A Curious Lack of Curiosity

Cross-posted with the Washington Times.

Not so long ago, there was a furious fight between different tribes in the White House, the CIA and the State and Defense departments over the correct war-fighting strategy. The coin of the realm back then was intelligence: Intelligence that pointed in the right policy direction was cherry-picked and shown to the public; covert players connected to undesirable conclusions were outed or disparaged. This fight for the hearts and minds of Washington opinion shapers was fought out on the battlefields of the Washington Post and the New York Times -- and from them to the networks and news outlets across the country and around the world.

These descriptions may remind you of Valerie Plame -- a CIA operations officer with relatively minor responsibilities who was outed by someone in the George W. Bush administration. As soon as the press corps came to believe that someone -- perhaps close to the president -- had leaked her name to Robert D. Novak, the hunt was on. The media screamed for investigations. The CIA called for a Justice Department investigation. The opposition Democrats called for a special prosecutor to probe the unconscionable breach. The prosecutor was appointed by President Bush. A trial was held.

People were less concerned with what they substantively had learned about Iraq's yellow-cake uranium policy -- that the past decision to go to war in Iraq may have been made against the advice and proffered ambiguous evidence of Miss Plame's husband -- than with the identity of the government official who had despicably and feloniously "blown her cover."

Well, last week the Times again published on the front page the name of a purported CIA-paid undercover asset. This time it was none other than Ahmed Wali Karzai, the powerful brother of the Afghan president. This time the Times cited, on background, Obama administration "political officials," "senior administration officials" and others as their sources to the effect that Mr. Karzai has been secretly on the CIA payroll for eight years and has been helping the United States with intelligence, logistic and base support for our Special Forces, recruiting and running an Afghan paramilitary force on the instruction of the CIA -- as well as being a major narcotics trafficker.

This may well be the most egregious compromise of an extraordinarily valuable and inflammatory secret CIA operative in our history. It was leaked not after the policy was carried out -- as in the Plame case -- but just weeks before the president will be making his fateful strategy and manpower decision for the Afghan war.

The Times reporters on this story are the estimable James Risen, Dexter Filkins and Mark Mazzetti. While they doubtlessly were the target of an intentional leak, their top-rate professional reputation can assure us that they have been scrupulously accurate in describing their sources as Obama administration "political officials" and "senior administration officials," among others. Those characterizations can mean nothing less than high sub-Cabinet or Cabinet officials and/or White House deputy assistants or assistants to the president. On a stretch, the political officials might be special assistants to the president.

In all such categories, their investigation and prosecution (it is a very serious felony to reveal such information by an official with authority to possess the information) would need to be carried out by a special prosecutor -- as the attorney general would be judged to have a conflict of interest to prosecute someone appointed by the president and so close to him.

At such a moment, one question promptly and almost invariably arises across the media, across Washington and across the country: Who did it and why? The search starts with the answer to the age-old question: Cui bono? Who benefits? No one knows yet. I certainly do not. But people are speculating. Was it done to shape presidential policy not yet made or to justify a policy already made but not yet announced?

Is it the group in the White House around the vice president who do not want to have our country ally with a corrupt Afghan government (and thus want to reduce, not increase, troop levels)?

Is it the political operatives in the White House who desperately do not want the president to get bogged down in "his" Vietnam and are allied with Speaker Nancy Pelosi (who herself is in open war against the CIA -- calling them criminal liars to Congress)?

Is it a senior diplomat with personal grievances?

Is it the group in the White House closely allied with the Defense Department, which for deep institutional reasons that transcend policy, partisan politics and administrations is often on the lookout to give the CIA a black eye?

Is it some political player at the White House acting in the interest of some other faction at CIA -- which many knowledgeable people believe has been or still are supporting all sides in Afghanistan: Taliban, narco-traffickers, warlords, other mujahedeen, different wings of the Karzai government, the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence, Iran, India, Russia?

The CIA should order its inspector general to investigate. There should be a Justice Department leak probe. A special prosecutor must be appointed. Sen. Pat Roberts, ranking Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee, should raise holy hell. He knows how to do it.

Of course, you have not heard anyone asking these questions -- yet, because in today's Washington, there is a curious lack of curiosity regarding possible administration staff wrongdoing.

But you will hear these questions -- and more. Because there are some powerful cliques in this town with powerful interests in seeing justice done in this "intelligence betrayal of the century." Tick-tock ... tick-tock. The squirming has already begun.

Tony Blankley is the author of American Grit: What It Will Take to Survive and Win in the 21st Century (Regnery, 2009) and vice president of the Edelman public-relations firm in Washington.

 

Comments

[Balzac]

Karzai's brother is not a "CIA asset". He's just a guy in a complicated role. Anyway, the CIA has so many different things going on, it's not fair to say the CIA represents this or that as an entity.

Hamid Karzai has been outspoken against the drone air strikes. He is not a tool, neither was Musharraf, neither is Nuri al Maliki. Let's be real. These are people who've found themselves in the role of mediator after some very unfortunate events which leave them with the responsibility of being a representative of an "occupied territory". It's not easy to be in that role, although it is easy to judge someone who finds their self in that predicament.

The lack of curiosity is because some things are obvious. It was not a huge revelation. Valerie Plame, real CIA agent, was outed in retaliation by the Bush/Cheney maladministration because Joe Wilson wouldn't lie to support the yellow cake uranium fraud to sell the invasion of Iraq as an urgent national security priority. That was terrible. This is not even similar. Karzai's brother is his own man.

[danshanteal]

The law is intended to protect CIA assets. In the Plame case it was inapplicable. In the end Scooter was convicted of perjury. In the case of Karzai's brother, he isn't a CIA agent directly but indirectly.
Would the law then apply? If, for whatever ulterior reason(s), the CIA pursued the Plame deal, it should follow up on the Karzia situation for applicability in the present instance. It certainly didn't take much shouting to involve a special prosecutor in the Plame deal; so let the games begin.

[melpol]

International Heroin dealers will soon own Afghanistan. The nation that exports the purest Heroin controls the world. The competition among drug dealers to get high grade Heroin is fierce, one pure gram can be stretched 100 times. Only the well connected get the pure and become billionaires. But they in return owe more than money to their benefactors, it is allegiance to a foreign power. Thousands of well connected drug dealers have been placed in every city of the world, they exert tremendous influence on governments. They have become wealthy enough to buy militias and assassins. An Octopus with tentacles made up of Heroin dealers has taken control of the world.

[melpol]

Poppies have already been upgraded into 50 million bags of pure Heroin. They are potent enough to supply billions of addicts for a century. Most of it is stored in silos as a secret weapon to bribe informers in key cities. The rest is in Afghanistan caves. At a moments notice Sleath bombers will drop packets of Heroin on an enemy target enslaving the population. Destroy this secret document immediately after reading.

[BassMonk]

Tony,

Can you please explain why you support Ahmed Wali Karzai's employment by our government? I would think ending his relationship with us a positive development.

[Lon]

Is it really possible that Blankley does not see the difference between a leak designed to punish a political opponent, and one that is designed to give an understanding of the choices we face in Afghanistan? Karzai's brother is not an unknown agent who suddenly is put at risk in Afghanistan. He is a major player in ther region whose corruption is a threat to our policy in the region. Understanding that he is also an agent of the CIA is important for knowing what we face.

By contrast the leak of Plame's name accomplished had no informative value besides the ending of a career. The accuracy of Wilson's report did not depend on Plame's job.

The idea that there is some similarity between these cases is so stupid it is hard to believe Blankley sees one. But then it seems he did not see anything wrong with outing Plame, and so it is not surprising that he does not see the differences with this case.

[MO-Mike]

Tony, there is a significant difference here. Valerie Plame was a US operative in charge of who knows how many assets, and on point for the CIA's mid east counter proliferation team. Karzai is an asset in charge of his own people, and heroin trafficker.

In that regard it seems the CIA may be getting back to basics, running drugs out of the golden triangle or Eugene Hasenfus flying cocaine out of South America.

People said Afghanistan was not Vietnam. They were right, it's an arid, mountainous country, not a lowland jungle. After that, the Karzai government is looking staggering like the Diem government, corruption and graft and our support of those groups means we will never get the populace behind us, and we keep escalating? At this point almost all you would have to do is read "A Bright Shining Lie" and do a little name replacement.

We know how this one turns out.

[jeanruss]

It is obvious that my tax dollars sre being spent to protect the poppy fields of Afghanistan and my tax dollars are used to exploit the drug business. The world would be a better place if the CIA didn't exist. The CIA doesn't protect us, it exploits us and anything goes, torture, murder financial fraud and every other crime imaginable. Does George Bush SR. still control the CIA?

[Chipher]

There is a huge difference between being Iraq station director charged with WMD intel, as Plame was, as CheneyCo's outing of her destroyed and compromised the lives of every other agent in the station, and the 'purported' Ahmed Wali, who everybody knows is a corrupt mafi0sa drug lord, and to compare the two as equivalent says more about the author than about the thesis, since CI.A did NOT confirm it.

[Ionian]

Yes, how dare a newspaper report on our government using our money to subvert and control another country's government! American stands for freedom and democracy, except when we don't, and that's supposed to stay secret. People might see the puppet government of Afghanistan for what it is. People might realize why we are not so popular (to put it mildly) in that part of the world. The only surprising thing is that it was Karzai's brother and not Karzai himself cashing the checks.
To compare the revelation of this very pertinent information to the spiteful outing of Valerie Plame is ridiculous.

[pragmat]

As an Obama supporter and generally anti-war, presumably progressive type person I totally agree with Tony. This only weakens the the Karzai gov. and strains our relations. It may force us out of Afghanistan and that's what most progressives want, but outing Karzai as working with the CIA is just like the smearing of Wilson. As with most of our foreign policy blunders, it relies on a belief that the ends justify the means.

[Chipher]

...no, it is NOT just like smearing Wilson ... it is purported allegation only, smearing Wali not much ... Wilson/Plame, on the other hand, was outing an active agent in charge of W.M.D. intel, in time of war.

[zizyphus]

No one is curious. No one cares. They just want their own pipeline of cash to keep flowing.

If we wanted to hurt the poppy trade we could legalize it and bring the price down in line with other agricultural products, then it would no longer be source of income for terrorists, hedge funds, intelligence agencies, and banks.

[Billy Hell]

So the real issue is the leak and not the unscrupulous nature of the activity the leak exposed? Maybe to main stream media shills, but to millions of Americans and others around the globe, the revelations of dirty tricks by the Obama administration have been what is important.

[Winning09]

What "dirty tricks by Barack?"

This is Cheney all the way.

[Balzac]

Karzai's brother has denied it. We can wait for Ahmed Wali Karzai to come forth and declare himself a "CIA-paid undercover asset" and to demand accountability. I don't think that's going to happen.

Karzai's brother does not enjoy the same stature as Valerie Plame. She was an under cover CIA agent. Ahmed Wali Karzai is only a player in the Afghan government with a questionable role. He is not a US citizen nor an employee of our government. No administration head will roll for Karzai's brother.

Nice try, Tony.

[woodshoe]

if the times made an effort to out one CIA operative each day, dissembling the feedback loops of permanent war,empire, and the international drug trade, as this outing does, that would be 'a start'.

if they try that, maybe i will buy a copy.

otherwise,.. and apart from these moments where they accidentally print something relevant, they have proven to be sycophants to power.. (holding stories back for the bush admin., the judith miller perversion of the fourth estate, etc.)

fourth estate journalists, muckrakers, whistleblowers .. please! ..and hurry! there is a reason that journalists are the only profession specifically mentioned and protected in the constitution.