY REFORM
A NEW INTELLIGENCE ORG ON CLIMATE CHANGE IS NEEDED, DSB SAYS
The U.S. intelligence community needs an organization that can assess the
impacts of climate change on U.S. national security interests in an open
and collaborative manner, according to a new report from the Defense
Science Board (DSB).
The Director of National Intelligence should establish a new intelligence
group "to concentrate on the effects of climate change on political and
economic developments and their implications for U.S. national security,"
said the DSB report on "Trends and Implications of Climate Change for
National and International Security."
The Central Intelligence Agency already has a Center on Climate Change and
National Security. So why would the Intelligence Community need an
entirely new organization to address the exact same set of issues?
One reason is that the role envisioned for the new organization is
inconsistent with the practices of the CIA Center. So, for example, the
new intelligence group would be expected to pursue cooperative
relationships with others inside and outside of the U.S. government. It
would also "report most of its products broadly within government and
non-government communities," the DSB report said.
But the CIA Center, by unspoken contrast, does not report any of its
climate change products broadly or allow public access to them. ("At CIA,
Climate Change is a Secret," Secrecy News, September 22, 2011).
The CIA's unyielding approach to classification effectively negates the
ability of its Center on Climate Change to interact with non-governmental
organizations and researchers on an unclassified basis. Since, as the DSB
noted, much of the relevant expertise on climate change lies "outside the
government [in] universities, the private sector, and NGOs," the CIA's
blanket secrecy policy is a potentially disabling condition.
In fact, the DSB report said, the secretive approach favored by CIA is
"The most effective way to tackle understanding [climate change] may be to
treat it, for the most part, as an open question, transparent to all
engaged in its study," the DSB report said. "Compartmentalizing climate
change impact research can only hinder progress."
CIA SEES "LITTLE LIKELIHOOD" OF FINDING DOCS ON SECRECY REFORM
There is "little likelihood" that the Central Intelligence Agency will be
able to produce any records documenting the CIA's implementation of the
Fundamental Classification Guidance Review that each classifying agency is
required to conduct, the Agency said last week.
The Fundamental Classification Guidance Review (FCGR) was ordered by
President Obama in his December 2009 executive order 13526 (section 1.9) as
a systematic effort to eliminate obsolete or unnecessary classification
requirements. It is the Obama Administration's primary response to the
problem of over-classification, and it has already achieved some limited
results at the Department of Defense and elsewhere.
But it can't possibly work if agencies don't implement it. And so far
there is no sign of any such implementation at CIA, despite the fact that
compliance is not optional.
In response to FOIA requests over the past year for records on the CIA's
progress in conducting its fundamental review, the CIA said it still had no
records on the FCGR that are subject to the FOIA requests.
In an earlier response, "we informed you that a search was conducted and
no records responsive to your request were located," wrote Susan Viscuso,
CIA Information and Privacy Coordinator, on October 26. "Although there is
little likelihood that an updated search would produce different results,
we will be glad to do so."
Ms. Viscuso's letter appeared to hint that responsive files might be
contained in CIA "operational files" that are exempt from search and review
under the CIA Information Act. But such a claim would be substantively and
legally spurious, especially since responsive records on the FCGR would
have been "disseminated" outside of their source files (e.g. to the
Information Security Oversight Office), which would nullify their exemption
from search and review.
Meanwhile, another intelligence agency, the National Reconnaissance Office
(NRO), proved more responsive. The NRO said in a report on the FCGR that
was released last week under the FOIA that it had scheduled all of its
classification guides for a fundamental review, as required. The NRO,
which is responsible for U.S. intelligence satellites, also said it was
preparing an integrated classification guide that would be "more agile,
timely, consistent, uniform, and flexible in providing classification
guidance and principles at the lowest appropriate classification level."
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.
The Secrecy News Blog is at:
To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, go to:
To UNSUBSCRIBE, go to
OR email your request to saftergood at fas.org
Secrecy News is archived at:
Support the FAS Project on Government Secrecy with a donation:
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
email: saftergood at fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691
More information about the IntelForum