USA — Intelligence Chiefs Cite Greatest Security Threats

WASHINGTON, March 11, 2011 — Two high-lev­el intel­li­gence chiefs described their top con­cerns for U.S. nation­al secu­ri­ty dur­ing their tes­ti­mo­ny on Capi­tol Hill yes­ter­day.
Speak­ing before the Sen­ate Armed Ser­vices Com­mit­tee, Army Lt. Gen. Ronald Burgess, Defense Intel­li­gence Agency direc­tor, and James R. Clap­per Jr., Nation­al Intel­li­gence direc­tor, cit­ed dan­gers rang­ing from ter­ror­ism, cyber-threats, weapons of mass destruc­tion, and the release of sen­si­tive data by sources such as Wik­iLeaks.

Clap­per told the com­mit­tee that cov­er­ing the scope of such threats could­n’t be pre­sent­ed in a brief man­ner, so he pre­sent­ed four cat­e­gories of great con­cern to the intel­li­gence com­mu­ni­ty.

Ter­ror­ism, Clap­per said, is the first and fore­most threat.

“Coun­tert­er­ror­ism is our top pri­or­i­ty because [job No. 1] for the intel­li­gence com­mu­ni­ty is to keep Amer­i­cans safe and the home­land secure,” he said. The intel­li­gence com­mu­ni­ty has helped thwart many poten­tial­ly dev­as­tat­ing attacks, Clap­per said, appre­hend­ing numer­ous “bad actors” through­out the world and “great­ly” weak­en­ing much of al-Qaida’s oper­a­tions, train­ing and pro­pa­gan­da.

Al-Qaida’s resolve to recruit Amer­i­cans and to spawn affil­i­ate groups is con­cern­ing, Clap­per said, most notably on the Ara­bi­an Penin­su­la. “We also see dis­turb­ing instances of self-rad­i­cal­iza­tion among our own cit­i­zens,” he added.

Home­grown ter­ror­ists might com­prise a small por­tion of the glob­al threat, Clap­per said, but such activ­i­ty can have a “dis­pro­por­tion­ate impact” because such ter­ror­ists under­stand the Unit­ed States and have eas­i­er access to U.S. facil­i­ties.

Over­seas coun­tert­er­ror­ism oper­a­tions in Afghanistan and else­where con­tin­ue to dis­rupt, dis­man­tle and defeat al-Qai­da and oth­er ter­ror­ist orga­ni­za­tions, Clap­per said.

Also “we have seen and will con­tin­ue to see suc­cess in gov­er­nance, secu­ri­ty and eco­nom­ic devel­op­ment that will erode the will­ing­ness of the Afghan peo­ple to sup­port the Tal­iban and their al-Qai­da allies,” he added.

Though U.S. com­bat oper­a­tions are over in Iraq, ter­ror­ist bomb­ings -– some al-Qai­da engi­neered — con­tin­ue there, Clap­per said.

“[That] means that our work to help solid­i­fy the secu­ri­ty gains we’ve made thus far remains a high pri­or­i­ty,” he said.

Clap­per told the com­mit­tee he’s also con­cerned about the pro­lif­er­a­tion of weapons of mass destruc­tion.

“The pro­lif­er­a­tion threat envi­ron­ment is a flu­id, bor­der­less are­na that reflects the broad­er glob­al real­i­ty of an increas­ing­ly free move­ment of peo­ple, goods and infor­ma­tion,” he said. “While this envi­ron­ment is crit­i­cal for peace­ful sci­en­tif­ic and eco­nom­ic advances, it allows the mate­ri­als, tech­nolo­gies and know-how relat­ed to chem­i­cal, bio­log­i­cal, radi­o­log­i­cal and nuclear weapons … and mis­sile deliv­ery sys­tems, to be shared with ease and speed.”

Iran’s nuclear pro­gram pos­es a threat, Clap­per said, as do North Korea’s nuclear weapons and mis­sile pro­grams.

Anoth­er chal­lenge for the intel­li­gence com­mu­ni­ty “is that we are in an inter­con­nect­ed, inter­de­pen­dent world and insta­bil­i­ty can arise and spread quick­ly beyond bor­ders,” Clap­per said, cit­ing the recent civ­il unrest that erupt­ed in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and oth­er Mid­dle East and North Africa coun­tries.

Anoth­er threat to U.S. nation­al secu­ri­ty is for­eign coun­ter­in­tel­li­gence activ­i­ty, Clap­per said, where the Unit­ed States faces a wide range of threats to its eco­nom­ic, polit­i­cal and mil­i­tary inter­ests at home and abroad.

And, the unau­tho­rized dis­clo­sures of clas­si­fied doc­u­ments through sources such as Wik­iLeaks also pos­es “sub­stan­tial chal­lenges” to nation­al secu­ri­ty, Clap­per said.

“From an intel­li­gence per­spec­tive, these dis­clo­sures have been very dam­ag­ing,” he said, not­ing the intel­li­gence com­mu­ni­ty is work­ing to bet­ter pro­tect its infor­ma­tion net­works. “We can and will respond to the prob­lems of intru­sions and leaks,” Clap­per added, “but we must do so with­out degrad­ing essen­tial intel­li­gence inte­gra­tion and infor­ma­tion shar­ing.” Burgess then addressed spe­cif­ic threats and chal­lenges as viewed by defense intel­li­gence, start­ing with trans-nation­al ter­ror­ism.

“The [Defense Intel­li­gence Agency] assess­es that al-Qai­da con­tin­ues to adapt in response to our coun­tert­er­ror­ism efforts,” Burgess said. “While core al-Qai­da is forced to focus more on sur­viv­abil­i­ty, it remains resilient, con­tin­ues attack plan­ning, and pro­vides oper­a­tional guid­ance to region­al affil­i­ates.”

In Afghanistan, Burgess said, high­er lev­els of vio­lence could occur through the year, part­ly because of increased Inter­na­tion­al Secu­ri­ty Assis­tance Force pres­ence and oper­a­tions. “ISAF has con­strained insur­gents in some areas,” he said. “The Tal­iban in the south have shown resilience and still influ­ence much of the pop­u­la­tion … in the east, the Tal­iban and Haqqani net­work have suf­fered numer­ous tac­ti­cal and lead­er­ship loss­es with no appar­ent degra­da­tion in their capac­i­ty to fight.”

In North Korea, Burgess said deci­sion mak­ing could be crit­i­cal as it relates to “the appar­ent lead­er­ship suc­ces­sion under way” and its “impli­ca­tions for addi­tion­al delib­er­ate provo­ca­tions against the south. Mis­cal­cu­la­tion could lead to esca­la­tion.”

Chi­na seems intent on expand­ing the capa­bil­i­ties of its mil­i­tary, Burgess said, as its lead­ers appar­ent­ly are “allo­cat­ing resources to pur­sue broad-based mil­i­tary trans­for­ma­tion.

“While remain­ing focused on Tai­wan as a pri­ma­ry mis­sion, Chi­na will, by 2020, [have laid] the foun­da­tion for a force able to accom­plish broad­er and region­al glob­al objec­tives,” he said.

Yet, China’s People’s Lib­er­a­tion Army con­tin­ues to face defi­cien­cies in inter­ser­vice coop­er­a­tion and actu­al expe­ri­ence in joint exer­cis­es, Burgess said, adding because of the short­com­ings, China’s lead­ers “con­tin­ue to stress asym­met­ric strate­gies to lever­age its advan­tage while exploit­ing poten­tial oppo­nents’ per­ceived vul­ner­a­bil­i­ties.”

Turn­ing back to Iran, Burgess told the com­mit­tee that while Iran prob­a­bly would not launch a pre-emp­tive attack, in the event of hos­til­i­ties it could try to block the Strait of Hor­muz tem­porar­i­ly, threat­en U.S. forces and region­al allies with mis­siles, and employ ter­ror­ist sur­ro­gates world­wide.

Iran’s space launch mis­sile pro­gram, he not­ed, demon­strates progress toward tech­nol­o­gy that could even­tu­al­ly be used for an inter­con­ti­nen­tal bal­lis­tic mis­sile.

Source:
U.S. Depart­ment of Defense
Office of the Assis­tant Sec­re­tary of Defense (Pub­lic Affairs)

More news and arti­cles can be found on Face­book and Twit­ter.

Fol­low GlobalDefence.net on Face­book and/or on Twit­ter

Team GlobDef

Team GlobDef

Seit 2001 ist GlobalDefence.net im Internet unterwegs, um mit eigenen Analysen, interessanten Kooperationen und umfassenden Informationen für einen spannenden Überblick der Weltlage zu sorgen. GlobalDefenc.net war dabei die erste deutschsprachige Internetseite, die mit dem Schwerpunkt Sicherheitspolitik außerhalb von Hochschulen oder Instituten aufgetreten ist.

Alle Beiträge ansehen von Team GlobDef →