Spook's Cypher Soup:
CIA, DIA, NSA, NRO, NFIP, TIARA

It is quite remarkable that one of the greatest assets to the intelligence community is not listed in the "Spy Cryptopottage" in the heading above, and that this year its budget was cut and its services curtailed. I'm speaking of the Library of Congress. I find it impossible to conceive that much heavy hitting or deep seated intelligence analysis could go on without the assets of the Library of Congress.

The analysis section of the CIA is organized along the lines of the University. It's a peculiar university, to be sure, with scholars pouring over their books and manuscripts and discovering all sorts of wonderful new insights that they share only with fellow inmates. But monastic life or not, the hooded monks of "Intelligence U" need grist for their mill, and most of that grist comes out of books, magazines, journals. ..in other words, the public domain. Intelligence U without a library is like a hockey team without sticks; they can do a lot of fancy skating, but can they score any goals? I'm sure the Intelligence Community has its own specialized sources, but I doubt they have the assets of the LOC. (And the budget cuts affected not only hours, but acquisitions.)

Much of the work of the Intelligence Community represents old-fashioned scholarship, using the same methods, tools, and materials. One would think it would be to the advantage of that community to promote a general air of scholarship in which the Intelligence scholarship could thrive and draw some of its nourishment It must be somewhat sterile, cloaked and shrouded in secrecy as it is; bloodless and pale, hidden from the light of academic scrutiny and acclaim. No one working in the Intelligence Community and playing by its rules is going to win a Nobel Prize. They may not even be thanked for their work. Since much of the work of Intelligence groups is garden-variety scholarship (albeit with a special application) it isn't clear why it is not done in the open. Suppose you read that a CIA report has been released which says that by the year 2025 the Soviet Union will be a desert and the United States will be a lush tropical garden. Why isn't the work done in the full glare of academia and published in the public journals? The work has obviously been released to the public (via the newspapers) so why bother to do it in a "Spook Shop" atmosphere?

The fact that the analysis scholarship of the Intelligence Community is as secretive as the rest of that community is detrimental to almost any policy one can think of. Consider "defense preparedness." Defense preparedness means being able to deal from a position of strength. We have a military hardware build-up enabling us to negotiate from such a position. (If the sword is so heavy it cannot be wielded, it may not help much, but that is another matter.) But is the military and its hardware our only shield against the anti-democratic forces of the world? While the military is useful and nice, if we use it we've chosen the most expensive option. A well run economy (tuned to international trade, since that seems to be what we have) is at least as important as a well-oiled, well-heeled military. It doesn't cost as much, and it's the source of our wealth in the first place. Do we view our economy as a weapon in the struggle for the hearts and minds of humankind? Do we see our major corporations as freedom fighters, making America as competitive in the world's markets as the Marines make us competitive on the world's beaches? If the economy of the United States fails because someone was out shaking the "Big Stick" when they should've been back home hoeing potatoes, "negotiating from a position of strength" will be a hollow phrase indeed. If the Russian nuclear arsenal enables them to extend their dominance further into the Third World while OUIS bleeds money from student loans, heaven help us.

The power of the world is divided into two spheres: politics and economics. Political power is expressed through political hegemony -domestic political parties and police forces, and mutual defense pacts, peace treaties, military forces and organizations like the U. N. internationally, are all characteristic of political hegemony. Economic hegemony has to do with domestic and international market shares, rates of exchange, tariffs, short- and long-haul trade, and the like.

For the U.S., dealing from strength means having a vigorous economy, a well-run democratic country (so that maintenance costs are kept to a minimum) and a military in an adequate state of preparedness (recognizing that it will be the civilian population that bears the brunt of a war, as draftees or as casualties in a nuclear conflict.) We don't need a military in readiness to fight our wars, we need a military which can contain the situation until the civilian militia can be brought to bear on the problem.

What is the crucial ingredient that a well-run democratic government (the key word is "democratic") must have in order to maintain its economy and military ma chi ne ? INFORMATION!!

The Intelligence Community is roughly divided into two parts: the cloak & dagger, clandestine operations part and the analysis part. We know more about the clandestine stuff because that's what we read about in The Washington Post and John LaCarre's books. The analysis part, though much larger, isn't very exciting and persons other than scholars might not comprehend its function. Nevertheless, it's the analysis part that has the greatest impact on the long-term stability of our government, but is the least sensitive to security breaches. What one monk can get out of a book, another monk can get out of a book... To mount a real initiative for peace in the information world, it must come out of its shroud and into the light of day to feed both sides of our hegemony-political and economic.

We need a CENTRAL INFORMATION AGENCY! Not a Central Intelligence Agency. Take the non-Spook part of the CIA and transform it from an intelligence agency (secretive, covert, unapproachable) into an information agency (open, available, accessible). We need an agency that is ready to take on the information management that will allow the nation to meet its economic and political goals. Information relating to basic military arts and sciences as well as the basic pacific arts and sciences.

The first thing such an agency could do is to translate all of the world's literature, past and present, into English. It would take quite a few scholars, and billions of dollars-but imagine the impact! Think of the additional millions of people who would be able to read the world's literature, instead of just a few scholars. Such a project would fIrmly place English as the language of the world, giving our scientists and engineers a clear advantage. It would have as stunning an effect as placing a man on the moon. We need an international language. The scientists of the world are learning English now, and a translation project would provide an incentive for all the world's people to learn English, because all of the literature in the world would be available to them in that language. I cannot think of a more humanitarian thing to do, yet which advances our political and economic hegemonies more fIrmly. It would cost a few millions a year to begin, since the scholars would not initially be available, and eventually rise to a few paltry billions a year. But the positive effect on the economy would more than offset the costs.

The second thing a Central Information Agency could do is provide national leadership in the general field of computer and information science. The agency would be responsible for information standards -hardware and software. Through in-house research and external contracts it would explore the solutions to the problems of large-scale information handling, including the information it would generate. It should lead research on electronic transformation and compression of information, and encompass all aspects of information acquisition and dissemination, from the computer sciences to the engineering of the super-hardware it would need. Such an organization could spawn a whole industry of information technology, be it facsimiles of the Gutenberg Bible on compact optical disks, or recordings of old Jack Benny films on videocasettes. A Central Information Agency would provide a great stimulus to the paper-publishing industry, since every innovation in information (fIlms, television, VCR's) has led to people reading more books. The agency would become a part of the Library of Congress, or vice versa, and they would in turn become the focus of a network-providing standards, guidance, and links to libraries throughout America, large municipal libraries and all university libraries should have a common electronic card catalog, accessible from them or through telecommunications. A telecommunications link would provide access ability from any research lab, office, home... any place a phone is available.

And this organization should undertake programs of scholarship in keeping with the husbanding of our economic resources and our national security interests throughout the world. Such studies could be undertaken internally and/or contracted, but at all costs classification of the studies should be avoided. If the studies were done with absolute scientific and academic rigor they would have the same effect on the international "idea market" that analyses of a company's earning and management efficiencies have on the stock market. Why shouldn't the world know who the wimps are, who runs torture chambers and who runs a clean constabulary, whose currency is overvalued and whose undervalued, who is ready to fight a war and who isn't? Isn't this information as much a deterrent to political manipulation as information about corporate mismanagement is to economic manipulation? To paraphrase Pope John XXIII, it would open more than a few windows. It would be shocking, but it would be a mighty weapon for the free world.

An organization like this would sweep into the information world like the Mongols swept through Europe. What would develop is a national information public utility, in the form of a giant holding company. We would be spending public money to create this utility, so the utility created should be publicly accessible.

Who would benefit from such an effort in computer science and information management? Just about everyone, but especially the intelligence community. The ability to sort through vast amounts, and associate widely disparate bits of information would be a boon beyond price to the various security agencies. Who else? Everyone from the eighth-grader doing a report on butterflies to Bell Labs researchers working on solid-state physics. Writers, editors, researchers; on Wall Street and on Main Street; and scholars worldwide; humanity in general would be the beneficiaries.

And let us not forget the politicians. Imagine a summit conference run according to the rules of Business Administration 101: Negotiate the things you agree on first, then go on to minor differences, and leave the real disagreements for the last. Nuclear disarmament would not be at the head of the list, because we don't agree on it The top of the list might be more student exchanges followed by exchanges of scientists, artists, musicians, exchanges of works of art, agreement to allow foreign broadcasts and exchange movies, perhaps relaxation of rules which prevent ordinary citizens from visiting each other's countries, cooperative work on National Parks and environmental matters, a mutual policy for peaceful uses of the oceans, of space, a cooperative agreement on assistance to third world countries. ..the list might become so long that we would never get around to negotiating on arms reductions (which no one is willing to do). And the next summit could be run the same way. After a few dozen years of such summits, maybe we wouldn't need to negotiate arms reductions.

Of course, it's a pipe dream. But compared to achieving a clear nuclear superiority and first strike advantage, or a 100% effective space defense, it doesn't seem too bad. It'd be one helluva lot cheaper. And the world would be a whole lot nicer.

...Ted Sudia...

© Copyright 1986
Institute for domestic Tranquility