|
|
National Defense
Vernon Loeb and Dana Priest
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, October 01, 2003; 1:00 p.m ET
Post military reporter Vernon Loeb and Post intelligence reporter Dana Priest were online Wednesday, Oct. 1 at Noon ET, to talk about the latest developments in national security and defense.
Loeb covers military defense and national security issues. Priest covers intelligence and recently wrote "The Mission: Waging War and Keeping Peace With America's Military" (W.W. Norton). The book chronicles the increasing frequency with which the military is called upon to solve political and economic problems.
A transcript follows.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control
over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.
|
Vernon Loeb:
Greetings everyone. The leak investigation seems to be the hot topic de jour, so let's get going here.
_______________________
College Park, MD:
Wow, the Bushies just keep failing not only themselves but the entire nation.
What is the likely fallout (pardon the pun) from them blowing decades of building a human intelligence network by outing Wilson's wife? Is this a crippling blow to US and international efforts to gain intelligence on WMDs? If so, does this rise to the level of treason by this White House?
Dana Priest: I don't think it will be crippling. Lots of other people and program have been outed, purposefully or not, ,many by the news media. Set back, sure.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
I'd be interested to know how much you think our national defense has been compromised by the White House leak of the name of a CIA operative? It seems to me that we were coming up short in human intelligence prior to 9/11 (and after), and that we should be growing our human intelligent resources rather than eliminating them. The impression I get from what I've seen in the Bush Administration is that they regard 'defense' as military force, rather than using all the tools in the tool box. (State Dept. diplomacy, CIA intelligence, etc.) How damaging do you think this will be to the mission of the CIA and the people that work there?
Vernon Loeb:
I don't think the national security has been compromised at all by this leak. Plame was not an overseas operative, but a Washington-based analyst who maybe would have worked overseas in the future. As for the Bush administration emphasizing the military over intelligence capabilities, I don't think that is correct. The intelligence community has received enormous increases in funding since 911, and I think Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has a keen appreciation of the importance of intelligence.
Dana Priest: .
_______________________
Brookline, Mass.:
I've asked this kind of question of Vernon before, but I want to ask again: How can we look at the current overextension of our military forces in Iraq, with little or no replacements on the way from our allies in the forseeable future, no exit strategy, and continuing hostilities there, and not conclude that we will soon be looking at reinstating the draft?
Dana Priest: Because reinstating the draft is a political decision. And a very unpopular political decision. And we're heading into a presidential campaign. Given that, it's possible the Bush administration would sacrifice the mission before they would shoot themselves in the foot politically. That's just speculation on my part, of course.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Does The Post, or you for that matter, intend to expose Novak's constantly shifting story about who contacted who and how he came to his information?
Vernon Loeb:
I won't be doing this. I don't think it's my job to try to figure out how other journalist's sources are.
Dana Priest: .
_______________________
Lancaster, Pa.:
Typically who in the White House has access to the identities of CIA operatives? I would imagine, at least hope, that very few, if any, would have this type of access.
Dana Priest: Well, if you work at the National Security Council you meet with people from the CIA and are likely to know who they are and who they are not. There are also CIA people detailed to the NSC on specific matters.
_______________________
Boston, Mass.:
It seems to me that there are at least six reporters stating that at least two TOP adminstration Officals volunteered the NAME of a uncover CIA operative. This lady is apparently a 30-year plus undercover operative, involved at the moment in undercover work involving nuclear materials. The result of unmasking her is to blind the USA intelligence service in the area of greatest threat to the U.S. public. This may or may not legally be TREASON, but it's beyond doubt the most treason -ike act by any adminstration I am aware of in the last 50 years.
Dana Priest: You've got a fair number of assumptions there that I don't buy, including her length of service and the nuclear secrets bit. If her job had been that sensitive, I would wonder why the agency didn't jump up and down quicker and why the Justice Department only this week decided to open an investigation.
_______________________
Houston, Tex.:
Newsday quoted Bob on July 22 saying, 'his sources had come to him with the information. "I didn't dig it out, it was given to me," he said. "They thought it was significant, they gave me the name and I used it." '
His claims now seem to be completely at odds with his previous explanation. Is Novak just doing his part as Republican flack and trying to push the cat back in the bag that he (unwittingly) let out?
Dana Priest: Well, you be the judge. You rightly point out the inconsistencies in his story.
_______________________
New York, N.Y.:
May I ask a question about journalism? Based on stories in your paper over the weekend, six journalists were contacted by two people in the W.H., correct? Could those journalists having come forward to you indicate the story is true produce a column without naming the journalists? No offense to Novak but he is an opinion columnist and I don't give much credit to his side of the story. Thanks.
Dana Priest: Conceivably yes. I assume someone is trying that approach.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Journalistic ethics: Should a journalist continue to protect his sources if it has become apparent the information was given in bad faith and in the commission of a felony? What about when national security is at stake, like the current controversy?
What would -you- do?
Vernon Loeb:
I probably would not have used Plame's name, because I know The Post's policy is that we do not publish the names of covert CIA employees. Now that I think of it, publishing Novak's policy was not consistent with standards we follow on our news pages. But I certainly would never reveal the name of a confidential source under any circumstances, once I have obtained information from a person with the understanding that the person's identity will remain confidential. That is our paramount responsibility, even if we ultimately determine that a source is acting in bad faith. If we come to that conclusion, the easy alternative is not to use the information--but never to out the source. Once we start naming sources, our ability to gather information on a confidential basis is compromised, and if that happens, we, our readers and the American public will be deprived of an essential means of gathering information, reporting news and holding the government accountable.
Dana Priest: .
_______________________
Grafton, NH:
I find the White House's assertion that "career professionals" in the Justice Dept. can conduct an impartial, apolitical investigation difficult to believe in light of the pressure that this administration has put on career professionals at the CIA, in the military, etc. to soft-peddle anything that went contrary to the party line on the threat from Saddam and the number of troops we'd need to secure Iraq. They even had the EPA mislead New Yorkers about the severity of pollution from the 9/11 attacks! Why should we believe that career professionals at DOJ will not also be subverted by Ashcroft?
Dana Priest: Because they might "out" Ashcroft some way if he tried? You're making the case for the independent prosecutor. Your scenario is plausible and, as it stands now, we'll just have to wait and see how it plays out.
_______________________
Chicago:
The Washington Post reported that six journalists were told by an administration official that Joseph Wilson's wife worked for the CIA. Is it possible that any of the six journalists will identify the official? Vernon Loeb:
I doubt it, and I hope not. It's a sad, sad day for journalism when they do.
Dana Priest: .
_______________________
Cumberland, Md.:
With our military so stretched and calling up the reserves, I noticed that Gen. Meyers and Sec. Rummsfeld are talking about reducing "our footprint" elsewhere in the world. Do you think we will finally withdraw from Kosovo and Bosnia and let the European take over their own backyard? Vernon Loeb:
We've been gradually drawing down in the Balkans. But no, I don't think we will exit completely until the mission is over, because our presence is a sign to NATO and Europe that we are willng to keep our NATO commitments, not walk away from them just because we are extremely busy someplace else.
Dana Priest: .
_______________________
Atlanta, GA:
How do you see this "outing" issue affecting the relationship between the CIA and the White House?
Dana Priest: Damaging it further. There's a fair amount of animus already between the two over Iraq.
_______________________
Houston Texas:
Let me get this straight -- Iraq consistently claimed it did not possess WMD. We were positive they did, but we've owned the country for half a year and found nothing. Now we're saying that all the while they publicly insisted they didn't have WMD, they were also "hinting" that they really did have them in order to intimidate us?
Someone needs to be publicly caned.
Dana Priest: Just passing on a suggestion about punishment:
_______________________
Alexandria, VA:
Upon conclusion of the probe, do you think DOJ will send Wilson and Plame to Guantanamo for violation of the Patriot Act by slandering President Bush and Karl Rove and thus giving comfort to terrorists?
Dana Priest: Or maybe they will be whisked off to one of the CIA's secret interrogation centers abroad and questioned 24/7 by Nigerian uranium miners.
_______________________
New York, NY:
We hear right-wing commentators saying all the time "The situation in IRaq is not that bad, the left wing media is exaggerating", But when you consider the facts: several major terrorist attacks with car bombs in the last few weeks, 2 prominent post-war politcians assasinated, several attacks daily on US troops, lots of random violence, crime etc. it seems there is no exaggeration involved, the facts on the ground are grim, although there is undoubtedly progress made, especially in the North. Your comments ?
Dana Priest: For one, most "right-wing commentators," most commentators for that matter, haven't ever stepped foot in Iraq so I wouldn't put a lot of stock there. Read the foreign correspondents whose articles are datelined Iraq. They are trying for ground truth and getting closer than most. The situation in Iraq is fluid and difficult to assess. It doesn't look good.
_______________________
Ann Arbor, MI:
You wrote: "Once we start naming sources, our ability to gather information on a confidential basis is compromised"
More likely, it's the ability of government employees to manipulate the press and the public that will be compromised. Vernon Loeb:
That could be the case in some instances, but some government officials and employees who leak information do so because they believe in the public's right to know. And believe me, some pretty basic stuff is stamped secret by the government and withheld from the American public.
Dana Priest: .
_______________________
Houston, Tex.:
"I don't think the national security has been compromised at all by this leak. Plame was not an overseas operative, but a Washington-based analyst who maybe would have worked overseas in the future."
Is the Post planning any reporting to this effect? The implication in every media story I have seen or heard on this is that Plame was an overseas officer in the clandestine service who had one or more networks. If that's not the case, then someone needs to point it out. Vernon Loeb:
I could be wrong, but I think she was basically an analyst. I know she is not now based overseas. And if the CIA is going to be sending people like her overseas to build clandestine networks of agents, we're all in trouble, because a lot of people in Washington know she works for the CIA, and I doubt it would have been very hard for people overseas to figure it out.
Dana Priest: .
_______________________
State College, Pa.:
According to ex-CIA official Larry Johnson, who appeared last night on the PBS News Hour with Jim Lehrer, Valeria Plame was in fact a 30-year undercover operative with the CIA. He stated specifically that she was not, as Bob Novak stated after the fact, an "analyst". Does this change your reading of the situation at all?
Here's the transcript:
PBS Site. Requires RegistrationHere's a quote: "Let's be very clear about what happened. This is not an alleged abuse. This is a confirmed abuse. I worked with this woman. She started training with me. She has been undercover for three decades, she is not as Bob Novak suggested a CIA analyst.
...
So the fact that she's been undercover for three decades and that has been divulged is outrageous because she was put undercover for certain reasons. One, she works in an area where people she meets with overseas could be compromised. When you start tracing back who she met with, even people who innocently met with her, who are not involved in CIA operations, could be compromised."
Dana Priest: I'll pass this on for readers.
_______________________
San Francisco, CA:
Forget caning and interrogation, they
should all be pummeled with
yellowcake...Duncan Hines variety
preferably. Vernon Loeb:
Thanks for your comment.
Dana Priest: .
_______________________
New York :
Other then the outing of a CIA employee that may have had political overtones due to a critic of this administration's 'yellow cake' fiasco, what do you think may have been done to our constitutional right to criticize our government without reprocussions?
Dana Priest: Not much. Most people in government whom I've met have more fortitude than that.
_______________________
MORGANVILLE, NEW JERSEY:
IT WAS REPORTED ON NPR THAT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT ALLERTED THE WHITE HOUSE 12HRS BEFORE COUNSELOR GONZALES ACTUALLY INSTRUCTED EVERYONE NOT TO REMOVE ANY POSSIBLE EVEIDENCE TO THE INVESTIGATION. WHAT DO YOU THINK WENT ON DURING THOSE 12HRS?
Dana Priest: Barring a confession, leak investigations are nearly impossible to close. Even if you have phone logs, you really can't prove a specific conversation took place.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Is it your opinion that the leak was a criminal act?
Was Wilson's wife an undercover agent -- was this
classified information? If so, did the leaker know if
was classified? Vernon Loeb:
Yes, it most likely was a criminal act.And the leaker probably did know the name of Wilson's wife was classified. But I should note that while disclosing classified information, it is rarely prosecuted, out of respect for the 1st Amendment.
Dana Priest: .
_______________________
Pleasant Hills, PA:
Isn't this probe, as it is right now, tantamount to, say, the Mitchell DOJ investigating the Nixon WH?
Dana Priest: You're call.
_______________________
N.Y., N.Y.:
What do think about the administration's use of the
British claim about Iraq's quest for uranium from
Africa and the Czech report about Mohammad Atta
meeting with an Iraqi Intelligence officer.
Dana Priest: that would take a long answer. I've written about both recently, you can find the articles at washingtonpost.com
_______________________
Newtown, Pa.:
I doubt it, and I hope not. It's a sad, sad day for journalism when they do.
Why do you say that? Vernon Loeb:
I say that because it's important for people to know that if a reporter gives him or her a promise that their identify will be protected, it's an absolute, ironclad guarantee. Many people who give vital information to journalists do so at enormous risk. Some could lose their jobs, sometimes even their lives, for having done so. It's very important for people to understand that journalists protect their sources, period. Some people who leak sensitive information may be sleazy spin doctors. But others are honorable people of real principle and integrity. And we don't have the luxury of protecting only those we respect. Because once we start doing that, both kinds will disappear as sources of information.
Dana Priest: .
_______________________
Europe:
Did Mrs Wilson accompany her husband when he was ambassador in Iraq? Is it common practice to use the family of ambassadors as spies?
If so, doesn't it lend some credibility to the Iraqi complaints about the UNSCOM inspectors being spies back in the 90s?
Dana Priest: no. they weren't married then. the UNSCOM allegation was based on an entirely different set of facts.
_______________________
Baltimore, MD:
For those 6 journalists contacted (aside from Novak), why didn't they report the news that someone within the WH appeared to be trying to smear Wilson, through his wife, in retaliation for his opposition to the Iraq policy? Isn't that even MORE of a story, arguably, than outing the wife's CIA connection? And why do you think the journalists (who apparently included Andrea Mitchell) didn't run with it?
Dana Priest: Good question. It might have something to do with who called and what information they really offered. But I think the silence is telling---of something.
_______________________
NY,NY:
If a person reveals the classified identity of a CIA
operative but says they didn't know it was classified
would it still be illegal?
Dana Priest: probably not prosecutable
_______________________
Boston:
Vernon, to follow up on something you said above, do you feel that the Post should have looked at Novak's column and refused to print it? It's been pointed out that even if they had, Novak is carried in about 299 other papers, so it would have made no difference. But I think the principle of the matter is that the Post should have pulled the column because it names a CIA operative.
Do syndicated pieces get run without oversight, i.e., edited for typos, but not for content?
(I agree that Novak, whose work I do not admire, had a right to reveal the name if he wanted to and that the crime here has been committed by the leaker(s), not by journalists or newspapers. But I want to know what you think a paper should do in the case of a syndicated columnist whom they carry who violates their editorial policy.) Vernon Loeb:
Good question. This is something way above my pay grade. The editorial board may have its own standards for this issue. But at the very least, someone on the editorial board, in my opinion, should have considered the issue before publishing the column. I don't know whether they did or not.
Dana Priest: .
_______________________
Madison, Wisc.:
If journalists receive information but don't use it in published articles, what ethical problem is there in identifying the sources for stories they choose not to write?
Dana Priest: It would (and I think should) ruin the credibility of the journalist. How could anyone trust that their confidence would be kept in the future?
_______________________
New York, NY:
In today's earlier chat, "Intelligence Leak",
ex-CIA analyst Mel Goodman stated quite
clearly that Plame was an undercover
operative, not an analyst. Yet Mr. Loeb
stated earlier in this chat that she was an
analyst. Who's correct? Vernon Loeb:
I've already acknowledged my mistake. Goodman is right, Plame is in the clandestine service.
Dana Priest: .
_______________________
Gambrills, Md.:
According to what I've read so far, there are at least 9 people who know who the leakers are. The two leakers, Robert Novak, Andrea Mitchell, two reporters from Newsday, and possibly three other reporters contacted by the leakers. Mitchell is not likely to reveal her source, Novak is spinning in the wind, but also sticking by his source, and I expect that the other journalists also will not reveal their sources, nor should they have to, unless directed by a court of law.
It seems then, that this controversy could be quickly ended by President Bush. He has said "if" there was a leak, he wants to know about it. Well, it seems pretty clear there WAS a leak. After all, Wilson's wife's identity as a covert operative is now out there.
Why can't the President just call a staff meeting, or start bringing in the major players, one by one, into the Oval Office and ask them a direct question? No if's, and's, or but's, do you know who leaked the fact that Wilson's wife was a covert CIA operative? That would be the right thing to do. If it's low level staffers who did something stupid, they could be immediately let go. If it's someone higher up, Bush would show character by saying I did not authorize this and I don't want to be associated with anyone who did.
Or, am I just being naive?
Dana Priest: Well, the leaker might not want to admit they did this. Or they could have been in league with others and those people might want to remain unnamed--even to the president. Since jail time and career ruin are possible options, the stakes are sort of high.
_______________________
Bethesda, Md:
Amb. Wilson believes it was Carl Rove who disclosed or at least allowed to leak Plamer's name to Novak. Do you think he will be held accountable? Why would Bush want to protect him (by denying it was him) if this information is going to come out during the investigation? Vernon Loeb:
I do not believe anyone will ever be charged in this case, because I do not believe the Justice Department vigorously pursues these investigations. If they did, they would have arrested and prosecuted some leakers by now. The fact that they haven't, after years of trying, suggests to me that they don't try very hard.
Dana Priest: .
_______________________
Marietta, GA:
"Dana Priest: You're call."
Are you typing this chat directly or having it transcribed by someone else?
e advantage of that ethic by feeding you guys self-serving or false information? Seems to me that in the Wilson situation journalists were being used to do the administration's biding. I am relieved that the other journalists refused to go public with the story. Yet I still wonder if journalists are not being used as pawns in this situation. As a commentator, Novak is surely pawn.
Dana Priest: I think this is a garble. Those are not my words. that's someone's comments. sorry.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Obviously leaks occur in Washington all the time to try to discredit/undercut someone. In this case, however, I don't really get the logic of the leak. How was his wife's occupation going to undermine what Wilson was saying?
Thanks. Vernon Loeb:
The leak, presumably, was not to undercut Wilson's credibility, by virtue of his wife's association with the CIA, but to undercut the CIA's credibility, by sending someone like Wilson whom the Bush administration apparently considers a Democratic partisan.
Dana Priest: .
_______________________
Los Angeles, CA:
North Korea has again threatened the US with nuclear war and is not moving towards the negotiating table. When a citizen threatens the life of the president, the secret service investigates the claim and can levy charges against them. Osama in 1998, declared War on the US and threatened to kill thousand of Americans and did so. Why is it that on the world stage these bellicose statements are not treated with the same importance and response? I mean is anyone really going to miss North Korea if we premetively attack them?
Dana Priest: Alot of dead people in South and North Korea will miss it, I'm sure. The military option there has always been considered very costly and the outcome uncertain--in terms of casualties. North Korea has not (yet) threatened the US in the direct manner you suggest, although that surely could come someday.
_______________________
Pittsburgh, PA:
In your oppinion, what is the level of a "Senior Administrative Official". Also does it mean the White House.
Vernon Loeb:
What I take "senior" to mean is, either a political appointee, or someone in the senior executive service--above GS-15. And what I take "administration" to mean is, anywhere in the executive branch, not only the White House (and not Congress).
Dana Priest: .
_______________________
New York, N.Y.:
Well, why can't one of the six journalists take a semi-principled stand (patriotism vs. unwritten rule among journalists) and leak the leaker? Vernon Loeb:
The most patriotic thing a reporter can do is protect sources. And I wouldn't dismiss the 1st Amendment as some "unwritten rule among journalists."
Dana Priest: .
_______________________
Montreal, Quebec:
So the President has gone to the U.N. seeking additional
contributions on Iraq and everything seems to have
fallen flat again. Is it my impression or are certain
countries dangling the possibility of providing troops
only to pull the rug out from under the Bush
administration later. For example, India, Pakistan,
Turkey and now South Korea, which initially said it
might lead a new multi-national division only to retract
that saying it will not send troops unless the North
Korean situation is dealt with first. What's going on
here?
Dana Priest: There's still so much bad blood towards the Bush policy in Iraq. I expect we will see lots of diplomatic revenge extracted from countries who disagreed with him.
_______________________
Dana Priest: Signing off for now. Dana
_______________________
Vernon Loeb:
Well, the hour is up. This has been a great discussion. We got over 130 questions. My apologies for not being able to answer them all, but we very much appreciate your interest and your participation.
_______________________
© 2003 The Washington Post Company
| 
