Drugs, Russia and Terrorism, Part 2
Joseph D. Douglass Jr.
Monday, March 11, 2002
Editor's note: This is the conclusion of a two-part article. Read Part 1 of article.
The 'Deception Plan'
To better understand what is happening, it is useful to return briefly to
the modernization of the KGB under Andropov, a topic introduced in the first part of this article.
Probably the most important part of this modernization, in understanding the
Soviet approach, is the accompanying deception plan that was designed to
mislead the West in its interpretation of what was happening.
The goal of
this deception was to hide the modernization and the updated KGB professionalism
by carefully promoting the image that KGB was operating in a "business as
usual" mode – that is, as a bunch of KGB "thugs."
Gen. Sejna used to emphasize over and over in his explanations of how
Communism works: "Never was there a decision taken that there was not a
deception plan designed to facilitate its implementation." Deception is as
much a part of the Russian culture as freedom is a part of the American
culture.
In breaking loose the Russian Mafia from the KGB during the rebirthing
process, there would have been a deception plan designed to mislead people
as to what was happening and why.
The image of the Russian Mafia that
emerged out of the settling dust of the "dissolution" of the Soviet empire
is as it was planned to be, misleading.
The best deceptions are those
designed around an element of truth. In this case, an obvious approach would
have been for the Soviets to modernize their organized crime operations so
that these operations would appear to be independent operations.
The real
character could have been masked by enabling, even orchestrating, the growth
of an independent Mafia that reflected the characteristics of the Mafia as
understood in the West.
The core of the modernized organized crime operation
likely would have been the modernized core of the elite strategic
intelligence directorate that has been very effectively hidden from the
West, as witnessed by its absence in both KGB and GRU organizational charts in
related studies, both unclassified and classified.
The strategic
intelligence directorate becomes, in effect, a super-secret part of the KGB
that is unknown even to most KGB officials. Its mission is to run those
extremely important foreign operations that are the core of Russia's
continuing attack on the industrialized countries: terrorism, drug
trafficking and organized crime are within this core set of operations.
Hands Off Our 'Ally" Russia
Unfortunately, at this precise time the
U.S. intelligence services were told to shut down their operations and treat
our former enemies the same as we treated our European allies.
Part of CIA director Tenet's problem may be simply the lack of information about the
various "entities" that were most visible in support of terrorism.
This problem is compounded, however, by the fact that the CIA, as an institution, in
support of politically correct foreign policy, had expended more energy
trying to sweep intelligence on Soviet sponsorship of terrorism, drug
trafficking and organized crime under the rug than it had expended in
trying to understand and expose what was going on.
Thus, there were serious systemic
problems inherent in the CIA's institutional understanding.
Exacerbating this
already extant problem, there appeared in 1989 a further internal incentive
not to hold to a belief that the Soviets were sponsoring terrorist
operations and running organized crime and drug trafficking.
President
G.H.W. Bush announced the beginning of joint FBI-CIA-KGB efforts to
counter terrorism, organized crime and drug trafficking, along with the
establishment of FBI and CIA offices in Moscow to coordinate and cooperate
with the KGB!
Unfortunately, it is hard to come up with any reason for
thinking the Soviet/Russian intelligence services were changing or had
changed.
The Russians certainly did not stop their missile development, or
stop work on underground command center complexes, or stop their illegal
biological and chemical weapons development, or curtail their foreign
intelligence operations, which actually was expanding with the dominant
presence of the KGB in the Kremlin.
Certainly they denied everything. They
always have.
Russian Ties to al-Qaeda
Thus, what is happening? Did al-Qaeda terrorists really execute the 9-11 attack by
themselves, or did they have some help?
Several former intelligence
professionals in the weeks following 9-11 scoffed at the idea that this was
just a Muslim extremist operation. Some competent foreign intelligence
service had to be involved, they wrote.
There have also been reports that
critical information was funneled through the Russian Lourdes intelligence
facility in Cuba to the terrorists. If anything, cooperation between Cuba
and the various terrorist Muslim states in the Middle East increased in
2001.
Additionally, as pointed out by Yossef Bodansky ("Bin Laden," Prima,
1999), since the mid-1990s bin Laden has been using the Russian Mafia (i.e., KGB
entities) for the covert movement of funds to support terrorist operations
and to acquire terrorist arms, explosives and related
materials.
Soviet intelligence links to the emerging Islamist terrorist groups were evident in the early 1980s (though not as blatant as the PLO-Soviet links of the late 1960s and 1970s), and those links are still active.
Numerous links from bin Laden and company to former high-level Russian officials in 2000-2001 have now been reported in the news media. None of this should be a surprise.
As stated in the first part of this article, the Soviets had long-standing penetrations into the
Muslim community around the world and had used
the Muslims as surrogate terrorists since the
1920s. At every step in the evolution of bin
Laden's terrorist network, as reported in
Bodansky's "Bin Laden,” Soviet/Russian links are
in evidence.
Weapons of Mass Destruction
Of serious concern today is the possibility of a terrorist group or nation
acquiring a nuclear weapon or device. The focus of a more moderate concern
in the 1990s was Russia.
It was not until people really became worried after
the anthrax episode following 9-11 that the CIA suddenly produced a
declassified portion of a study in which it states that there is no
information of any nuclear weapon having been stolen from Russia or sold to
the terrorists by some Russian organized crime "entity."
(Whether this information is true or
designed to mislead the American people, as appears to have been the
case in the crash of TWA 800 and the Oklahoma City bombing incident, is anyone's guess.)
Likely, CIA director Tenet used the term "entity" to project the image of non-state involvement. The idea of a Russian non-state entity seems to have
been introduced following the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 as an
artificiality used to raise and characterize the proliferation problem as
rogue individuals and "criminals" taking advantage of the sorry economic
plight of those people who were safeguarding the various stockpiles.
This
scenario (deception?) was promoted by both sides to demonstrate our "working
together" and to justify the movement of billions of U.S. dollars to Russia to
help it thwart such activities.
But those U.S. voices involved in crying
wolf failed to understand that such criminal "entities" have played an
integral role in Soviet covert operations since the 1920s, as indicated
earlier, and as such were thoroughly penetrated and carefully watched by the
KGB.
Moreover, the organized crime entities that were suddenly given free
rein when the Soviet Union became Russia more likely than not were merely
adjunct KGB covering crime operations (that is, selected components of the
traditional Russian underground mixed in with a number of KGB-run
branches).
What is especially evident in the newly emergent organized crime
and especially Russian banking operations is the clear and dominant presence
of both current and former KGB officials. (See, for example, Yevgenia Albats,
"The State Within a State," Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 1994.)
But again, insofar as U.S. intelligence collection in the former Soviet
Union was cut back to the bone, we are left mainly with information the
Russians want us to have about what happened in Russia during and
following its rebirth.
In this respect, extensive efforts have been expended
to promote the Russian Mafia as an organized crime operation that the
Russians disliked as much as other nations did. They said the Mafia
was simply there and they were unable to control it any better than other
nations were able to.
This argument depends for its credibility upon the continued
silence (including poor memories) about the massive KGB-GRU state
intelligence operations in organized crime, narcotics trafficking and
terrorism that was initiated 35 years earlier at mid-century, and a
traditionally inadequate Western understanding of Russian deception, which
more than anything else remains guided by Lenin's directions to Dzerzhinsky:
"Tell them what they want to believe."
Significance of the Anthrax Attack
To understand why this lack of understanding or assisted self-deception is
so dangerous, consider the anthrax episode that followed on the heels of the
9-11 attacks. The main thrust of the investigation is now evidently focused
on the possibility of an internal lone U.S. individual with the appropriate
skills, such as a disgruntled university microbiology teacher.
The working
assumption now is that the episode was independent of 9-11 – that is, a mere
coincidence of simultaneous timing.
Possible, but highly improbable. More
disturbing is the evident lack of any attention directed toward the suspects
with the greatest expertise and both technical and operational capabilities:
Russia, Cuba and China.
While coming close on the heels of 9-11, the anthrax operation by design was
operationally very different. In the case of 9-11, notwithstanding the
explosion and fire that pretty much destroyed the plane and all those
aboard, there was still almost instant identification of the culprits and
responsible organization.
In contrast, in the anthrax case, there has been
no suggestion of a single scrap of evidence to have come out of the anthrax
investigation, and there was no explosion or fire to burn everything and
everyone up. The anthrax operation has all the earmarks – no trail –
associated with skilled intelligence professionals.
The anthrax episode demonstrated the ability of an unidentified hostile
force to manufacture a significant quantity of very special anthrax spores
and distribute them in a manner guaranteeing that the U.S. government would
not be able to suppress the information on what had happened.
The actual
ability to cause horrendous damage was demonstrated without causing more
than a few deaths – this was the message. In a sense, the reality of this
ability is far more serious than the 9-11 attack, yet there are no clues and
it almost seems that the episode is being allowed to die a natural death.
The Real 'Terrorist' Threat
The implications of the anthrax episode point toward an existing, present
terrorist threat of truly frightening magnitude and possible consequences.
The United States and, by extension, Europe are in a situation in which our main
enemies' regimes (of over 80 years in the case of the former Soviet Union
republics, 50 years in the case of China and 40 years in the case of Cuba)
are pretty much as they were before the dissolution of the Soviet
Union.
All the former Soviet
republics and most of the former satellites are run by former Communists.
They are, in all but name, Communist regimes, and most still have control
lines that run to Moscow.
They remain closely connected with terrorist
groups and rogue nations, and thus have the capability of supporting or
running catastrophic sabotage operations using weapons of mass destruction.
These would have enormous social, economic, and political consequences – all
to the benefit of the hostile regimes, beginning with those in Russia,
China, Cuba and the various totalitarian Islamist states.
What this means is that a skilled, professional intelligence service, with
relative ease, should be able to execute an attack on the United States, or
any of our allies, with weapons of mass destruction and get away without detection.
Operationally, the 9-11
attacks were far more difficult to manage and execute, but the consequences
of a serious attack using weapons of mass destruction (particularly a
suitcase nuclear warhead) likely would be far more devastating, without
the attack being recognized as a state-directed attack.
This intelligence service
could use a terrorist group as a surrogate or execute the operation so that
it had all the accouterments of a terrorist operation.
Is it any wonder that CIA director Tenet had such a difficult time
responding to Sen. Bayh's question?
Drugs, Russia and Terrorism
By presidential decree we are in a war on terrorism and those who harbor or
support terrorists. We have been told it will be a long and difficult war
that may never end, which sounds distressingly like the war-on-drugs
rhetoric.
There has been no explanation of who or what is within the ranks
of those who "harbor and support the terrorists," other than the terrorists'
financial support networks. While use of the label "state-supported" was
made politically incorrect in the Clinton administration, no one of note has
claimed that today's terrorists are either independent or self-sufficient.
As Bodansky repeatedly points out in his book, "Bin Laden," significant
terrorist operations, including those orchestrated by bin Laden, are still
state-supported, with bin Laden providing the states with "plausible
deniability."
His support includes both active and passive support, material
as well as moral support, East and West support, Muslim and non-Muslim state
support. What if, as Sen. Bayh questions, Russia and China are not only
involved, but involved in a big way?
Has anyone stopped to draw a complete picture of the very possible
ramifications of the war on terrorism, including the various hidden
entities, for President Bush and his War Cabinet?
My guess is that the
answer to this last question is no, not that the information is unavailable,
but that those in the intelligence bureaucracy are not about to volunteer
institutionally sensitive information and, more likely than not, no one is
asking.
Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
Al-Qaeda
Bioterrorism
Bush Administration
Castro/Cuba
China/Taiwan
Russia
War on Terrorism
A product that might interest you:
Get NewsMax's exclusive interview with Col. Stanislav Lunev: CIA Files: Defector Reveals Russia's Secret Plans