President Donald Trump stated that the CIA will play a decisive role in a campaign to "unite the civilised world against radical Islamic terrorism, which we will eradicate completely from the face of the Earth." The question is, is the CIA up to the task.
The history of the past six decades of CIA operational activities however, suggests that as the Central Intelligence Agency exists today, it is not capable of such an undertaking and the reasons for this lack of preparedness present a frankly disturbing reality.
President Trump, by authorizing the raid on the Al Qaeda headquarters in the Yemen, has had his first flurry into the world of CIA and military clandestine operations. One American soldier died in that operation, and now the question becomes does Commander-in-Chief Trump have the wherewithal to finish the job, or has yet another American soldier died in vain.
President Donald Trump suggests that the CIA is vital to an effort to "… unite the civilized world against radical Islamic terrorism, which we will eradicate completely from the face of the Earth."
The use of the term, civilized world, in the president's inaugural address is at best grievous statement is, unfortunately, yet another example
The question is, is the CIA up to the task?
If, the history of the past six decades of CIA operational activities is used to judge its present capabilities, especially in reference to its interactions with the Islamic world, the outcome of such an assessment suggests that they are not, and the reasons for this lack of preparedness, present a frankly disturbing reality.
What follows is a brief resume of two books, the first of which is, The Hour ofMaximum Danger, 1st Edition (2005). The Hour of Maximum Danger is an executive summary on the advent and ascent of radical Islam written for the Bush Administration as it began its second term of office.
More than a decade ago, in the introductory statement to an executive summary written for the purpose of jogging the GW Bush administration into action on the terrorism front, one of the authors of this guide stated the following: “There are few more pressing problems facing global security than the war being conducted against non-Muslims, because they are non-Muslims, by individuals and groups under the banner of Islam. Unless this problem is addressed properly, it will be a constant menace to world security well into the foreseeable future.” *
The second edition of that book will be published in the next few weeks, The Hour of Maximum Danger, 2nd Edition (2017).
The second book, Understanding Radical Islam, will be available in the spring of 2017, and like the first book is intended as an executive summary on the subject of the indiscriminate use of violence by the adherents of radical Islam for the Trump Administration. Four weeks before it is released to the public, a copy of the book, Understanding Radical Islam, will be sent to President Trump.
In a nutshell, Mr. President, the decades-long non-meritorious hiring policies within our intelligence and security services, have robbed those agencies of scores upon scores of highly qualified and potentially productive American analysts and field operatives, simply because they were not Caucasian.
To the largest extent, this systematic practice resulted in not only an inbred bureaucracy, but in addition created a vacuum in the ability of our intelligence and security agencies to understand situations worldwide where Caucasians were not the object or subject group of our intelligence and security operations.
Therefore, our intelligence and security agencies lacked a significant source of intelligence and the cultural, social political and technical awareness and discipline that comes with an understnding of those with which we interact. This glaringly chronic shortcoming has given our intelligence services leeway for a constant stream of ill-conceived foreign interventions. And, in this regard, our relations with South and East Asia, North and Southern Africa, as well as the Americas have been skewed.
Importantly, our intelligence apparatus interjected their skin color worldview into the our dealings with the Islamic world, that is, with Muslims. As incredulous as it might seem today, even our most senior intelligence agency operatives and managers maintained more friendly relations with lighter skin color Muslims than with Muslims with darker complexions.
The only way, as will become evident as this resume develops, for President Trump to be able to have an intelligence and security service capable of defeating the radical Islamic terrorist threat, would be to completely gut the entirety of the current intelligence and security services of the United States, that is, wipe the slate clean and to begin anew. Merely replacing the chief choirmaster is insufficient to restore even a semblance of the wherewithal within our intelligence and security services to mount a campaign to contain, no less to eradicate, the radical Islamic terrorist threat. And, with all due respect, Mr President, it is the madness of folly, to expect otherwise.
The US Ambassador to India, writing in 1954, at a time when every effort was being made to bring the nations of South and East Asia into the American as opposed to the Soviet sphere of influence, suggested that the alignment effort was constantly undermined by the fact that, whereas we spoke of the American ideal of equality, when visitors from South and East Asia visited the United Sates they, because of the color of their skin, were exposed to discrimination, an experience they did not have in contrast, when they visited the Soviet Union. The same was true, according to the ambassador, for the representatives from North Africa and the Middle East. Most of the nations of South and East Asia, therefore adopted a benign attitude towards American interests and concentrated on their relations with either India or China.
It is therefore understood that realities of racial discrimination in the United States and the racial attitudes of US diplomatic, intelligence and security operatives in North Africa, the Middle East, South and East Asia systematically undermined the effort to portray the United States as the beacon of freedom and equality. The American ideals of freedom and equality could be talked about, but could not be demonstrated.
Nehru writing at the time suggested that '... if anything the attitude of most South Asian Indians toward the United States was even more complex than their thinking about Communist Russia and Communist China. They have on the one hand an extremely high ideal of what America's action should be, and on the other hand the conviction that America was not living up to that ideal.'
As an illustration of the wide difference between the image of America as a democratic egalitarian paradise as portrayed by the Eisenhower administration, and the reality of social relations in the US, when Secretary of State John Foster Dulles visited India in 1953 he was greeted with the following question, "Mr Secretary of State, it it true that in America you lynch dozens of Negroes every month."
Why that exact question in 1953 was of such importance to the leaders of India at a critical juncture in our demand to India that if they wanted our help, they must first throw their support behind us in the Cold War? I will leave it to your Vice-President, Mike Pence, to explain, since Indiana played such an important part in this development.
But in final analysis, this resume is about the need for a complete overall and revamping of the national security and intelligence apparatus of the United States. Almost inexplicably, those who would become the icons of American national security and intelligence for the next three decades, encouraged Eisenhower to make it the policy of the United States to oppose Indian independence, and India's presence at the Korean Truce Conference, and to allow our intelligence agencies to continue their intrigue in support of an independent Kashmir.
It will not be long into your presidency, Mr President, that the issue of the Kashmir, as it has been for every president since Eisenhower will return in one of those many intelligence briefings to which you will become all too familiar. Kindly note that the Kashmir is a thorn in the side of US Russian, US Indian, US Pakistan, US Chinese relations, and is the source of continued instability in South Asia.
It should be understood that the inability of American foreign policy in the Eisenhower Administration to increase American influence in North Africa and the Greater Middle East (The Eisenhower Doctrine), and the eventual humiliating defeat of US forces in Syria was to a large extent the result of how citizens of those countries were treated when they were in the United States.
The inexplicable nature of national security and intelligence advice to Eisenhower concerning South Asia pales in comparison to the, for lack of a better word, US intelligence and security agency bungling in the Greater Middle East.
Sayyid Qutb, an Egyptian, in the late 1940s and early 1950s studied in Washington DC and Colorado before being admitted to graduate studies at Stanford.
The US Ambassador to India, writing in 1954 ...
Have you ever thought, that if you just had the background, you could understand current national and world events?