The outsourcing of US intelligence

The image of a trench-coat CIA man, lurking in the dark corners of the worlds’ capital cities, scoping out top secret information has long been most people’s idea of intelligence gathering.

That may have been the case once, but in the 21st century as the US government ploughs more and more of its intelligence budget into hiring private contractors, the intelligence industry has been privatised and corporatised.

So what are the implications of living in a world where, as US journalist RJ Hillhouse put it, “James Bond bills by the hour,” and large corporations are becoming increasingly responsible for national security?

It’s hard to get a handle on exactly how much money the US government is devoting to its intelligence operations because much of the information is classified.

Experts estimate however that anywhere from 50% to 70% of the current US intelligence budget ends up in the hands of private companies.

In return for the billions of dollars, they provide services ranging from intelligence gathering and analysis through to more controversial and possibly illegal operations.

This week, the Washington Post published a three-part report investigated over two years into the waste, profiteering and insecurity resulting from America’s current intelligence industry.

Called ‘Top Secret America’, the report says a combination of massive growth and no public oversight is delivering figures like 850,000 Americans with top-secret security clearance, and 50,000 intelligence reports produced each year – most of which are ignored.

The move towards large-scale outsourcing began in earnest in the months after 9/11. However, the seeds were sewn at the end of the Cold War in 1990 when the intelligence budget and the number of government operatives working in the field were significantly cut.

Changes in government priorities and the abundance of trained, laid-off staff meant it made economic sense for organisations like the CIA to look at contracting out certain services.

In the beginning, the emphasis was on everyday activities like IT. But the Twin Towers attack changed all that.

Overnight the government increased the amount of funding to the intelligence community, and with huge numbers of people required to do the work, the industry expanded swiftly.

As far as the workforce is concerned, outsourcing has had huge financial rewards, with private sector jobs generally paying 50% more than government jobs.

A phenomenon known as ‘butts in seats’ has developed. This is where a government employee can leave his job, and be back at the same desk doing the same work the next day but working for a private contractor on a much higher salary.

The government has been effectively paying to train junior level staff, and once they get to a qualified level, they quit to do the same job for a private company at one and a half times the price.

Furthermore, concerns are growing that too much intelligence work has been outsourced and the US government has effectively lost control of its own information channels.

One concern is the quality of staff being hired. Experts are worried that private companies’ profit motives may adversely affect the standard of employees, with unsuitable people being hired in order to make the ‘butts in seats’ model work.

And some people have pointed out that there seems to be very little oversight or coherent plan for the outsourcing.

Jobs and responsibilities are duplicated and one expert says the lack of oversight or clear structure means that in some cases, while production has increased, much of the information generated is useless.

Others are worried about the issue of loyalty. RJ Hillhouse points out that intelligence operatives working for the government with 20 or 30 years of loyal service were unlikely to act contrary to the good of their country, even when later working in the private sector.

She says that in years to come as more private sector spies come through, the public service loyalty ethos will disappear, making the risk of counterintelligence or double-agents from within more likely.

Investigations have also been carried out into a number of operations thought to be illegal or contrary to normal government operating procedure.

In May this year, it was reported that a network of private intelligence contractors in Afghanistan and Pakistan, supposedly set up by the US Defence Department as a harmless information gathering service, was actually being used to help track and kill suspected militants.

This was completely against government rules relating to contracting and information gathering by the military.

Nevertheless, the genie is out of the bottle as far as outsourcing goes and it’s unlikely to be put back in anytime soon. The US government does, however, need to have a serious look at what’s going on.

This includes what is happening on the ground, the systems it has in place for oversight, the cost and value to the taxpayer, and the implications the process has for the future security of its country.

By Jo Blick