The Big Question

We know that Dick Cheney and his White House functionaries sought to delay the National Intelligence Estimate on Iran that today has exploded onto the scene. So Kevin Drum is right to ask these questions:

This NIE was apparently finished a year ago, and its basic parameters were almost certainly common knowledge in the White House well before that. This means that all the leaks, all the World War III stuff, all the blustering about the IAEA — all of it was approved for public consumption after Cheney/Bush/Rice/etc. knew perfectly well it was mostly baseless.

Why were the key judgments finally released? Cheney didn't want them released, Bush surely didn't want them released, and DNI Mike McConnell told Congress a few weeks ago that he didn't want them released. So who did?

These are great questions for a reporter to explore. That is, if they stop writing headlines like "Iran STILL Capable Of Nuclear Weapons!"

In addition, Matt Yglesias notes that not only does this square with all contemporaneous reports about Iran from intelligence experts, but it squares with Iran's offer in 2003 of a grand bargain with the United States, with the exchange of the dismantling of their nuclear ambitions for stronger diplomatic ties and removing sanctions. The international community brought this about in Iran, not the invasion of Iraq, but the point is that a deal on Iran was extremely possible in 2003, and the regime is actually concerned with international prestige and security guarantees, and not the irrational "wild men" which is the neocons' preferred portrayal.

When more information trickles out about how this NIE got released, and it almost certainly will, things should get VERRRRY interesting.

UPDATE: I should mention that Drum believes it was Congressional pressure, particularly from the Democrats, that forced the release. If that's true, all that I have to say is that elections have consequences.

The Professional Liars of the Bush Administration

Mike McConnell was made the Director of National Intelligence because he was such a straight shooter. Here's what happened in the last two days:

• McConnell claimed that the new FISA law, enacted barely more than a month ago, was responsible for breaking up the German terror plot.

• The Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee calls him a liar, saying that the intelligence in the German case was collected several months ago, well before this new law was rammed down the throats of the Democrats and the American people.

• McConnell admits he lied to the Senate.

During the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs hearing on September 10, 2007, I discussed the critical importance to our national security of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), and the recent amendments to FISA made by the Protect America Act. The Protect America Act was urgently needed by our intelligence professionals to close critical gaps in our capabilities and permit them to more readily follow terrorist threats, such as the plot uncovered in Germany. However, information contributing to the recent arrests was not collected under authorities provided by the Protect America Act.

Some straight shooter.

The new, draconian FISA bill has nothing to do with our national security. We disrupted a terrorist attack by collecting foreign intellligence after getting a warrant. This wasn't good enough for the authoritarian ideologues in the White House, and now they're claiming victories where none exist.

Good for Jane Harman.

WASHINGTON (CNN) — A leading congressional Democrat on Wednesday accused the director of national intelligence of undermining the authority of his office by taking political positions.

Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., lashed out at DNI Mike McConnell for taking a political role in recent negotiations with Congress about updating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the law that regulates foreign intelligence eavesdropping.

"He appeared to be taking orders from the White House, negotiating for the White House," said Harman. The role he played, "whether he intended it or not, appeared to be political," she said.

Hey Democrats, it's time not to lay down like dogs again and give up even more of our civil liberties.

"Iran... is mentioned but is not a focus"

The long-awaited, probably-ready-before-the-election NIE on Iraq will officially be out on Friday morning, but the WaPo has talked to enough people who've seen it to give a preview. It's not a pretty picture (but you knew that).

A long-awaited National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq, presented to President Bush by the intelligence community yesterday, outlines an increasingly perilous situation in which the United States has little control and there is a strong possibility of further deterioration, according to sources familiar with the document.

The report dances around whether or not Iraq is in civil war, and then says this...

But it couches glimmers of optimism in deep uncertainty about whether the Iraqi leaders will be able to transcend sectarian interests and fight against extremists, establish effective national institutions and end rampant corruption.

The document emphasizes that although al-Qaeda activities in Iraq remain a problem, they have been surpassed by Iraqi-on-Iraqi violence as the primary source of conflict and the most immediate threat to U.S. goals. Iran, which the administration has charged with supplying and directing Iraqi extremists, is mentioned but is not a focus.

Iran is NOT A FOCUS. The problem in Iraq is one of SECTARIAN VIOLENCE.

This NIE is the judgment of 16 of the nation's intelligence agencies, and they're all saying the exact opposite of the impression that the Cheney Administration gives in their public statements. For all the warmongering and belief that Iran is the scapegoat, the source of all the troubles in Iraq, this clear-eyed assessment won't fall for it. And there was more encouraging news on that front on Capitol Hill today:

"One of the sort of deeply held rumors around here is that the intelligence community gives an administration or a president what he wants by way of intelligence," Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) told Navy Vice Adm. John M. McConnell, Bush's nominee to be director of national intelligence, during McConnell's confirmation hearing yesterday.

Without directly accepting Feinstein's premise, McConnell replied that the intelligence community had learned "meaningful" lessons over the past several years and that "there's very intense focus on independence." McConnell and others made clear that the new NIE on Iraq had been subjected to extensive competitive analysis to test its conclusions.

I'm inclined to believe that. The CIA could get rolled when the Cheney Administration was riding high. But they were brutally damaged by the fallout over Iraq, and they can no longer afford to stovepipe intelligence. They should only have loyalty to the facts, not a political party or anyone in the executive branch. And they're being sure to do something unprecedented in intelligence reports in this era of certitude: they're dissenting, right in the document.

One senior congressional aide said the NIE had been described to him as "unpleasant but very detailed." A source familiar with its language said it contained several dissents that are prominently displayed so that policymakers understand any disagreements within the intelligence community -- a significant change from the 2002 document, which listed most key dissents in small-type footnotes.

Given all of this background, I'd have to say that this NIE is probably very strong in its findings. Of course, expect the White House to cherry-pick the one or two bits of good news to highlight; it's what they always do. But let's make no mistake about this: IRAN IS NOT A FACTOR in what's going on in Iraq. Repeat that over and over again like a mantra. Put it in your letters to the editor. Report it to your Congresscritters. Use it in your debates. Make sure the whole world knows it before we find ourselves in another war.

UPDATE: According to Spencer Ackerman, they are trying to keep this NIE classified, so the public won't get a chance to read what a mess we're in. Dianne Feinstein is leading the fight, believe it or not, to declassify. Must be that call I made to her office today. :) ... we need to make sure this report is made public.