Good Intelligence

The fallout from the release of classified documents by Edward J. Snowden, a former contractor for the National Security Agency, continues. Recent revelations that the N.S.A. listened to cellphone calls of Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany have generated widespread debate and outrage. But this solitary focus may miss the deeper issue: the vast increase in the reach of U.S. intelligence operations, which too often lack a stringent moral grounding and an appropriate balance between security and liberty. Though U.S. citizens sometimes seem content to turn a blind eye to what the government does in their name, this trend warrants attention and concern.

Our country’s participation in the Second World War, and then the cold war, resulted in an enormous intelligence apparatus of lasting consequence. The National Security Act of 1947 pulled together existing agencies and established the Central Intelligence Agency. A year later, President Harry S. Truman expanded its mission to include covert operations shielded by plausible deniability. He also established the N.S.A. in 1952 to continue code-breaking work in the postwar era. These intelligence organizations, by their very nature, operate beyond public scrutiny—allowing them to expand with minimal public debate.


In this issue of America, James W. Douglass writes that in the wake of the failed Bay of Pigs invasion, President John F. Kennedy said he wanted “to splinter the C.I.A. in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds.” No such dissolution of the agency’s power has taken place. Instead there has been an explosion in the size and scope of U.S. intelligence organizations following Sept. 11, 2001. We know little about the cost of these operations, but thanks to a two-year investigation by The Washington Post published in 2010, we know there are over 3,000 government organizations and private companies involved in national security and intelligence programs. An estimated 854,000 people hold top-secret security clearances.

We now know that the N.S.A. not only decodes foreign intelligence and protects American secrets, but spies without warrants on Americans at home and listens to tens of millions of calls abroad, including those of 35 world leaders. The C.I.A., far beyond its original mandate, operated secret prisons for terrorism suspects, employed methods of interrogation that amounted to torture and continues to execute not-so-secret drone strikes in countries like Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia.

When President Obama came into office, he rightly changed course by issuing executive orders that closed C.I.A. prisons and prohibited enhanced interrogation techniques. Mr. Obama even ordered the release of the then-classified C.I.A. “torture memos”—a courageous decision that resulted in the expected yet unfounded criticism that the president was showing weakness on national security.

Even greater courage is needed to take up the unfinished business of reining in U.S. intelligence agencies. C.I.A. Director John O. Brennan has said the agency “should not be doing traditional military activities and operations.” This should become policy, not just a promise. White House officials have signaled a “preference” for Pentagon oversight of drone strikes, but a full transition from the C.I.A. has not yet taken place. Only the Department of Defense should carry out U.S. military operations, and those should be in conformity with international humanitarian law and subject to public scrutiny. The resources of the C.I.A. should be directed toward its traditional mission of intelligence collection and analysis.

Last month the N.S.A. announced a plan to hire a civil liberties and privacy officer, and bipartisan legislation under consideration in Congress would limit the collection of domestic communication records. These proposals represent positive steps. The actions of U.S. intelligence agencies reflect our values as a nation. These agencies have a role to play in pursuing legitimate security interests, but they cannot bypass moral discernment. Having the ability to do something does not mean we should do it. Spying on allies has a long history, but that does not justify its continued use, especially given the invasive nature of surveillance today. The proposal by France and Germany to review intelligence gathering techniques makes sense and should be accepted by U.S. leaders.

Fifty years ago, Pope John XXIII, shortly before his death and the assassination of President Kennedy, left a testament to the world still relevant today. In his encyclical on global peace and human rights, “Pacem in Terris,” the pope wrote that “true and lasting peace among nations” must consist in “mutual trust.” This trust is important among allies and essential among adversaries. Relationships among nations cannot be driven by fear, competition and excessive reliance on espionage. There must be a level of trust that allows for greater collaboration in facing the global challenges and security needs that affect us all.

Comments are automatically closed two weeks after an article's initial publication. See our comments policy for more.
Leonard Villa
4 years 4 months ago
One of the "realities" coming out of this spotlight on spying is the that everyone spies on everyone else. In a world of real enemies who seek our destruction "mea culpas" cannot be done in a vacuum based on a utopia or on the standards of the enemies of our country foreign and domestic. Moreover the catch 22 is that the intelligence agencies cannot boast about their successes which have kept us safe. You cite the Obama check on torture as if torture were a univocal term. It's not. So a word of caution about auto-destruct tendencies concerning intelligence in a world of Putin, Korea, Islamic terrorists, and a China seeking super-power status.
Jean-Pierre HERVEG
4 years 4 months ago
I don't exactly know the role of CIA, NSA ... in the killings of Jesuit Priests in South America. But I know that those agencies often worked with the "Richs" against the "Poors". Óscar Arnulfo Romero y Galdáme was not killed by Russian but by people working for ... and trained by ... Many Jesuits were also murdered with a lot of poor simple countrymen, their parishioners. "Traditional mission of intelligence collection and analysis" are only used to kill people.
Tammy Gottschling
4 years 4 months ago
I appreciate reading this article, and I am currently reading David Luban's book "Legal Ethics and Human Dignity." I mention because Luban references Thomas Shaffer's work in legal ethics and religion. I'm wondering if writers for America Magazine might direct me to Catholic voices re the growing complications addressed in this article.


Don't miss the best from America

Sign up for our Newsletter to get the Jesuit perspective on news, faith and culture.

The latest from america

Xavier High School students fill West 16th Street during the National School Walkout Day. (Credit: Shawna Gallagher Vega/Xavier High School)
Our student body generated dialogue around a topic that we did not all agree on.
Devin OnMarch 23, 2018
Protesters gather near the Manchester Central Fire Station in Manchester, N.H., Monday, March 19, 2018, where President Donald Trump madee an unscheduled visit. Trump is in New Hampshire to unveil more of his plan to combat the nation's opioid crisis. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
To suggest the use of the death penalty as a way to address the opioid epidemic ignores what we know already to be true: The death penalty is a flawed and broken tool in the practical pursuit of justice.
Karen CliftonMarch 23, 2018
(Images: Wikimedia Commons, iStock/Composite: America)
An angel whispered in my ear: “Fred, ‘Be not afraid.’”
Fred DaleyMarch 23, 2018
(photo: Music Box Films)
“Back to Burgundy” is about family tensions boiled up by both the financial and artistic challenges of the wine business.