A Course To Stay
a novel by
Frederick Harrison
Copyright 2008 by
Frederick Harrison
CHAPTER ONE
As one acerbic
columnist in the Post put it: “It is obvious
that Washington is in the grip of a malaise. What
is not clear is whether the illness is an
aftereffect of the recent attempted terrorist attack
in New York City or of the dizzying spin put on the
significance of that event by the Tucker
Administration.”
Several weeks had
passed since a terrorist plot to kill thousands of
people aboard a packed ferry in New York harbor had
been thwarted. After a day of confusion and
hesitation, the White House proclaimed the episode a
great victory. Not only were the terrorists
prevented from achieving their objective but the
mastermind of the operation, one John Balthazar, had
been trapped and killed by the combined effort of
the CIA, FBI, and NYPD. This was enough to save
the jobs of CIA Director Admiral Philip Bergen and
FBI Director Donald McGinnis.
The
official after-action report did not, however, reach
the same conclusion as the Administration’s
spinmeisters. The document itself was classified
and weighted down with so many handling and access
restrictions that there was more red print on the
cover than black. Nevertheless, the thrust of it
had quickly leaked to the New York press: there had
been no recognized warning of a terrorist operation
in preparation, and when such indications seemingly
appeared, they proved to be false leads to innocent
people. As a number of those involved later
admitted privately, the good guys had lucked out.
“Was
this an intelligence failure, Admiral?” Senator
Michael Peck wanted to know. Peck was the Chairman
of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and
had taken advantage of his seniority to schedule the
first round of hearings on lessons learned in New
York. Admiral Bergen was his star witness because
the President had fired Albert Bierschmidt, the
Director of National Intelligence, after the New
York attack. Peck could have called the latter to
testify, but having been released from the bonds of
office under a largely undeserved cloud, there could
be no predicting what Bierschmidt might say just to
spite the White House.
Bergen
was not happy. This was not his fight, and he
resented having to be an apologist for the White
House. “I don’t mean to be pedantic, Senator,” he
responded, “but most often it’s the people who fail
rather than the intelligence. It is highly
unlikely that available information pertaining to
any given issue or threat will be totally
unambiguous and fully instructive. Recognizing
and dealing effectively with uncertainties and
ambiguities is what enables the avoidance of
intelligence failures, and that can be done only by
people: those who develop the intelligence, as well
as those who use it to support operational
countermeasures.”
As
Bergen spoke, there seemed to be a collective intake
of breath in the room. Since 9/11, the term
“intelligence failure” had become a commonly used
catch-phrase employed both as accusation and
rationalization: a short hand way of saying that, if
only the significance of these dots had been made
apparent, we would have connected them, and
wouldn’t be in the mess we’re in.
“People fail for many reasons,” he continued, “ many
of which simply reflect the fact that they are
human. We tend to interpret new information in the
light of what we already know, what we value, and
what we fear. Accepting warnings of the
unexpected is very difficult, particularly for those
bearing the responsibility for acting on them.
Deputy Mayor Caplin in New York, however, took
timely action to deal with the extreme ambiguity of
his available intelligence. He hedged the lack of
clear evidence of an impending attack by bringing in
the helicopter gunships that ultimately saved the
day.”
“There
are those who might argue that Caplin was simply
covering his rear end. But, who are we to
criticize that?” Senator Mayhew observed, to nervous
laughter.
“Are
you telling us, Admiral, that intelligence failures
are nobody’s fault?” Senator Henry Bartlett
interjected angrily.
“Not
at all, Senator,” Bergen replied. “What I am
saying is that, if we are to improve the
performance of our intelligence services, we need to
focus first on the people and organizations involved
and how they interoperate. When we speak of
‘connecting the dots,’ I believe that we may be
paying too much attention to the dots and not enough
to the connecting part.”
There
was a moment of silence, after which every senator
in the room signaled for the floor. But, the
Chairman wished to move on.
“What
you’ve just said, Admiral, should itself be the
subject of hearings. But we have two more issues
we’d like your comment on. The first has to do
with Anwar al-Ghabrizi, until recently the icon of
international terrorism, currently being held by us
in Virginia. Does he have any intelligence
value? What do we plan to do with him?”
“Al-Ghabrizi’s situation has changed, with respect
to his potential value,” the CIA Director
responded. “As you know, we determined after his
capture that he had been deliberately betrayed to
us. There is accumulating evidence that he is no
longer the dominant leader we thought him to be.
If that finally is confirmed, his value to us would
be substantially reduced. Our people are talking
with him on a continuing basis. He has shed some
light on his own situation, but has yet to provide
anything useful regarding his successors or other
terrorists.”
“Thank
you, Admiral. The other question is related, and
pertains to the circumstances of al-Ghabrizi’s
capture. We have been told that the people who let
us know where to find him did so to focus our
attention on a change they would like us to make in
the way we’re pursuing the war on terrorism.
Since this is not a closed session, I won’t be more
specific. But, can you give us an indication of
where we stand on that?”
Bergen
hesitated for a moment. “Actually, there isn’t much
I can tell you, Senator. Proposals have been made
to us that would require significant alterations of
policy and tactics. Such matters take time to
resolve, but they are being worked on.”
Hannah
Crossman, Bergen’s aide, could tell that the Admiral
had reached the limit of his patience. It would
be a loud ride back to Headquarters.
Captain Ibrahim
Khan of the Pakistani Security Police was having
lunch with CIA’s Karachi station chief, whose cover
name was Jed. Khan had led the raiding party that
arrested al-Ghabrizi, who had subsequently been
turned over to the Americans. Since then, he and
Jed had met periodically in obscure places,
principally for Khan to pass on information and
messages his sponsors wished the U.S. Government to
have. It was not entirely clear to Jed and his
superiors in Washington for whom Khan was working,
but it was apparent that he was much better
connected than the ordinary precinct commander.
The Captain told Jed that he was the agent of an
informal consortium of men in positions of wealth
and power in the Muslim world whose interests and
safety were being increasingly endangered by the
growth of Islamic extremism. These men saw an ally
in the West, the goals and objectives of which were
congruent to theirs with respect to the threat from
the fundamentalist jihad. There was, however, a
growing problem.
As Khan explained
it, the manner in which the US Government was
pursuing its Global War on Terror was playing into
the hands of extremists by allowing them to
characterize it to the Muslim masses as a general
crusade against Islam. His sponsors wanted the US
and its allies to stop treating Anwar al-Ghabrizi
and others like him as symbols of a vast Islamic
threat to democracy and the American way-of-life.
Doing that, they claimed, only inflated the
terrorists’ view of their power and importance and,
more significantly, increased the number of their
followers. Khan’s sponsors’ decision to engineer
al-Ghabrizi’s arrest and transfer into US custody
was to be regarded as an offering and a plea. In
return for al-Ghabrizi’s removal from the scene,
they fervently hoped the White House would agree not
to reinvent him.
“It has been
almost a month,” the Captain was saying, “but we
have received no indication that your government is
sensitive to our request that it change its approach
to dealing with our extremists. You are sure that
your leaders are aware of our views?”
Jed was quick to
reassure him. “I speak with my boss by telephone
frequently; he’s a Deputy Director, and briefs
Admiral Bergen every day. He told me that the
Admiral relayed your sponsors’ views and desires to
the senior leadership at the White House, and has
raised the matter several times since then.”
“So, why then have
we not heard anything?” Khan asked.
“I don’t really
know,” Jed replied, “but my guess is that they’re
still digesting the New York business and trying to
figure out how to move forward. Even though the
attack didn’t succeed, it came so close to doing so
that it still has everyone shaken up. The White
House is looking forward to the coming election, and
can’t be happy with what it sees, given that the
President has taken a lot of credit for protecting
the country from terrorism. I suspect your
proposal will be a hard sell.”
Khan was obviously
frustrated. “We cannot continue this way much
longer. A number of my sponsors have been
sufficiently weakened in their countries that their
ability to maintain themselves may be in doubt.
Should any one of their governments fall and be
replaced by an extremist-dominated regime, it would
greatly increase the pressure on the others, and my
sponsors, in self-defense, may be required to shift
their support to the fundamentalists to show loyalty
to their cause.” He spoke slowly and carefully, as
though trying to insure that his message reached
across the world clearly and intact.
“You will recall
the infamous domino theory,” he concluded. “Well,
it is alive and well, and at work in the Muslim
world.”
A Course To Stay
Paperback - 273 Pages - $12.95
|