October 27, 2002	Sunday	Sha’aban 20,1423

WASHINGTON: An influential Pentagon advisory board is calling for a major expansion of the US special forces role in combating terrorism, and is seeking a new White House office to plan “pre- emptive” covert operations across the globe.

The classified proposals urge the Pentagon to “take the terrorist threat as seriously as it takes major theatre war,” urging officials to launch secret missions and intelligence operations to penetrate and disrupt terrorist cells abroad.

Some of those operations should be aimed at signalling to countries that harbour terrorists that “their sovereignty will be at risk,” according to a summary of the Defence Science Board’s recommendations that were described to the Los Angeles Times.

The recommendations were presented in high-level Pentagon briefings this week that were conducted by members of the board, a little-known but highly respected advisory group that is funded and controlled by the Pentagon.

If adopted, some of the proposals would appear to push the US military into territory that traditionally has been the domain of the CIA, raising questions about the extent to which such missions would be subject to legal restraints imposed on CIA activities.

But William Schneider Jr., chairman of the Defence Science Board, rejected such concerns, saying the panel set out to identify ways that special forces could do more to assist the war on terrorism, not encroach on other agencies’ authority.

“The CIA executes the plans but they use Department of Defence assets,” Schneider said. He stressed that the board is not recommending any changes to long-standing US policies banning assassinations, or requiring presidents to approve in advance US covert operations. Nor, he said, is the panel advocating changes that would erode congressional oversight.

The proposals, Schneider said, were “well-received” by senior Pentagon officials this week, and are scheduled to be presented to Defence Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld next week.

The board’s recommendations are outlined in a 78-page briefing document obtained by defence analyst and Los Angeles Times military columnist William M. Arkin. The document is explored in an Arkin column scheduled to appear in Sunday’s commentary section of the paper.

It is certain to add to a growing debate over the Pentagon’s expanding role in the war on terrorism, intelligence collection and covert operations.

Rumsfeld has touched off turf battles with the CIA and other agencies in recent months, as he has sought to consolidate authority over intelligence gathering in the Pentagon and craft a more assertive role for US special forces in an array of overseas activities.

On Thursday, Rumsfeld acknowledged that shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks last year, his office had created a special intelligence analysis unit to examine evidence of links between Al-Qaeda and Iraq, a task that ordinarily would fall to the CIA.

At a news briefing, Rumsfeld said the Pentagon has “an excellent relationship” with the agency. “It’s been a good relationship,” he said.

Rumsfeld has been carving out an expanded role for special forces. He recently gave the special operations command the lead in the hunt for Al-Qaeda, raising the possibility of covert operations even in countries with which the United States is not at war. Other Pentagon and intelligence officials say Rumsfeld is deeply frustrated with the CIA’s analyses on key issues such as the threat posed by Iraq. He is eager to have US special forces usurp the agency’s traditional role, they say.

“He was upset when US forces got on the ground in Afghanistan last August and had to be introduced to local tribal leaders by CIA operatives,” said one senior defence official. Rumsfeld would rather have covert Pentagon operatives “operating elbow to elbow with the CIA or independent of the CIA,” the official said.

Many of the proposals in the Defence Science Board’s report would push the Pentagon toward that goal.

The report is titled “Summer Study on Special Operations and Joint Forces in Support of Countering Terrorism.” It was produced by a 10-member panel of military experts that included Vice Adm. William O. Studeman, former director of the National Security Agency, which eavesdrops on electronic communications around the world.

Defence Department Spokeswoman Victoria Clarke said she was not familiar with the report. “There are literally thousands of private individuals who give the Pentagon advice and recommendations of all shapes and kinds,” she said. “Some of it gets taken on, and some doesn’t.”

But experts said the Defense Science Board occupies a unique position. “The board is probably the most influential group the Pentagon has,” said Lawrence J. Korb, an assistant secretary of defense in the Reagan administration. “People pay attention to the board.”

The document focuses on the shifting counterterrorism mission of US special forces, which include the Army Green Berets, Delta Force operatives and Navy Seals.

One of its principle recommendations calls for the creation of a “Proactive Pre-emptive Operating Group” that would oversee missions involving special forces, psychological warfare experts and other covert operatives.

One aim would be to “improve information collection by stimulating reactions” among intelligence targets. Experts interpreted that to mean operations designed to provoke terrorists to move material or shift locations, thereby exposing their members and methods to intelligence collection.

One version of the report says the group would be run out of the National Security Council. Schneider, the board’s chairman, stressed that subsequent drafts make clear that the NSC would plan operations but not oversee their execution.

Such an arrangement might prompt nervous comparisons to past abuses, such as the Iran-Contra operations run out of the NSC by Lt. Col. Oliver North during the Reagan administration.

Under the board’s proposal, NSC plans would be executed by the Pentagon or the CIA. Schneider insisted those operations still would be subject to existing government restrictions.

Lawmakers have expressed growing concern with Rumsfeld’s push to expand the Pentagon’s covert capabilities, largely because the Pentagon is not subject to rules that require the CIA to report its covert activities to Congress.

Still, most lawmakers and administration officials acknowledge that Sept. 11 highlighted the need for significant changes in the nation’s intelligence and counterterrorism efforts. The Defense Science Board is the latest to enter an intense debate on the shape of those changes.

Its report concludes that the United States is too reliant on satellites and other “remote” collection capabilities, and must pursue ways to insert agents or “in-place sensors” to monitor terrorists cells and movements of weapons of mass destruction.

The document suggests that many changes are under way. It cites the expansion of existing intelligence analysis centres and the creation of new management teams to direct covert operations at such installations as Fort Bragg, N.C., where US special forces are based.

It also provides tantalising glimpses of new capabilities, referring to new high-tech sensors in development that would enable the United States more closely to track the movements of vehicles or even individuals by satellite. —Dawn/LAT-WP News Service (c) Los Angeles Times