Secret Agents Not So Secret

It seems that Valerie Plame is no longer the only member of the Central Intelligence Agency to have her cover blown in recent history, at least according to an article in today’s Chicago Tribune. Roughly 2,600 other agents could be in the same boat.

Tribune staffers searched what they called “a commercial online data service,” and say that they were able to obtain a directory of these agents, a list of 50 internal agency phone numbers and even the geographical locations of about two dozen “secret” CIA facilities in the United States.

“Cover is a complex issue that is more complex in the Internet age,” CIA chief spokeswoman Jennifer Dyck told Tribune reporter John Crewdson. “There are things that worked previously that no longer work. Director [Porter] Goss is committed to modernizing the way the agency does cover in order to protect our officers who are doing dangerous work.”

As it stands now, however, this information is still available from a variety of resources similar to, and possibly including, Lexis-Nexis and even Google. Although many agents whose names were revealed through the Tribune’s search are not “covert”–at least 160 work openly as intelligence analysts–many do hold what are generally classified positions. The CIA confirmed this, but declined to state how many of the listed employees hold secret posts.

According to Crewdson, a senior U.S. official said of the computer searches used to gain access to agents’ identities: “I don’t know whether Al Qaeda could do this, but the Chinese could.”

The Libby Factor And Beyond

Revealing the names of covert agents not only has the potential of jeopardizing national security, but it also violates the Intelligence Agents Privacy Protection Act of 1984, carrying with it possible hefty fines and jail time (see trackback URLs: 7, 9, 10, 12,14).

When political commentator Robert Novak revealed Plame’s identity in an opinion piece for The Washington Post in 2003, Plame had to leave her post, and although Novak has yet to see the inside of a jail cell for this issue, journalist Judith Miller went to prison for refusing to reveal the source. Unlike Novak, Miller had not disclosed Plame’s identity to the public.

Although initial speculation pointed toward White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove as the source, Time Magazine reporter Matthew Cooper admitted in 2005 that both Rove and (then) Vice Presidential Chief of Staff Irv Lewis “Scooter” Libby had offered up to him both Plame’s identity and information on the agent.

According to Cooper, the duo never actually recited Plame’s name to him, but they did identify her by noting that she was “Wilson’s wife,” with Wilson being Joseph Wilson, a former U.S. foreign service diplomat who had he accused the Bush Administration of “exaggerating the Iraqi threat” in order to justify war.

Upon receiving a grand jury indictment on criminal felony charges in October, Libby resigned from his White House post. Charges include one count of obstruction of justice, two counts of perjury and two counts of making false statements, with each crime carrying a possible $250 million fine (more info: United States of America v. I. Lewis Libby). It should be noted that while these charges stem from the Plame investigation, neither Libby nor any other official has yet been charged with the actual offense of identifying a covert operative.

Nevertheless, the matter is still open, and Libby could–in case of new evidence–face additional charges. Also, if Karl Rove, Robert Novak or anyone else linked to the Plame scandal is indicted for violating the IAPPA, they might, in light of the Tribune article, find it possible to avert conviction.

After all, if anyone who visits a library and knows how to use databases similar to Lexis-Nexis is able to find out secret agents’ names, ages and physical locations, exactly how “secret” can their identities be?

Moreover, if these databases violate the IAPPA or similar legal initiatives, who will receive the blame, and can even they be punished? Who authorized the release of this information to these databases, and what could become of them? With the advent of the internet, did American privacy somehow become a myth?

As it stands now, these are orphan questions–questions without answers.

While it would be unethical for any journalist to ignore the old maxim, “the public has a right to know,” a line needs to be drawn. As citizens, our individual rights end when the next person’s rights begin. Like knowledge, privacy–especially privacy issues that effect national security–should be both respected and protected.

The CIA should be held accountable for this potentially dangerous oversight. If a group of journalists were able to identify this security breach, there is no excuse for the agency itself being ignorant of the problem. The CIA, like the military and our civilian police forces, has the duty to protect and serve this nation.

Who will we blame?