WSJ 2009 CIA Plan Envisioned Hit Teams Killing al Qaeda Lead

#1

CIA Plan Envisioned Hit Teams Killing al Qaeda Leaders
JULY 15, 2009

By SIOBHAN GORMAN

WASHINGTON -- A secret Central Intelligence Agency initiative axed by Director Leon Panetta examined how to assassinate members of al Qaeda with hit teams on the ground, according to current and former national-security officials familiar with the matter.

The goal was to assemble teams of CIA and special-operations forces "and put bullets in [the al Qaeda leaders'] heads," one former intelligence official said.

The plan was never carried out, and Mr. Panetta canceled the effort on the day he learned of it, June 23. The next day, he alerted Congress, which didn't know about the plan.

"The agency hasn't discussed publicly the nature of the effort, which remains classified," said agency spokesman Paul Gimigliano. The Wall Street Journal reported Monday the effort stemmed from a presidential order dated September 2001 that directed the CIA to find ways to kill or capture al Qaeda leaders.

The revelation has intensified a growing battle between the executive branch and Congress over the conduct of the CIA and U.S. intelligence operations.

Democrats in Congress are calling for an investigation into whether or not it was properly briefed on the matter. Meanwhile, Sen. Kit Bond, the top Republican on the Senate intelligence panel, said the thrust of the plan should be resurrected. "The general concept in the plan is one that should be explored somewhere. Whether it's a modification of this plan or some related plan," he said in an interview.

Congress frequently feuded with the Bush administration over intelligence matters. Democrats expected that tension would abate under the Obama administration, but lawmakers have frequently found themselves at odds with President Barack Obama's decisions to continue or not investigate controversial intelligence policies initiated under President George W. Bush.

The tug-of-war will enter a new round as soon as this week, when the House is expected to take up a bill that would expand congressional oversight of intelligence activities, especially of covert-action programs. The White House has said it would veto the bill if passed.

Details of how CIA could carry out proposals for an al Qaeda hit team remain sketchy, and the difficulty of executing such a plan likely explains why it periodically surfaced in internal briefings over eight years but never came to fruition.

The White House has evaluated whether or not to declassify information on a case-by-case basis, making any pattern hard to discern. It released legal memos on the CIA's interrogation program, but declined to make public photos that allegedly documented detainee abuse.

Had it become fully developed, the CIA's aborted plan would have been a covert-action program. At the outset, the potential operation wouldn't have been limited to particular countries. The use of hit teams was in accordance with the authority granted by the 2001 order, said a former national-security official familiar with it.

In the most recent iteration of the project, top CIA leaders instructed officers involved to narrow its focus and report the plans to Congress if they reached a critical point where moving forward would involve activities that, if discovered, could embarrass the U.S., according to a former senior intelligence official.

Targeted killing of terrorists is prohibited by presidential orders banning assassinations that date back to the Ford administration. But the president can waive that order, said Vicki Divoll, a former CIA counsel, because there is no specific federal law that bans the practice.

There's also no legal difference, she said, between killing al Qaeda targets with a hit team or with an unmanned drone, because the "intent to kill a targeted person" defines an assassination.

The CIA has recently opted to step up its use of Predator and Reaper drones to kill al Qaeda and related militants in Pakistan's tribal areas. That program is done in consultation with Pakistani officials and is less risky than sending in individuals, because it doesn't involve U.S. personnel on the ground.

One official with direct knowledge of the secret program said that assassination teams could be more effective than taking out al Qaeda leaders with drone-fired missiles. "We're talking about the difference between two feet and 50,000 feet," said one official with direct knowledge of the program. "Do you want the collateral damage of 50,000 feet or two?"

Mr. Panetta's decision to kill the assassination initiative and notify Congress has reignited a long-running battle over how involved lawmakers should be in overseeing the agency's activities. Democratic lawmakers credit the director for telling them about the program, but the party's House members are now preparing to investigate the program. On Monday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said lawmakers should "take whatever actions they believe are necessary" to get to the bottom of the matter.

The battle has also has put him in a tough spot. His recent moves to stand up for the agency in disputes with the director of national intelligence and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi -- who recently accused the agency of "lying all the time" -- have bolstered his support within the agency, veterans said. But lawmakers' rapid-fire calls to investigate Bush-era efforts like the secret assassination program threaten to undermine that support.

These emerging probes, coupled with discussion of a possible attorney general investigation of the CIA's controversial interrogation program and the recent declassification of interrogation documents, are rattling nerves at CIA, agency veterans say.

The flap with Congress over the secret program is already reverberating through the CIA's Langley, Va., headquarters, said one former senior intelligence official who is in regular contact with former colleagues.

"This is really hitting everyone hard," the former official said. "They've expressed concern that nobody's got their back,"

Even after Mr. Obama promised to cover legal fees for any officials caught up in lawsuits over the interrogation program, the former official said, "people who shouldn't have to are asking for advice on lawyers."

Another U.S. intelligence officer countered that most officers discount the exchanges as politics, "apply an appropriate discount factor to the drama" and find it "only mildly annoying."