How about a real intelligence reform bill then?

The nation’s intelligence agencies, mired in
bureaucratic messes, have failed to deliver to Congress the
high-quality information it needs about trouble spots such as North
Korea and Iran, Michigan’s Rep. Pete Hoekstra said today.

“We
still don’t have the intelligence community (needed) to give us as
policy-makers the information we need to make good decisions on North
Korea and Iran and other places,” Hoekstra, R-Holland, said during an
appearance on “Fox News Sunday
.”

Hoekstra is the top Republican
on the House Intelligence Committee, and a top ally of the White House
on national security issues. But he criticized former top Bush
administration officials for hampering the flow of quality
intelligence. He said turf wars between the Pentagon and intelligence
agencies and a slow start-up to a reformed intelligence bureaucracy
that was part of post-9/11 changes are to blame.

I really like Rep. Hoekstra and the level of effort he puts against intelligence issues, but pointing to an alleged mil-civ divide as the reason for a lack of progress in intelligence reform is a non-starter.

The blame for a lack of enthusiasm for change is not exclusively a military one. The DOD is the largest producer and consumer of intelligence information. You don’t think they’d welcome changes that would put more/better/faster intel into the hands of those that could use it?

Get analytic elements out of collection agencies, eliminate duplication of effort, and stop operating as if it is still 1955 and you’ll start to realize some meaningful change.

Want real intelligence reform? How about a real intelligence reform bill?

1 comment for “How about a real intelligence reform bill then?

  1. March 7, 2007 at 10:34 AM

    Fixing the security clearance nonsense would probably make the rest of the necessary changes easier to put in place.

Leave a Reply