Office
of the National Counterintelligence Executive
The 10 Commandments of Counterintelligence
This article appeared in Studies of Intelligence, Unclassified Edition,
Fall-Winter 2001, No.11, published by the CIA's Center for the Study of
Intelligence. The Center seeks to promote study, debate, and understanding
of the role of intelligence in the American system of government. Mr.
Olson served in the Central Intelligence Agency's Directorate of Operations
and is presently on the faculty of the George Bush School of Government
and Public Service at Texas A&M University.
"O that thou hadst hearkened to my commandments!
Then had thy peace been as a river, and thy righteousness as the waves
of the sea." Isaiah 48:18
The need for counterintelligence (CI) has not gone away,
nor is it likely to. The end of the Cold War has not even meant an end
to the CI threat from the former Soviet Union. The foreign intelligence
service of the new democratic Russia, the Sluzhba Vneshney Razvedki Rossii
(SVRR), has remained active against us. It was the SVRR that took over
the handling of Aldrich Ames from its predecessor, the KGB, in 1991. It
was the SVRR that ran CIA officer Harold James Nicholson against us from
1994 to 1996. It was the SVRR that was handling FBI special agent Earl
Pitts when he was arrested for espionage in 1996. It was the SVRR that
planted a listening device in a conference room of the State Department
in Washington in the summer of 1999. And it was the SVRR that was handling
FBI special agent Robert Hanssen when he was arrested on charges of espionage
in February 2001.
The Russians are not alone. There have been serious, well-publicized
concerns about Chinese espionage in the United States. The Department
of Energy significantly increased security at its national laboratories
in response to allegations that China had stolen US nuclear weapons secrets.
Paul Redmond, the former Associate Deputy Director of Operations
for Counterintelligence at the CIA, told the House Permanent Select Committee
on Intelligence in early 2000 that a total of at least 41 countries are
trying to spy on the United States. Besides mentioning Russia, China,
and Cuba, he also cited several "friends," including France,
Greece, Indonesia, Israel, the Philippines, South Korea, and Taiwan. He
warned of a pervasive CI threat to the United States.
The United States, as the world's only remaining superpower,
will be the constant target of jealousies, resentments, rivalries, and
challenges to its economic well-being, security, and leadership in the
world. This inevitably means that the United States will be the target
of large-scale foreign espionage.
A Choice Assignment
When I joined the CIA, one of my first interim assignments
was with the old CI Staff. I found it fascinating. I was assigned to write
a history of the Rote Kapelle, the Soviet espionage network in Nazi-occupied
Western Europe during World War II.
With its expanded computer power, NSA was breaking out the
actual messages sent between the NKVD center in Moscow and the clandestine
radios of the various cells in Western Europe. Incredibly, these messages
came to me.
There I was, a brand new junior officer, literally the first
person in the CIA to see the day-to-day traffic from these life-and-death
operations. I was deeply affected by the fear, heroism, and drama in these
messages. Above all, I felt privileged to have been given such an opportunity.
Building on an earlier study of the Rote Kapelle by the
CI Staff, I completed a draft several months later that incorporated the
new material. To my great surprise, this study was well received by my
immediate superiors, and I was told that I was to be rewarded with a personal
interview and congratulations from James Jesus Angleton, the legendary
head of the CI Staff from 1954 to 1974.
Angleton's office was on the second floor of the Original
Headquarters Building. I was first ushered into an outer office, where
Angleton's aides briefed me on how to conduct myself. And then I went
alone into the inner sanctum.
The room was dark, the curtains were drawn, and there was
just one small lamp on Angleton's desk. I later heard that Angleton had
eye trouble and that the light hurt his eyes, but I was convinced the
real reason for the semidarkness was to add to his mystique. It certainly
worked on me!
I nervously briefed Angleton on my study, and he listened
without interrupting, just nodding from time to time. When I finished,
he methodically attacked every one of my conclusions. Didn't I know the
traffic was a deception? Hadn't it occurred to me that Leopold Trepper,
the leader of the Rote Kapelle, was a German double? He went on and on,
getting further and further out.
Even I, as a brand new officer, could tell that this great
mind, this CI genius, had lost it. I thought he was around the bend. It
was one of the most bizarre experiences of my career.
When the meeting was over, I was glad to get out of there,
and I vowed to myself that I would never go anywhere near CI again. I
did not keep that vow. In my overseas assignments with the Agency, I found
myself drawn toward Soviet CI operations. Nothing seemed to quicken my
pulse more, and I was delighted when I was called back to Headquarters
in 1989 to join the new Counterintelligence Center (CIC) as Ted Price's
deputy. When Ted moved upstairs in early 1991 to become the Associate
Deputy Director for Operations, I was named chief of the Center.
Today, many years after that initial disagreeable encounter
with CI, I find it hard to believe that it is actually my picture on the
wall of the CIC conference room at CIA Headquarters, where the photos
of all former CIA counterintelligence chiefs are displayed. There I am,
number seven in a row that begins with Angleton.
So, after a career that ended up being far more CI-oriented
than I could ever have imagined, I would like to offer some personal observations
in the form of "The 10 Commandments of Counterintelligence."
I have chosen the form of commandments because I believe the basic rules
of CI are immutable and should be scrupulously followed. In my view, it
makes little difference whether the adversary is the Russians, the Cubans,
the East Germans, the Chinese, or someone else. It likewise makes little
difference whether we are talking about good CI practices in 1985 or in
2005. Unfortunately, as I watch US CI today, I am increasingly concerned
that the principles I consider fundamental to effective CI are not being
followed as carefully and consistently as they should be.
These commandments were not handed down to me from a mountaintop,
and I make no claim that they are inspired or even definitive. They are
simply the culmination, for what they are worth, of my experience. They
are intended primarily for my fellow practitioners in CI today, but also
for any younger officers in the Intelligence Community (IC) who might
someday want to join us.
The First Commandment: Be Offensive
CI that is passive and defensive will fail. We cannot hunker down in a
defensive mode and wait for things to happen. I believe we are spending
far too much money on fences, safes, alarms, and other purely defensive
measures to protect our secrets. That is not how we have been hurt in
recent years. Spies have hurt us. Our CI mindset should be relentlessly
offensive. We need to go after our CI adversaries.
Aggressive double agent (DA) operations are essential to
any CI program, but not the predictable, hackneyed kind we have so often
pursued. We need to push our bright and imaginative people to produce
clever new scenarios for controlled operations, and we need more of them.
The opposition services should be kept constantly off guard so that they
never suspect that we have actually controlled the operations they believe
they initiated from the beginning. When the requirements, modus operandi,
and personality objectives of the DA operation have been achieved, we
should in a greater number of cases pitch the opposition case officer.
If only one out of 10 or 20 of these recruitments takes, it is worth it.
And CI professionals, of course, should not rely exclusively on their
own efforts. They should constantly prod their HUMINT colleagues to identify,
target, and recruit officers from the opposition intelligence services.
The key to CI success is penetration. For every American spy, there are
several members of the opposition service who know who he or she is. No
matter what it takes, we have to have penetrations.
We should operate aggressively against the nontraditional
as well as the traditional adversaries. How many examples do we need of
operations against Americans by so-called friendly countries to convince
us that the old intelligence adage is correct: there are friendly nations,
but no friendly intelligence services? If we suspect for whatever reason
that the operatives of a foreign intelligence service, friend or foe,
are operating against us, we should test them. We should dress up an enticing
morsel, made to order for that specific target, and send it by them. If
they take it, we have learned something we needed to know, and we have
an operation. If they reject it, as true friends should, we have learned
something, too. In either event, because we are testing a "friend,"
plausible deniability has to be strictly preserved. Every foreign service
is a potential nontraditional adversary; no service should get a lifetime
pass from US offensive CI operations.
The Second Commandment: Honor Your Professionals
It has been true for years, to varying degrees throughout the IC, that
CI professionals have not been favored, to the extent they deserved, with
promotions, assignments, awards, praise, esteem, or other recognition.
The truth is that CI officers are not popular. They are not always welcome
when they walk in. They usually bring bad news. They are easy marks to
criticize when things go wrong. Their successes are their failures. If
they catch a spy, they are roasted for having taken so long. If they are
not catching anyone, why not? What have they done with all that money
they spent on CI? It is no-win.
For much of my career, many of our best people avoided becoming
CI specialists. CI was not prestigious. It had a bad reputation. It was
not fast track. It did not lead to promotions or good assignments. Angleton
left a distasteful legacy that for years discredited the CI profession.
Ted Price did more than anyone else in the Agency to reverse that trend
and to rehabilitate CI as a respected professional discipline.
Nevertheless, that battle is still not completely won. We
have to do more to get our CI people promoted, recognized, and respected
so that our best young officers will be attracted to follow us into what
we know is a noble profession and where the need is so great.
The Third Commandment: Own the Street
This is so fundamental to CI, but it is probably the least followed of
the commandments. Any CI program worthy of the name has to be able to
engage the opposition on the street, the field of play for espionage.
And when we do go to the street, we have to be the best service there.
If we are beaten on the street, it is worse than not having been there
at all.
For years, we virtually conceded the streets of the world's
capitals, including the major espionage centers, to the KGB, the GRU,
and the East European services because we either did not know how to do
it or we were not willing to pay the price for a thoroughly professional,
reliable, full-time, local surveillance capability.
Opposition intelligence officers have to be watched, known
meeting areas have to be observed, and, when an operation goes down-often
on short notice- undetectable surveillance has to cover it, identify the
participants, and obtain evidence.
This capability is expensive-selection, training, vehicles,
photo gear, video, radios, safe apartments, observation posts, and on
and on-but, if we do not have it, we will be a second-rate CI service
and will not break the major cases.
The Fourth Commandment: Know Your History
I am very discouraged when I talk to young CI officers today to find how
little they know about the history of American CI. CI is a difficult and
dangerous discipline. Many good, well-meaning CI people have gone wrong
and made horrendous mistakes. Their failures in most cases are well documented,
but the lessons are lost if our officers do not read the CI literature.
I find it inconceivable that any CI practitioner today could
ply his or her trade without an in-depth knowledge of the Angleton era.
Have our officers read Mangold? Have they read Legend and Wilderness of
Mirrors? Do they know the Loginov case, HONETOL, MHCHAOS, Nosenko, Pollard,
and Shadrin? Are they familiar with Aspillaga and the Cuban DA debacle?
Have they examined our mistakes in the Ames and Howard cases? Are they
staying current with recent releases like The Mitrokhin Archive and The
Haunted Wood?
I believe it is an indispensable part of the formation of
any American CI officer-and certainly a professional obligation-to study
the CI failures of the past, to reflect on them, and to make sure they
are not repeated.
The many CI courses being offered now are a positive step,
but there will never be a substitute for a personal commitment on the
part of our CI professionals to read their history, usually on their own
time at home.
The Fifth Commandment: Do Not Ignore Analysis
Analysis has too often been the stepchild of CI. Throughout the CI community,
we have fairly consistently understaffed it. We have sometimes tried to
make it up as we go along. We have tried to do it on the cheap.
Generally speaking, operators make bad analysts. We are
different kinds of people. Operators are actors, doers, movers and shakers;
we are quick, maybe a little impulsive, maybe a little "cowboy."
Our best times are away from our desks. We love the street. Research and
analysis is really not our thing-and when we have tried to do it, we have
not been good at it.
True analysts are different. They love it. They are more
cerebral, patient, and sedentary. They find things we could not. They
write better.
A lot of CI programs in the past have tried to make operators
double as their own analysts. As a result, in the United States, CI analysis
historically has been the weakest part of the business. Professional CI
analysts have been undervalued and underappreciated.
A good CI program will recruit and train true analysts in
sizable numbers. I do not think it would be excessive as a rule of thumb
in a top notch CI service to be evenly divided between operators and analysts.
Very few of our US CI agencies come anywhere close to that ratio.
Wonderful things happen when good analysts in sufficient
numbers pore over our DA reports, presence lists, SIGINT, audio and teltap
transcripts, maps, travel data, and surveillance reports. They find the
clues, make the connections, and focus our efforts in the areas that will
be most productive.
Many parts of the US CI community have gotten the message
and have incorporated trained analysts into their operations, but others
have not. Across the board, we still have serious shortfalls in good,
solid CI analysis.
The Sixth Commandment: Do Not Be Parochial
More harm probably has been done to US CI over the years by interagency
sniping and obstruction than by our enemies. I remember when the CIA and
the FBI did not even talk to each other-and both had disdain for the military
services. It is no wonder that CI was a shambles and that some incredibly
damaging spies went uncovered for so long.
Occasionally in my career, I encountered instances of sarcasm
or outright bad mouthing of other US Government agencies by my officers.
That kind of attitude and cynicism infected our junior officers and got
in the way of cooperation. These comments often were intended to flaunt
our supposed "superiority" by demeaning the capabilities of
the other organizations. I dealt with these situations by telling the
officers to "knock it off," and I would encourage other CI supervisors
around the community to do the same.
CI is so difficult, even in the best of circumstances, that
the only way to do it is together. We should not let personalities, or
jealousies, or turf battles get in the way of our common mission. Our
colleagues in our sister services are as dedicated, professional, hardworking,
and patriotic as we are, and they deserve our respect and cooperation.
The best people I have known in my career have been CI people, regardless
of their organizational affiliation. So let's be collegial.
The Seventh Commandment: Train Your People
CI is a distinct discipline and an acquired skill. It is not automatically
infused in us when we get our wings as case officers. It is not just a
matter of applying logic and common sense to operations, but is instead
a highly specialized way of seeing things and analyzing them. CI has to
be learned.
I do not know how many times in my career I have heard,
"No, we do not really need a separate CI section. We are all CI officers;
we'll do our own CI." That is a recipe for compromise and failure.
There is no substitute for a professional CI officer, and
only extensive, regular, and specialized CI training can produce them.
Such training is expensive, so whenever possible we should do it on a
community basis to avoid duplication and to ensure quality.
CI is a conglomerate of several disciplines and skills.
A typical operation, for example, might include analysts, surveillance
specialists, case officers, technical experts, and DA specialists. Each
area requires its own specialized training curriculum. It takes a long
time to develop CI specialists, and that means a sustained investment
in CI training. We are getting better, but we are not there yet.
The Eighth Commandment: Do Not Be Shoved Aside
There are people in the intelligence business and other groups in the
US Government who do not particularly like CI officers. CI officers have
a mixed reputation. We see problems everywhere. We can be overzealous.
We get in the way of operations. We cause headaches. We are the original
"black hatters."
Case officers want their operations to be bona fide. Senior
operations managers do not want to believe that their operations are controlled
or penetrated by the opposition. There is a natural human tendency on
the part of both case officers and senior operations managers to resist
outside CI scrutiny. They believe that they are practicing good CI themselves
and do not welcome being second-guessed or told how to run their operations
by so-called CI specialists who are not directly involved in the operations.
I have seen far more examples or this in my CI career than I care to remember.
By the same token, defense and intelligence contractors
and bureaucrats running sensitive US Government programs have too often
tended to minimize CI threats and to resist professional CI intervention.
CI officers, in their view, stir up problems and overreact to them. Their
"successes" in preventing CI problems are invisible and impossible
to measure, but their whistle blowing when problems are uncovered generate
tremendous heat. It is not surprising that they are often viewed as a
net nuisance.
When necessary, a CI service has to impose itself on the
organizations and groups it is assigned to protect. A CI professional
who is locked out or invited in only when it is convenient to the host
cannot do his job.
My advice to my CI colleagues has always been this: "If
you are blocked by some senior, obtuse, anti-CI officer, go around him
or through him by going to higher management. And document all instances
of denied access, lack of cooperation, or other obstruction to carrying
out your CI mission. If not, when something goes wrong, as it likely will
in that kind of situation, you in CI will take the blame."
The Ninth Commandment: Do Not Stay Too Long
CI is a hazardous profession. There should be warning signs on the walls:
"A steady diet of CI can be dangerous to your health."
I do not believe anyone should make an entire, uninterrupted
career of CI. We all who work in CI have seen it: the old CI hand who
has gotten a bit spooky. It is hard to immerse oneself daily in the arcane
and twisted world of CI without falling pray eventually to creeping paranoia,
distortion, warping, and overzealousness in one's thinking. It is precisely
these traits that led to some of the worst CI disasters in our history.
Angleton and his coterie sadly succumbed, with devastating results. Others
in the CIA and elsewhere have as well. The danger is always there.
My wife, who was working at the CIA when I met her, was
well acquainted with this reputation of CI and the stories about its practitioners.
When I was serving overseas and received the cable offering me the position
as Ted Price's deputy in the new Counterintelligence Center, I discussed
it with her that evening at home. Her response, I thought was right on
the mark: "Okay, but do not stay too long."
Sensible and productive CI needs lots of ventilation and
fresh thinking. There should be constant flowthrough. Non-CI officers
should be brought in regularly on rotational tours. I also believe it
is imperative that a good CI service build in rotational assignments periodically
outside CI for its CI specialists. They should go spend two or three years
with the operators or with the other groups they are charged to protect.
They will come back refreshed, smarter, and less likely to fall into the
nether world of professional CI: the school of doublethink, the us-against-them
mindset, the nothing-is-what-it-seems syndrome, the wilderness of mirrors.
The Tenth Commandment: Never Give Up
The tenth and last commandment is the most important. What if the
Ames mole hunters had quit after eight years instead of going into the
ninth? What if, in my own experience, we had discontinued a certain surveillance
operation after five months instead of continuing into the sixth? CI history
is full of such examples.
The FBI is making cases against Americans today that involved
espionage committed in the 1960s and 1970s. The Army's Foreign Counterintelligence
Activity is doing the same. The name of the game in CI is persistence.
CI officers who are not patient need not apply. There is no statute of
limitations for espionage, and we should not create one by our own inaction.
Traitors should know that they will never be safe and will never have
a peaceful night's sleep. I applauded my CI colleagues in the FBI when
I read not long ago of their arrest in Florida of a former US Army Reserve
colonel for alleged espionage against the United States many years earlier.
They obviously never gave up.
If we keep a CI investigation alive and stay on it, the
next defector, the next penetration, the next tip, the next surveillance,
or the next clue will break it for us.
If there were ever to be a mascot for US counterintelligence,
it should be the pit bull.
In Conclusion
These are my 10 commandments of CI. Other CI professionals
will have their own priorities and exhortations and will disagree with
mine. That is as it should be, because as a country and as an Intelligence
Community we need a vigorous debate on the future direction of US CI.
Not everyone will agree with the specifics, or even the priorities. What
we should agree on, however, is that strong CI has to be a national priority.
Recent news reports from Los Alamos, Washington, and elsewhere have again
underscored the continuing need for CI vigilance.
01/31/2002
PDF Version
|