Dr. Robert Gates
(former Director of the CIA)
Presentation Summary
October 22, 2002
Dr. Gates began by addressing the post 9/11 issues that arose regarding intelligence failure. While acknowledging that clearly some early warning signals were missed, the biggest intelligence-gathering problem in Dr. Gates' opinion is the congressional requirement that any and all CIA operatives are solid citizens without criminal records. Unfortunately the people that are willing to infiltrate terrorist organizations all have "bloody hands." In addition, the CIA budget is 25% less than it was thirty years ago when he entered the service.
The current terrorist threat is different in several respects from the terrorist groups of the 70's and 80's. For the most part they were all government or state sponsored. Today they are freelance groups that are almost entrepreneurial in their method of operation.
Today's terrorists also have a different motivation. Previous terrorist groups generally had a political agenda and that is no longer the case. Today's terrorists are religious fanatics that are united in their objective of simply destroying Western culture. That includes taking down moderate Arab regimes in the Middle East.
The third difference is today's terrorists do have the opportunity to acquire weapons of mass destruction.
On the positive side, all established governments now recognize the danger and are mobilizing to defend against it. He commented how important it was having Russia and China as allies in the global war on terrorism. These new allies have already provided us with important information regarding terrorist activities and have also launched campaigns of their own against terrorist groups in their own countries. There is no longer any doubt or mystery about the nature of the threat and we are in a new era of global cooperation and coordination of anti terrorist activities.
That is the good news, but the effort is going to have to be sustained for a long time. In fact, it quite simply may never end.
With regard to the prospects of war with Iraq he sounded a note of caution. He hopes Washington waits until a global coalition has been assembled. That will be difficult if Iraq is even reasonably cooperative with weapons inspectors. He went on to caution that we should not be lulled into complacency by the shortness of the 1991 Gulf War or the success we recently had in Afghanistan. No war is easy and there is always a risk of surprises that could lead to a long drawn out conflict. UN sanctioned inspections is a clear first preference in his opinion.
Should that fail we should not underestimate the danger of weapons of mass destruction, a war and subsequent regime change in Iraq would be the only option left.
He was quite pessimistic regarding the Homeland security initiative. Making it a cabinet level position was a mistake in his opinion because it just simply creates another cabinet level officer at the same rank as other cabinet level officers. The effort should have been housed in the White House, which could control it and then command the resources of various other agencies scattered through different cabinet departments as required. That opportunity has been missed. The ongoing bureaucratic battles will definitely hinder the effectiveness of the Homeland security effort.
Defining the anti-terrorism activity as a "war" is a mistake in his opinion. He believes it is better to view it as similar to law enforcement's ongoing effort to contain crime or the Center for Disease Control's efforts to contain disease. Victory and an endpoint in a war like sense is not possible. Containment is the goal and can be achieved.
He ended on an optimistic note by stating that the world is now fully aware of the danger that terrorism presents and is not likely to lose that focus going forward.