Skip to main content

Congressional Activity Regarding CIA Paramilitary Activities

109th Congress
The 109th Congress did not address this issue legislatively. On November 23, 2004, President
Bush issued a letter requiring the Secretary of Defense and the Director of Central Intelligence to
review matters relating to Recommendation 32 and submit their advice to him by February 23,
2005. In unclassified testimony to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in February 2005,
the Director of the CIA testified that the CIA and DOD disagreed with the 9/11 Commission’s
recommendation.14 In June of 2005 it was reported that the Secretary of Defense and the Director
of the Central Intelligence Agency responded to the President, stating that “neither the CIA nor
DOD endorses the commission’s recommendation on shifting the paramilitary mission or
operations.”15 The Administration reportedly rejected the 9-11 Commission’s recommendation to
shift the responsibility for paramilitary operations to DOD.16

110th Congress
The 110th Congress saw the enactment of P.L. 110-53, Implementing Recommendations of the
9/11 Commission Act of 2007 which did not address either paramilitary operations by CIA or
special operations by DOD. Opposition by the Pentagon, the Intelligence Community, and the
Bush Administration undoubtedly affected the congressional response to the 9/11 Commission’s
recommendation to vest responsibilities for paramilitary operations in DOD. CIA’s reputation
may have also been assisted by the generally favorable assessments given to the Agency’s post-
9/11 performance, especially in the initial phases of the Afghan campaign that led to the collapse
of the Taliban regime in December 2001.

111th Congress
Although most observers believe that there remains little inclination among Members to transfer
responsibilities for all paramilitary operations out of CIA, some Members have expressed
concerns about apparent blurring of lines between DOD clandestine operations and CIA
intelligence-gathering operations.17

Endnotes

14 Transcripts, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Subject: National Security Threats to the United States, Federal New Service, Feb. 16, 2005, p. 29.

15 John J. Lumpkin, “Rumsfeld, Goss Oppose DOD Assumption of CIA Paramilitary Covert Operations,” Army Times, June 29, 2005.

16 Douglas Jehl, “White House is Said to Reject Panel’s Call for a Greater Pentagon Role in Covert Operations,” New York Times, June 28, 2005.

17 See CRS Report RL33715, Covert Action: Legislative Background and Possible Policy Questions, by Alfred Cumming; also, U.S. Congress, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, to accompany H.R. 2701, 111th Cong., 1st sess., June 26, 2009, H.Rept. 111-186 (Washington: GPO, 2009), pp. 48-49.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Project TWO-FOLD

25 MAY 1973 MEMORANDUM FOR: Executive Secretary, CIA Management Committee 1. This memorandum sets forth a recommendation for your approval in paragraph 5. 2. For the past several years, this office has been supporting the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs (BNDD) by spotting, assessing, and recruiting personnel to form an internal security unit whose primary mission is the detection of corruption within the BNDD. Subsequent to the recruitment and training stage, the individuals selected are turned over to the Chief Inspector of BNDD for operational guidance and handling in their various domestic assignments. 3. Recently, this Agency has extended this activity by supporting BNDD in the covert acquisition of individuals who are hired as Staff Agents utilized under nonofficial cover and directed against the principal international drug traffickers. These individuals are true employees of the BNDD and, although all administrative details relative to their employment are handled within...

Victory Through Auto Registration

Joel Ross Anti-imperialism in Panama "The Panamanian people, with their patriotic government as the vanguard, have been valiantly struggling against US imperialist economic and political aggression and hegemony." This statement typifies the rancid rhetoric that Panamanians hear from the men who wield or symbolize the power in their country, primarily General Manuel Noriega, chief of the Panama Defense Forces (PDF), and Manuel Solis Palma, the head of government. I say "head of government," because, while the Panamanian Government refers to "President" Solis Palma, the US Government recognizes him as "Minister in Charge of the Presidency." A Devious Plan The Panamanian Government has stressed the importance of defeating "US imperialism" and its Panamanian "agents." It says these "bad Panamanians" are from the upper class and have "Caucasian tendencies." That is the government's way of implying to the maj...

The Darker Bioweapons Future

3 November 2003 A panel of life science experts convened for the Strategic Assessments Group by the National Academy of Sciences concluded that advances in biotechnology, coupled with the difficulty in detecting nefarious biological activity, have the potential to create a much more dangerous biological warfare (BW) threat. The panel noted: The effects of some of these engineered biological agents could be worse than any disease known to man. The genomic revolution is pushing biotechnology into an explosive growth phase. Panelists asserted that the resulting wave front of knowledge will evolve rapidly and be so broad, complex, and widely available to the public that traditional intelligence means for monitoring WMD development could prove inadequate to deal with the treat from these advanced biological weapons. Detection of related activities, particularly the development of novel bioengineered pathogens, will depend increasingly on more specific human intelligence and, argued panelist...