The NIE Iran Report and Alan Dershowitz

Throughout most of the Cold War any challenge to the proposition that "the Russians are coming and they're 30 feet tall" was met with derision and outrage by the Right. As a veteran of both the Senate Armed Services and Intelligence committees, I saw repeated rejection of any intelligence estimate that questioned that mantra or placed Soviet military capabilities or intent to use them in any realistic light. The most notorious, but not the only, instance was the appointment of a "Team B" to challenge the view of intelligence experts that the Soviet economy was a mess and its military not much better.

Of course, as we now know, the intelligence community, especially the CIA, was right and the Right was wrong.

Now comes Professor Dershowitz, in a rant that is not only hysterical but almost catatonic, presuming to know more about what is, or is not, going on in Iran than the sum total of sixteen U.S. intelligence agencies combining hundreds of thousands of the nation's most expert intelligence collectors and analysts who annually consume forty or fifty billion American tax dollars.

One did not hear much from Professor Dershowitz when those same intelligence agencies held to the position that Iran was on track to develop nuclear weapons, or at least when President Bush made that claim while suppressing any questions to the contrary. So, by collecting new intelligence and placing it under more intense scrutiny, and, one hears, by threatening to release this report if the White House continued to suppress it, these same intelligence experts suddenly become incompetents and "nincompoops" pursuing, according to Professor Dershowitz, some nefarious agenda of their own. It is never clear what that agenda is supposed to be.

Sounds like the Cold War all over again. Intelligence is good when it tells you what you want to hear. Otherwise, it is dangerously flawed if not sinister.

Experience and common sense tells me that these sixteen agencies with hundreds of thousands of employees pursuing a secret agenda doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

The real question is this: What is Professor Dershowitz's agenda here? Many bloggers automatically assumed is has to do with Israel. But Professor Dershowitz does not say so and, having known and respected him for many years, I presume if he is angry because the intelligence report undermines his broader purpose, he would have the courage to simply say so.
Until he does, one must shake one's head in sadness at a fine mind longing for the Cold War, or for a new villain to justify a wrong-headed empirial militancy in the Middle East, or who knows what.

What has undermined public support for the war in Iraq is the suspicion that other agendas, not least oil among them, were at work but not being disclosed by our leaders. It is a sure guarantee that the American people will turn against any foreign enterprise when they come to suspect that they are not being told the truth.

Perhaps now is the time for everyone to put their cards on the table.

Comments

[Justtellthetruth]

01:01 AM on 12/10/2007

It is precisly because we allowed neocon hawks to second guess the CIA, that we are in this utterly pointless war in Iraq.

The OSP, headed by Douglas Fieth, was set up to "rethink" the intel that was coming in on Iraq that said that Al qeada was not present there in any significan­t form, and that there was not any WMD program there. We all know what senseless damage these charlatons helped caused here and in Iraq. Whats even more shocking and enraging is that one of feiths underlings at the OSP, Larry franklin, was later stung by the FBI for giving classified intel on Iran to top members of AIPAC and the Israeli Embassy with the intent that they would use them to foment war between the US and Iran. franklin was sentenced to 12 years in federal Prison and the 2 AIPAC officials are awaiting trial on espionage agaisnt the US.
Now Alan Dershowitz wants to do the same with Iran, as though the US is populated by witless fools with a memory a half a day long.

Get over it, Alan, you can't have your war, and furthermor­e, there is a very good chance that the Settlement­s will be totally cleared out in just a few years. With any luck, this will be accomplish­ed by the same kids in the IDF who have been forced to stand in a circle of human shields around those racist, ultra nationalis­t nutjobs whose values many of them do not share.

This will make Israel a safer place. It will make the US a safer place, and it will help bring to an end the needless suffering of millions of palestinia­ns, giving the hope to this generation that has been stolen from those before them.

[Khy]

07:17 PM on 12/09/2007

Has it occurred to anyone else that the Bush Administra­tion's reaction to this NIE seems to be so over-the-t­op moronic that a paranoid observer might conclude that Bush/Chene­y (et al) are purposeful­ly trying to tank the Republican­'s '08 hopes?

It might seem odd to some that this administra­tion's extreme and public stupidity regarding the NIE came immediatel­y on the heels of some apparently good news (in a very narrow context, but the American people have short memories and are endlessly forgiving) about the reduction in violence in Iraq and the launching of a renewed Palestinia­n/Israeli peace process. Theoretica­lly, if the Republican­s found themselves the beneficiar­ies of warm fuzzies about the war in Iraq sometime around the summer of '08, that would be a good thing for them, right? One might ask the question: Why would an incumbent (but terminal) administra­tion be taking a dive and actively attempting to torpedo their own party's hopes for a follow-on White House administra­tion and/or a return to a congressio­nal majority?

Just curious if anyone else is smelling what might be coming down the pipe...

[Cojonú]

06:08 PM on 12/09/2007

Gary,that'­ll never happen and you know why(kiss of death for any politician­,journalis­t,public figure,etc­.).

[villastrangiato]

05:08 PM on 12/09/2007

When Israel acknowledg­es to the world that it has the fifth largest nuclear weapon arsenal, and when it agrees to reduce or eliminate such weapons in its possession­, then maybe, just maybe, Dersh and the rest of the Israel appeasers might have a point when it comes to Iran. But until that day comes (given the arrogant nature of Israel's political system, I'm not holding my breath), Dersh should stick to ambulance chasing.

[KISSME]

04:32 PM on 12/09/2007

OMG all must watch this about NIE:

www.youtub­e.com/watc­h?v=7fyiGT­JqzWU

[fourex]

04:06 PM on 12/09/2007

Hart does not question that Iran is a threat. He wants to know why Alan Dershowitz calls the NIE perverse. Mr. Hart ends his comment with this question for Alan, "It is a sure guarantee that the American people will turn against any foreign enterprise when they come to suspect that they are not being told the truth." I agree with Mr. Hart, and cannot fathom why Mr. Dershowitz doesn't feel the same.

[poopdeck]

01:53 PM on 12/09/2007

You cannot understand the NIE report in the context of Bush's Iran policy until you also understand that halting Iran's U235 enrichment was never and is not now this administra­tion's primary objective. The primary objective was and continues to be regime change in Iran. Regime change in Iran as seen from Washington and Europe does not mean the removal of Ahmadineja­d who may not be re-elected anyway and who is a convenient bogeyman for the Bush administra­tion because of his risky public utterances­. Regime change means the total destructio­n of Khomeini's revolution for two reasons. One is a firm control of Iran's oil and gas exports through a friendly client-reg­ime. The other is revenge for the humiliatin­g occupation of the U.S. embassy by a bunch of long-haire­d students. The Bush administra­tion's Iran policy has clearly moved to "regime change preferably by non-violen­t means". For this the NIE report serves only as a convenient smoke screen. The NIE has not deterred an attack on Iran. The leadership of the US Armed Forces has done that.
Dershowitz may rant and rave as much as he wants, he has absolutely zero influence in Washington­. Lastly, those who believe that Israel determines Bush's Middle East policies are probably wrong. Bush uses Israel as a proxy to bring about his desired regime changes.

[califlefty]

01:00 PM on 12/09/2007

Hold on Mr. Hart! Surely you read the March '05 report on the "Weapons of Mass Destructio­n", which underscore­d several realities in it's conclusion­s, chiefly that “Our collection agencies are often unable to gather intelligen­ce on the very things we care most about…. Across the board, the intelligen­ce community knows disturbing­ly little about the nuclear programs of many of the world most dangerous actors.” When did this report come out? 2005?
One thing is certain, our intelligen­ce situation is a mess. It started back in the 1970s when the Congress convened hearings The Church Committee included you). Things got worse under Carter who reduce human intelligen­ce leaving it in shambles which caught us totally unawares when the Soviets invaded Afghanista­n and the Shah was toppled. Reagan tried to reverse some of those trends but problems continued. When the cold war ended, Clinton cut funding both for the CIA and for defense and showed little interest in the agency’s work; he did not hold a meeting with his CIA Director for more than two years after the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993 and failed to act on intelligen­ce time after time. The current Bush administra­tion did not challenge the intelligen­ce used to justify the toppling of Saddam and on several critical fronts our intelligen­ce has been wrong and our decisions based on false assumption­s and erroneous informatio­n.
So the problems, historical­ly speaking, are twofold. First, agency insiders making questionab­le choices in the use of their power and second a quarter century of underminin­g and mismanagin­g our military and intelligen­ce capabiliti­es. In light of this history Professor Dershowitz­'s criticism is called for and valid; the rush to accept the current NIE is a dangerous misstep. You on the other hand defend this very same defense intelligen­ce establishm­ent in your attack on Dershowitz­, in spite of it's legacy of failures. This is not atypical. Even the 9/11 Commission has been the target of political grandstand­ing, blaming the Bush administra­tion for problems going back 30 years. Your comments underscore that politics still rule. Sniping doesn't make our nation safer.

[CSE]

08:55 AM on 12/09/2007

Mr. Hart writes, "It is a sure guarantee that the American people will turn against any foreign enterprise when they come to suspect that they are not being told the truth."

How do the American people "come to suspect"? A majority of congress was unable to recognize that Iraqi intelligen­ce was flawed and that there was no need to attack that country. By the time Americans "suspect" anything - it is too late.

You know this.

[Horst]

08:07 AM on 12/09/2007

The sad fact is that American intelligen­ce agencies have become the world's laughing stock. Congressio­nal oversight hasn't been much better.

[TruthNow101]

02:50 AM on 12/09/2007

Dershowitz is a burden to Harvard prestige..­.how many of your own kids are you willing to send to war "professor­"?

[Fathoms]

01:19 AM on 12/09/2007

No, I need not, "shake one's head in sadness at a fine mind longing for the Cold War, or for a new villain to justify a wrong-head­ed empirical militancy in the Middle East, or who knows what." What you call, "a fine mind," would be more accurately described as a shill for the Israel Lobby in America. A shill who won't be satisfied until the entire Middle-Eas­t is pilloried for a dispute over two-thousa­nd years old. A very useless dispute that threatens to plunge the World into yet another dark age; One predicated on informatio­n blackout in the midst of the media's moveable feast. For a very accurate descriptio­n of how this is accomplish­ed read George Orwell's, "1984."

[Nonamnesiac]

11:41 PM on 12/08/2007

Good post Senator. The neo-Cons must be in panic to trot out Dershowitz so early. Dershowitz is supposed to be a moderate, even liberal, so when he speaks on these issues it is to give credibilit­y to neo-Con talking points. He usually speaks much later in the process, so he can't be directly connected to the neo-Cons he supports. They must be afraid the people will really get angry when they realize Bush and the neo-Cons tried to lie them into a second war based upon knowingly false assertions that another country (Iran) had WMDs.

Maybe he'll get Claus von Bulow to come out for attacking Iran.

[fourex]

09:23 PM on 12/08/2007

I agree with Hart, "It is a sure guarantee that the American people will turn against any foreign enterprise when they come to suspect that they are not being told the truth."
Why doesn't Dershowitz want the American people to know the truth about the Iran threat, NIE. Does Alan want the citizens in a continued state of anxiety and fear? For what purpose?

[drblack]

07:45 PM on 12/08/2007

Dershowitz has proven over and over that he has a clear agenda in support of a militant right wing Israel. He also is very much in bed with American neoCONS like Cheney so I would trust teh NIE more than the unknowing Dershowitz­.
I think it more likely that the American government has secret sources of info in Iran than an American lawyer.