The
largest body of secrets are not contained at CIA headquarters in Langley,
Virginia but about 30 miles up I-95 near Annapolis Junction, Maryland.
Just off the Baltimore-Washington Parkway
there’s a specially-built exit ramp that leads to “Crypto City” –- a super-secret
no-man’s land that also houses one of the largest collections of super-calculating
computers. And with 60 or so office buildings, warehouses, factories,
labs and living quarters, the “city” employs tens of thousands of advanced
mathematicians, linguists, computer geeks, military personnel and other
assorted spooks who work in utter anonymity.
It may sound like a mysteriously interesting
place to visit and maybe snap a few pictures but you wouldn’t want to
do that because you’d be in violation of the Internal Security Act and
have more 9mm submachine gun-packing security on you than flies at a horse
stable, asking questions like: “Don’t you see those bright yellow signs
that say no photos, cameras or note-taking in this area?”
This is the National Security Agency but
if you ask the men in black what NSA stands for they’ll tell you those
letters stand for “No Such Agency” exists.
In his best-selling book Body
of Secrets: Anatomy of the Ultra-Secret National Security Agency, James Bamford reports that the very first subject addressed
in the NSA
Handbook is the “practice of anonymity.” Even those seeking employment
with the NSA are told very little about the work of the world’s largest
espionage agency, to the point where it “can have an adverse effect on
recruitment.”
“Indeed, so little can be said that the acceptance
of employment with NSA is virtually an act of faith,” in the words of
an NSA
Technical Journal editorial.
Most of us are not only intrigued but accept
the real-world necessity of spying. Still, there are aspects to keeping
state secrets beyond “Crypto City” that require “an act of faith” on the
part of non-government citizenry. Question is: do the pillars of the secrecy
faith serve us, we the people, well?
As Steven Aftergood of the Federation of
American Scientists reports, one pillar of the faith is enshrouded in
the 1974 Supreme Court ruling United
States v. Nixon. Even though the
Supremes ordered the Nixon White House to comply with a subpoena for the
Watergate tapes, they also affirmed that secrecy is a vital part of presidential
deliberations because it promotes greater candor, which lead to better
policy outcomes.
In the words of the Court: “A President and
those who assist him must be free to explore alternatives in the process
of shaping policies and making decisions and to do so in a way many would
be unwilling to express except privately.”
The commandment - thou shalt not disclose
the presidential decision-making process because total honesty and public
disclosure are mutually exclusive - is an act of faith that should be
radically modified, according to a new law review published in the Spring
volume of the George
Mason Law
Review getting some attention in policy
wonk circles.
The standard view is that in private people
are more willing to discuss doubts, express emotion or debate controversial
options. But, according to the trio of scholars who wrote the review,
the standard view is “a highly contestable view of human nature” with
little empirical evidence to back it up. More importantly, the authors
argue, these assumptions about candor and secrecy don’t take into account
the downside of it all.
In practice, the review notes, official secrecy
can serve to discourage honest deliberation. The paper cites numerous
times when Bush Administration advisors declined to question confidential
policy pronouncements, even when they harbored serious doubts.
Not only can secrecy discourage truth-telling,
the author’s say, it’s also not a necessary condition for candor. For
example, the review notes, Congress almost never invokes its Constitutional
right to hold secret deliberations, demonstrating that candor and openness
are not mutually exclusive.
Finally, the author’s contend, candor-in-secret
does not necessarily lead to good decisions. “In many of the contexts
in which candor is used as a justification for secrecy, the candor that
is being shielded is candor that disserves the public interest.”
The paper emphasizes that the authors do
not oppose all secret deliberations, nor are they arguing that every official
meeting be on C-Span. What they are advocating is that the presumption
of secrecy held in the Nixon Supreme Court ruling is unjustified in both principle and
practice, and that it should be replaced by a general presumption of openness
and disclosure, especially Congress is asking for access to executive
branch records. “The presumption established
by the Nixon Court...gives presidents and their advisors reason to believe
that secrecy is standard operating procedure.”
“Dismantling the Nixon canon — as this Article advocates — would instead foster a
culture where the expectations were reversed, where ideas about what is
appropriate for public discussion are expanded, and where secrecy must
be justified by a risk of significant harm — not harm to the political
prospects of the incumbent officials, but to the interests of the nation
as a whole.”
Heresy!
This week, the conservative Hudson Institute
is hosting a gathering of the faithful to discuss Gabriel Schoenfield’s
new book Necessary
Secrets: National Security, the Media, and the Rule of Law
, in which he argues
that law enforcement needs to crackdown on leaks of classified intel to
reporters, often the only way the public comes to learn about how its
government operates at the highest level.
Heresy and faith go together like fried clams
and tarter sauce. The French poet Andre Suares was right. “It is faith
that begats heretics. There are no heresies in a dead religion.”
Count me among the heretics on this one.
BlackCommentator.com
Guest Commentator Sean Gonsalves is a longtime syndicated columnist, formerly
with Universal Press Syndicate, his work has appeared in the Oakland Tribune,
Boston Globe, USA Today, The Washington Post, Huffington Post, Alternet,
Common Dreams and ZNet. Gonsalves is currently a news editor with the
Cape Cod Times in Hyannis, MA, where he lives with his wife and three
children. Click here
to contact Mr. Gonsalves. |