|
 A week after Russia plunged directly into Syria’s civil war by
launching a campaign of air strikes, the intelligence committees of
the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives want to examine the
extent to which the spy community overlooked or misjudged critical
warning signs, the sources said.
Findings of major blind spots would mark the latest of several U.S.
intelligence misses in recent years, including Moscow’s surprise
takeover of Ukraine’s Crimea region last year and China’s rapid
expansion of island-building activities in the South China Sea.
Though spy agencies have sought to ramp up intelligence gathering on
Russia since the crisis over Ukraine, they continue to struggle with
inadequate resources because of the emphasis on counter-terrorism in
the Middle East and the Afghanistan-Pakistan region, according to
current and former U.S. officials.
A senior administration official, who also asked not to be
identified, insisted that there were “no surprises” and that
policymakers were “comfortable” with the intelligence they received
in the lead-up to the Russian offensive.
 Spy agencies had carefully tracked Russian President Vladimir
Putin’s build-up of military assets and personnel in Syria in recent
weeks, prompting White House criticism and demands for Moscow to
explain itself.
But intelligence officers – and the U.S. administration they serve -
were caught mostly off-guard by the speed and aggressiveness of
Putin’s use of air power as well as a Russian target list that
included U.S.-backed rebels, according to the officials, who spoke
on condition of anonymity.
"They saw some of this going on but didn't appreciate the
magnitude," one of the sources told Reuters.
Russia’s sudden move to ramp up its military involvement in the
Syria crisis has thrown Obama's Middle East strategy into doubt and
laid bare an erosion of U.S. influence in the region.
A shortage of reliable information and analysis could further hamper
President Barack Obama’s efforts to craft a response on Syria to
regain the initiative from Washington’s former Cold War foe.
BEHIND THE CURVE?
It is unclear how his administration could have reacted differently
with better intelligence, though advance word of Putin’s attack
plans might have allowed U.S. officials to warn the moderate Syrian
opposition that they could end up in Russia's line of fire.
Obama, who is reluctant to see America drawn deeper into another
Middle East conflict, has shown no desire to directly confront
Russia over its Syria offensive – something Moscow may have taken as
a green light to escalate its operations.
Syrian troops and militia backed by Russian warplanes mounted what
appeared to be their first major coordinated assault on Syrian
insurgents on Wednesday and Moscow said its warships fired a barrage
of missiles at them from the Caspian Sea, a sign of its new military
reach.
Russia's military build-up now includes a growing naval presence,
long-range rockets and a battalion of troops backed by Moscow's most
modern tanks, the U.S. ambassador to NATO said.
The U.S. administration believes it now has a better understanding
at least of Putin’s main motive – to do whatever it takes to prop up
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. But Washington remains uncertain
exactly how much further Putin is willing to go in terms of
deployment of advanced military assets, the U.S. officials said.
The lack of clarity stems in part from the limited ability of U.S.
intelligence agencies to discern what Putin and a tightly knit
circle of advisers are thinking and planning.
In a tense meeting with Putin at the United Nations early last week,
Obama was not given any advance notice of Russia’s attack plans,
aides said. Russian air strikes began two days later, including the
targeting of CIA-trained “moderate” anti-Assad rebels, though Moscow
insisted it only hit Islamic State insurgents.
[to top of second column] |
“They did not expect the speed with which Putin ramped things up,"
said Michael McFaul, Obama’s former ambassador to Moscow. "He likes
the element of surprise."
U.S. intelligence agencies did closely follow and report to
policymakers Russian moves to sharply expand infrastructure at its
key air base in Latakia as well as the deployment of heavy
equipment, including combat aircraft, to Syria, officials said.
“We’re not mind readers,” the senior administration official said.
“We didn’t know when Russia would fly the first sortie, but our
analysis of the capabilities that were there was that they were
there for a reason.”
However, several other officials said U.S. agencies were behind the
curve in assessing how far the Russians intended to go and how
quickly they intended to launch operations.
In fact, right up until a White House briefing given shortly after
the bombing began, Obama press secretary Josh Earnest declined to
draw "firm conclusions" on Russia's strategy.
CONFUSION OVER RUSSIAN INTENT
One source suggested that U.S. experts initially thought the Russian
build-up might have been more for a military "snap exercise" or a
temporary show of force than preparations for sustained, large-scale
attacks on Assad's enemies.
Another official said that after initial review, congressional
oversight investigators believe that "information on this was not
moving quickly enough through channels” to policymakers.
And another source said there had been a "lag of a week" before
agencies began voicing full-throated alarm about imminent Russian
military operations.
The senior administration official said, however, that “I don’t
think anybody here perceived a gap” in intelligence.
In their reviews of how U.S. intelligence handled the Syria
build-up, officials said congressional intelligence committees would
examine reports issued by the agencies and question officers
involved in the process, according to congressional and national
security sources. At the moment, no public hearings are planned, the
officials said.
Though the senior administration official denied the intelligence
community was paying any less attention to Syria, John Herbst, a
former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, said that not enough intelligence
assets had been devoted to analyzing Putin’s “aggressive policies”.
McFaul, who took the view that the Obama administration had been
largely on top of the situation as Putin prepared his offensive,
said that a faster or more precise intelligence assessment would
probably have done little to change the outcome.
“What difference would it make if we had known 48 hours ahead of
time?” asked McFaul, who now teaches at Stanford University in
California. “There still wouldn’t have been any better options for
deterring Putin in Syria.”
(Additional reporting by Lesley Wroughton and Roberta Rampton,
Writing by Matt Spetalnick; editing by Stuart Grudgings)
[© 2015 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2015 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
 |
