If not for the Abu Ghraib torture scandal, most Americans probably never would have heard of Stephen Cambone. For more than a year, Cambone has served as the first-ever undersecretary of defense for intelligence, but he has lived a cloistered existence at the Pentagon. During most of his infrequent public appearances on Capitol Hill, Cambone has been a silent presence hovering over the shoulder of his boss, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. But then came Abu Ghraib. Last month, the Senate Armed Services Committee called Cambone to testify about the role military intelligence officers played in the treatment -- and mistreatment -- of inmates at the Iraqi prison.
His testimony was less than illuminating. Cambone, the Pentagon's newly minted intelligence chief, repeatedly maintained that he was unaware of the "scope and scale" of the torture at the prison, site of perhaps the largest military intelligence operation in Iraq, until he read Major General Antonio Taguba's report in early May. This, even though investigations into the abuse had been underway for months. He insisted that detention policy was the province of Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith, even though he told Congress that Major General George Miller, the head of the Guantanamo Bay prison complex, visited Iraq in August 2003 "with my encouragement, to determine if the flow of information to
and back to the subordinate commands could be improved." Furthermore, the Abu Ghraib intelligence chief Colonel Thomas Pappas reportedly followed up on Miller's recommendations with a briefing memo titled "Draft Update for the Secretary of Defense."
If Cambone's testimony sounds murky, it's indicative of the lack of clarity that has surrounded his entire office, the Pentagon's newest senior post. Cambone's position is merely supposed to consolidate oversight of the Pentagon's intelligence assets like the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, and the intelligence branches of the uniformed services. "That's not intrinsically objectionable," says Steven Aftergood, an intelligence expert at the Federation of American Scientists, "except for the fact that the arrangement is so lacking in transparency." Asked if he understands what exactly Cambone's office does, a senior aide to the Senate Armed Services Committee -- which helped establish the position -- confesses, "That's hard to say."
In fact, since Cambone's March 2003 confirmation by the Senate, he and Rumsfeld have spent far more energy explaining what the job isn't -- that is, a rival to the director of central intelligence (DCI). The DCI is the titular head of the intelligence community, but he has budgetary and executive control over only the CIA, which he runs directly. The problem is that the CIA controls only about 12 percent of the estimated $40 billion intelligence budget, while Pentagon-based intelligence services represent about 85 percent. (The difference is made up by the smaller agencies.) Previously, the various Pentagon intelligence services didn't have a single official overseeing them. Now they do -- Cambone. That change has prompted some to suggest the new undersecretary represents an alternative power center in the intelligence community. "What the creation of office has done is to shift the intelligence community's center of gravity further into the Pentagon," says Aftergood.
(more)
<http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/16/opinion/main623498.shtml>