PRINCIPLES FOR INCREASING AMERICAN SECURITY AFTER 9/11

Newt Gingrich May 11,2004 SUMMARY The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also known as the 9/11 Commission) has an opportunity to describe the system, culture, structures, budgets, metrics, and goals that America needs to be safe in an increasingly dangerous world. The greatest contribution the 9/11 Commission can make is to tell the country the truth about the scale of change that is needed and then let the elected and appointed officials make the compromises. To achieve these goals the following steps would be helpful: 1. Focus on the future security needs of America using 9/11 as a case study from which to learn. It is not nearly as important to discover what's wrong with the current system of intelligence as it is to design the values, the structure, the metrics, systems architecture and the culture of the new system. The current system is a hybrid product of the Cold War competing with the KGB and being changed from the outside by the Congress. It began with the FBI, OSS and military intelligence competition of the Second World War and was then first changed by the National Security Act of 1947. Trying to reform the current system is exactly the wrong strategy, what we need to do is design the transforming 21st century system and then build bridges from the current reality to the desired end state. 2. Future security needs are vastly greater, more urgent, and more challenging than people think:

1
DRAFT 5/11/2004 © 2004 All Rights Reserved American Enterprise Institute Ph: (202) 862-5948

a. Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD, mostly nuclear) and Weapons of Mass Murder (WMM, mostly biological but with some chemical weapons) are more real and much more deadly than either the American people or their political-governmental system think. Despite all of the rhetoric since 9/11, America is much more like Britain in 1935 than Britain in 1940. We are vastly underestimating the threat and the urgency; b. The Islamic Civil War between the irreconcilables (largely Wahhabi and Deobandi) and the modernizing wing (very small and mostly in Europe, the US and outside the Arab world) and the traditionalists is likely to last until 2070 or later. Today the irreconcilables have the energy, the moral force, and the momentum. There may be 39 to 52 million potential recruits for violence and the number is growing (source: CIA Counter Terrorism Center senior analysts); c. Centers of danger beyond the Islamic Civil War continue to grow with Pakistan (possibly the most precarious and dangerous nuclear-capable country in the world in 2004) and Saudi Arabia. North Korea and their state-controlled WMD enormously complicates the intelligence challenges of trying to focus on both non-state and state at the same time. The ChinaTaiwan relationship, Russia and Iran are additional examples of concerns America must have beyond the Islamic terrorist threat; d. There is an enormous amount of ungoverned territory on the planet (see attached map Possible Remote Havens for Terrorist and Other Illicit Activity) and there is no practical way to implement a no sanctuary policy for terrorists without an enormous expansion of governed areas (the map illustrates largely rural ungoverned areas but most third world large cities have huge ungoverned zones in which police are powerless); e. There is a Gray World of people smuggling (including 800,000 slaves a year), illegal arms trade, illegal international narcotics, illegal transportation and illegal crime of traditional sorts. This Gray World (the term is George Tenet's) provides a gray
2 DRAFT 5/11/2004 © 2004 All Rights Reserved American Enterprise Institute Ph: (202) 862-5948

underside to the emerging global economic system and is a force multiplier for any terrorist group with money. 3. Our opponents are intelligent, determined, and adaptive. They increasingly study us and practice denial and deception. We should find it very sobering that they could carry off bombings in Madrid, Chechnya and Iraq virtually with impunity. We should have no illusions about how little we have accomplished in trying to penetrate and defeat our terrorist opponents. Furthermore, their use of public communications to convey their messages has been vastly superior to our efforts to do the same. We should be very humbled by the results of the first three years of the direct war between America and irreconcilable Islamists. 4. Intelligence in a 21st century highly-complex world which includes real time information systems and weapons of mass murder and mass destruction has to be: a. Comprehensive; b. Real time; c. Demand pulled across all institutional boundaries; d. Centered on human intelligence; e. Analyzed by people with sophisticated understanding of cultures and personalities we are opposing; and f. All of the above should be reflected in a completely new form of daily presentation to the President, the senior National Security and Homeland Security officials and the leaders of Congress to ensure they are staying informed about a very complex real time world. 5. To create the kind of large scale strategic achievements Alfred Sloan developed at General Motors in the 1920s and General George C Marshall managed in the Second World War you must:
DRAFT 5/11/2004 © 2004 All Rights Reserved American Enterprise Institute Ph: (202) 862-5948

a. Insist on coming to the right solution and only then begin to compromise. If policy makers only see the compromised versions, they will never know what their advisers thought should really be done. Let the elected officials make the tough compromises but insist on giving them the real options to choose from; b. Create a systemic planning process to ensure that all echelons thoroughly understand what they are supposed to accomplish (see attached Planning & Leadership Model); c. Make sure you have the right theory of the problem and the solution (see John Nagl's Counterinsurgency Lessons from Malaya and Vietnam: Learning to Eat Soup with a Knife for a classic example of learning by the British and rejecting learning by the Americans); d. Plan back from victory (this was the key to successfully fighting the Second World War in such a short time). The key measurement is not how far you have come but how far you have to go. e. Plan everything in a deep-mid-near model where deep is ten years out, mid is four to five years our and one is the next year. The absence of disciplined focus on deep first and then mid is why so many daily decisions in Washington have no profound impact over time. Decisions without context are simply energetic activity. f. Establish the right metrics to measure achievement so you know every day if you are doing the right things in the right way. Establishing measurable metrics is a key to effective implementation. 6. Insist on including Congress in your analysis. Under our Constitution, Congress has co-equal responsibilities for establishing the institutions of national security. Congressional budgeting, congressional
4 DRAFT 5/11/2004 © 2004 All Rights Reserved American Enterprise Institute Ph: (202) 862-5948

oversight, congressional limitations on activities have all had a dramatic impact on our intelligence and national security institutions. To try to explain the absence of adequate human intelligence capabilities on 9/11 without reference to the Church Committee and a quarter of century of congressional hostility to dealing in hostile environments is simply historically false. To try to develop the future national security system by focusing only on the Executive Branch is a profound misreading of the American Constitution. It is time for some group to tell the truth about the need for Congressional reform in national security. 7. Without getting into partisan scape-goating it is important to put the intelligence and policing functions in their historic context. The people who were leading the FBI on 9/11 were operating in a culture that had been profoundly aloof at least since the early days of the Second World War some 60 years earlier. The people who were trying to get the intelligence community to work had been battered and shaped by attacks on the community going back at least 30 years to the attacks on Director Helms and others. Fixing these two sets of institutions and cultures will require profound and not merely shallow changes. 8. When we have everything right, everything fixed, with even the best intelligence system in the world and the wisest leaders willing to listen, we will still run a high risk of being surprised because we have active opponents who study us and practice denial and deception. Therefore, we need to have a surprise-surviving defense and Homeland Security system.
###

5
DRAFT 5/11/2004 © 2004 All Rights Reserved American Enterprise Institute Ph: (202) 862-5948

Planning & Leadership Model
VISION
STRATEGIES
All communication occurs in the mind of the listener

PROJECTS

("A project is a definable I delegatable achievement and the I key to entrepreneurial rather than L bureaucratic behavior.

TASKS

Listen > Learn > Help > Lead
Appreciative understanding (active listening between the sentences)
TRUE PRAGMATISM (Listen for new facts and perceptions)

2004 All Rights Reserved The Gingrich Group, LLC www.newt.org (202) 862-5948

Leadership Model

The Nature of the Real War
Islamic Civil War (1.3 billion people)
• Modernizers • Traditionalists • Non-violent Irreconcilables
Iraq Afghanistan Saudi Arabia Indonesia Libya Syria Iran

9/11
Osama bin Laden's Symbolic Victory"

Pool of Potential Recruits (39 - 52 million and growing)
Al Qaeda (3-5K)

Potentially Violent .... Irreconcilables

/-—-—

/

Additional groups...

The Gray World and the Ungoverned Areas
- Illegal narcotics and drug-dealing, - Illegal transportation, - International arms dealers, - International crime, and - People smuggling (800K slaves a year and millions of others)

Warrior-Recruiters (from Iraqi cross-border insurgency experience)

Egypt
Pakistan (most dangerous potentially) North Korea Colombia

3/10/2004 DRAFT © 2004 All Rights Reserved American Enterprise Institute (202) 862-5948

The 9/11 event proved you can focus the irreconcilables and kill Americans.

Memo on Previous Statements Relating to Terrorism by Former Speaker Newt Gingrich

Excerpts from Window of Opportunity by Newt Gingrich with David Drake and Marianne Gingrich - Chapter 10: The Dilemmas of American Foreign and Military Policy (1984) • "Any terrorist group which systemically exploited the vulnerabilities of our economy would discover that there was remarkably little planning for backup systems in case the normal routes and structures were destroyed. In effect, we have made ourselves vulnerable to any serious group terrorists who want to paralyze large portions of our economy and society." (p. 230) • "Terrorism must be confronted because it is far more likely to have an impact on our lives than is nuclear war. Terrorism is more likely to kill Americans and to challenge our policies than is any other kind of force." (p. 231) • "We must develop a doctrine which states clearly American policy toward violence aimed at the destruction of our society. We must take the steps necessary to prove that no terrorist organization can kill Americans with impunity." (p. 232) • "The long-term struggle against terrorism will be a dark and bloody one, involving years of vigilant counterterrorism...and a willingness to strike back with substantial force at the originators of the action rather the foot soldiers of the terrorist action.. .We must develop a doctrine which so severely and directly threatens the leaders of terrorist movements that they refrain from attacking the United States because they fear personal consequences. Any other policy is an invitation to a blood bath in which we will certainly be the losers." (p. 232) • "At a minimum, we will need closer relationships between the intelligence agencies, the diplomatic agencies, the economic agencies, the military agencies, the news media, and the political structure. There has to be a synergism in which our assessment of what is happening relates to our policies as they are developed and implemented. Both analyses and implementation must be related to the news media and political system 1
DRAFT 5/11/2004 © 2004 All Rights Reserved American Enterprise Institute Ph: (202) 862-5948

because all basic policies must have public support if they are to succeed." (P- 239) Gingrich Comment made 8/3/85 "We are a nation that has a nagging toothache called terrorism. We have gotten through the last terrorist assault with almost no casualties, few lessons and no medicine." The National Journal August 3, 1985 "Reagan Gets Mixed Reviews for His Loud Speech But Small Stick on Terrorism" By Christopher Madison Gingrich Comment made 12/20/86 • "What I'm trying to do is start an argument on how we live in the first third of the 21st century. My centerpiece is that we are now a country whose problems are 100 or 1,000 times bigger than its solutions. Our three biggest problems are that government costs more than society will pay, we are not competitive in the world market and there is a requirement that we lead the free world through the [Western] alliance and in the fight against terrorism." The National Journal December 20, 1986 "Eye of Newt" By Richard Cohen Gingrich Comment made a day after February 26, 1993 World Trade Center bombing Then minority whip, Gingrich said that Clinton needed to be "cautious" in cutting the defense budget. "There's a very real requirement for human intelligence and military strength. Every time we have any display of weakness, any display of timidity.. .here are people eager on the planet to take advantage of us." www. opinionjournel. com (2/2 7/93) "An Unheeded Warning" - 9/30/03, By Richard Miniter
2

DRAFT 5/11/2004 © 2004 All Rights Reserved American Enterprise Institute Ph: (202) 862-5948

Comment made by Dr. Roy Godson 4/6/95 • "It is entirely proper for Congress, if necessary, to take the lead in calling for this type of comprehensive assessment of terrorism In the early 1980s, Congress, at the prodding of a then relatively little-known Congressman from Georgia, Newt Gingrich, forced the Executive Branch to issue annual public reports on Soviet efforts to influence Western public opinion, and in so doing performed a great service. If not for Congressional urging, today we would probably be without a national narcotics assessment as a weapon against international organized crime. As the national interest demanded it, Congress pushed the Executive Branch; today, a comprehensive opportunity-oriented assessment of terrorism is very much in that same national interest." Testimony April 06, 1995 President National Strategy Information Center House Judiciary International Terrorism By Dr. Roy Godson Gingrich Comment made 5/10/95 • "But the objective fact of the future is that the primary dangers of terrorism on the planet are essentially those of Islamic extremism and particularly those financed and abetted by the Iranian government." The Record May 10, 1995 "Gingrich: Main Terrorist Threat Still From Iran" Gingrich Comment made 3/7/96 • "We are, in fact, entering the age of terrorism," Gingrich said. "We've had this fantasy since the fall of the Berlin Wall that the age of freedom has arrived." Terrorism means more than bombs set off by shadowy groups, Gingrich said, but can extend to states threatening neighbors. Telegraph Herald (Dubuque, IA) March?, 1996
3 DRAFT 5/11/2004 © 2004 All Rights Reserved American Enterprise Institute Ph: (202) 862-5948

Gingrich Comment made 7/29/96 • "I'm just saying I think you've got really look at what is your overall systematic plan for dealing with terrorism, where do you get the best punch for the dollar? I'm just suggesting to you that we want to be very helpful but we want to be helpful in a way that is effective and that actually gets the job done to save lives; it doesn't just make people feel good spending money, lots of activity, and then you discover, oh, here's this huge loophole that somebody over here was able to walk right through and pull off their act of terrorism." The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer July 29, 1996 Gingrich remarks made during the Keeper of the Flame Award Dinner, Center for Security Policy (9/18/96) • ".. .There should be a thorough investigation of the current Central Intelligence Agency" [note: Deutch was in charge at the time] • "We should insist on the establishment of a professional Central Intelligence Agency with a professional director dedicated to the defense of the United States rather than to the defense of left-wing politicians." • "I believe there are three levels of dangers that we should deal with using three different strategies...The first is terrorism; the second is adventurous or outlaw states; and the third is great powers." • "We should insist on the re-establishment of human intelligence and the capacity of the intelligence agency to.. .have spies." • "This [Clinton] administration is stretching our military, frankly, [to] the verge of the breaking point." • "We have to talk honestly about modernization.. .at the core of the survival of our children's country, we need to reestablish a seriousness of purpose and an honesty of intellect and a willingness to have clarity, to have coherence, and to have consistency. Or we are going to once again face a crisis of enormous proportions, and we will pay in blood what we are giving up today in time and preparation."

4 DRAFT 5/11/2004 © 2004 All Rights Reserved American Enterprise Institute Ph: (202) 862-5948

Gingrich Response to U.S. intelligence failures to anticipate Pakistani underground nuclear tests • ".. .We have too little funding for intelligence, too few assets, too few analysts. I hope lawmakers will consider this when they adopt the intelligence budget." The Washington Post May 14, 1998 Gingrich Response to Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania • "We need much better human intelligence, much more sophisticated efforts to go after terrorists and others." The Baltimore Sun August 8, 1998 Gingrich Response to U.S. air strikes in Afghanistan and Sudan after Embassy bombings • "We cannot allow a terrorist group to attack American embassies and do nothing. And I think we have to recognize that we are now committed to engaging this organization and breaking it apart and doing whatever we have to suppress it, because we cannot afford to have people who think that they can kill Americans without any consequence." • "I think it's very important that we send a signal to countries like Sudan and Afghanistan that if you house a terrorist, you become a target. And if you want to get rid of the target, you've got to get rid of the terrorist." Gingrich response to US Strikes against Osama bin Laden's network CNN BREAKING NEWS 13:45 pm ET August 20, 1998; Thursday 1:45 pm Eastern Time Gingrich Discussing the $1.5 billion emergency supplemental funds approved for U.S. intelligence agencies for FY99

5 DRAFT 5/11/2004 © 2004 All Rights Reserved American Enterprise Institute Ph: (202) 862-5948

• Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.) chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, credited Gingrich as the main architect of the spending package, saying he had been pushing for an additional $1 billion for intelligence for several months. $200 million of the package was added to intelligence for anti-terrorism efforts involving the FBI along with the CIA and the Pentagon. • "Past cuts in intelligence have hurt key programs, including innovation of advanced technological collection techniques as well espionage operations and analysis. The new programs are specifically tailored to provide protection to both U.S. citizens and our country's interests in the new millennium." The Washington Post October 23,1998 Recommendations from the Hart-Rudman Commission (The United States Commission on National Security/21st Century) Recommendations, Phase I (9/15/99) - New World Coming: American Security in the 21st Century, Phase II (4/15/00)- Seeking a National Strategy: A Concert for Preserving Security and Promoting Freedom, and Phase III (3/15/01) - Building For Peace • Phase I, commission's view of the future believes in part that, (11): "We should expect conflicts in which adversaries, because of cultural affinities different from our own, will resort to forms and levels of violence shocking to our sensibilities." • Conclusions to draw, Phase I, in part, (1): "America will become increasingly vulnerable to hostile attack on our homeland, and our military superiority will not entirely protect us.. .States, terrorists, and other disaffected groups will acquire weapons of mass destruction and mass disruption, and some will use them. Americans will likely die on American soil, possibly in large numbers." • First key objective stated in Phase II: "To Defend The United States And Ensure That It Is Safe From The Dangers Of A New Era." • First section of executive summary in Phase III, Securing the National Homeland: "The combination of unconventional weapons proliferation with the persistence of international terrorism will end the relative invulnerability

6
DRAFT 5/11/2004 © 2004 All Rights Reserved American Enterprise Institute Ph: (202) 862-5948

of the U.S. homeland to catastrophic attack. A direct attack against American citizens on American soil is likely over the next quarter century." • Among the 50 recommendations in Phase III that the commission pushed for: 1) "The President should develop a comprehensive strategy to heighten America's ability to prevent and protect against all forms of attack on the homeland, and to respond to such attacks if prevention and protection fail." Gingrich Testimony: House Committee on Armed Services • .. ."Terrorism is a much more profound threat than we have responded to. It should trouble every American that we've been trying to get bin Laden since 1993. You just mentioned the cost of repairing an American warship damaged by terrorists. We should all be concerned that we don't have the intelligence to know where they are, the ability to preempt, or the capacity to punish. And in fact, we have people who routinely go around the world holding press conferences explaining they're at war with the United States. This is a serious strategic challenge to us." • In response to question during Q&A period: "We felt that a Homeland Security Agency was a more appropriate response.. .we felt that in terms of having a better grip on what happens around our coasts and around our borders, that the Coast Guard and the enforcement parts of the Customs Service and the Border Patrol are logically a coherent part of this kind of a Homeland Security Agency, far more so than they are in the current agencies where they're embedded. • But I strongly commend what you've introduced. I do hope that all of your colleagues in both parties will look at it carefully. And I do think we need some kind of systematic effort to develop a capacity to respond to an event of mass destruction or mass disruption in one of our major cities." • .. ."The customs and the Border Patrol ought to be integrated, in our judgment, into a Homeland Security Agency. It is absurd when one computer can't talk to the other and they're sitting right on the border together, or when one union work rule blocks somebody from being practical. We ought to have the most efficient possible border, because we want the maximum flow of trade, and that cannot happen if there's great inefficiency." House Committee on Armed Services March 21, 2001
7 DRAFT 5/11/2004 © 2004 All Rights Reserved American Enterprise Institute Ph: (202) 862-5948

Senator Rudman's Senate Testimony (9/21/01) praising Newt Gingrich as the "Father" of the Homeland Security concept • "Let me tell you, interestingly enough, you know, Newt Gingrich, who was the father of this idea, on the theory that no good deed goes unpunished, when he left the House, was put on this commission. And he is a historian who brought a lot of insight." Senator Warren Rudman Senate Testimony September 21,2001 CIA Director George Tenet's comment at Joint House and Senate Select Intelligence Committee on pre-9/11 intelligence failures that Newt Gingrich was the only person to obtain an intelligence funding increase in the 1990s (10/17/02) • "Counterterrorism funding and manpower needs were number one in every list I provided to Congress and the administration. Indeed it was at the top of the funding list approved by Speaker Gingrich in 1999, the first year in which we received a significant infusion of new money for intelligence. That supplemental and those that follow it that you supplied were essential to our efforts and they helped save American lives." CIA Director George Tenet Joint House and Senate Select Intelligence Committee October 17, 2002
###

8 DRAFT 5/11/2004 © 2004 All Rights Reserved American Enterprise Institute Ph: (202) 862-5948

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful