SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2017, Issue No. 65
September 11, 2017Secrecy News Blog: https://fas.org/blogs/secrecy/
SENATE INTEL AUTHORIZATION REPORT FILED
Do the security clearance procedures that are used for granting access to classified information actually serve their intended purpose?
To help answer that question, the Senate Intelligence Committee mandated a review of security clearance requirements, including "their collective utility in anticipating future insider threats."
See the Committee's new report on the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018, filed September 7, 2017:
https://fas.org/irp/congress/2017_rpt/ssci-fy2018.html
The report summarizes the content of the pending intelligence authorization bill (S. 1761), which was filed last month, and adds Committee comments on various aspects of current intelligence policy.
https://fas.org/irp/congress/2017_cr/s1761.html
So, for example, "The Committee remains concerned about the level of protection afforded to whistleblowers within the IC and the level of insight congressional committees have into their disclosures."
The central point of contention in the bill is a provision declaring a sense of Congress "that WikiLeaks and the senior leadership of WikiLeaks resemble a non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors and should be treated as such a service by the United States."
The provision had originally stated that WikiLeaks and its leadership "constitute" a non-state hostile intelligence service. But this was amended to replace "constitute" with "resemble". That move might have attenuated the provision's significance except that it went on to say -- whether WikiLeaks constitutes or merely resembles a non-state hostile intelligence service -- that the U.S. should treat it as such.
A hostile state-based intelligence service would presumably be subject to intense surveillance by the US. A competent US counterintelligence agency might also seek to infiltrate the hostile service, to subvert its agenda, and even to take it over or disable it.
Whether such a response would also be elicited by "a non-state hostile intelligence service" is hard to say since the concept itself is new and undefined.
"The Committee's bill offers no definition of 'non-state hostile intelligence service' to clarify what this term is and is not," wrote Sen. Kamala Harris, who favored removal of this language, though she said WikiLeaks has "done considerable harm to this country."
Sen. Ron Wyden, who likewise said that WikiLeaks had been "part of a direct attack on our democracy," opposed the bill due to the WikiLeaks-related provision.
"My concern is that the use of the novel phrase 'non-state hostile intelligence service' may have legal, constitutional, and policy implications, particularly should it be applied to journalists inquiring about secrets," Sen. Wyden wrote in minority views appended to the report. "The language in the bill suggesting that the U.S. government has some unstated course of action against 'non-state hostile intelligence services' is equally troubling."
POSSIBLE EXITS FROM THE IRAN NUCLEAR AGREEMENT
If the Trump Administration decided to terminate U.S. acceptance and implementation of the Iran nuclear agreement, how might it do that?
The Congressional Research Service considered the question, without advocating such a move, in a new report.
"There are several mechanisms or methods the Administration might use to cease implementing the JCPOA [Iran nuclear agreement] or to alter its implementation, if there is a decision to do so," CRS found. These include provisions in the agreement itself or in the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act that was passed in 2015.
See Options to Cease Implementing the Iran Nuclear Agreement, September 7, 2017:
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/R44942.pdf
******************************
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the Federation of American Scientists.
The Secrecy News blog is at:
https://fas.org/blogs/secrecy/To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, go to:
https://fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/subscribe.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE, go to:
https://fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/unsubscribe.htmlOR email your request to saftergood@fas.org
Secrecy News is archived at:
SUPPORT the FAS Project on Government Secrecy with a donation here:
https://fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html
https://fas.org/donate/