When President Donald Trump tweeted Secretary of State Rex Tillerson's job away and announced he planned to fill the vacancy with current CIA Director Mike Pompeo, he also said he wanted the CIA's current deputy director, Gina Haspel, to take the reins of the spy agency.
In the wake of this announcement, several prominent former intelligence officials, including former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and former CIA Acting Director Mike Morell, spoke highly of Haspel, herself a 30-plus-year veteran of the agency. But Haspel also has a chorus of loud detractors, especially civil liberties figures, because of her reported prominent role in the CIA's enhanced interrogation program, later declared by the U.S. government to be torture.
Over Twitter, John Sipher, who spent 28 years in the CIA's clandestine service, told me why he thought Haspel deserved to be asked "hard questions" but would ultimately be good for the agency. The brief exchange is posted below, with Sipher's permission, along with a direct message in which he expanded a little more on his thoughts. (Note: EIT refers to enhanced interrogation techniques, the clinical-sounding term used by the CIA for torture.)
Fmr top intel officials appear to be fans of Haspel, from what I’ve seen fly by online so far https://t.co/9ZExngOKWS
— Lee Ferran (@leeferran) March 13, 2018
We need leaders in this environment who understand and will protect their institutions. They need to protect the people and tell truth to power. Nobody will survive the political chaos but we need our institutions and public servants to be resilient.
— John Sipher (@john_sipher) March 13, 2018
Any concerns about the EIT history?
— Lee Ferran (@leeferran) March 13, 2018
Yeah but while she is a symbol of it, she was not the architect or promoter, or even really senior then. Bring it up and ask hard questions but don't use her as a scapegoat and leave the powerful institution to those who will do worse.
— John Sipher (@john_sipher) March 13, 2018
Any idea what you would’ve done in her position?
— Lee Ferran (@leeferran) March 13, 2018
Too easy to say now. I'm lucky that I never was in that position. I do recall that everybody in Washington - even those who are the most vocal now - were begging the CIA to do more, not less. Of course, they all ran for the hills and hid when the reckoning came.
— John Sipher (@john_sipher) March 13, 2018
[The direct message from Sipher, also posted here with permission:]
“I think a lot of people in CIA felt a sense of responsibility for 9/11. They certainly knew that future attacks would be on our heads. The White House was pushing hard and our lawyers were working closely with the Justice Department. Several of the techniques were disallowed. I can imagine some people felt that, even if they felt queezy, the State was behind them and they were doing what was necessary. It’s hard when you know the people. When you know they are thoughtful and good people that were in a tough position. It’s easier if you are not the one on the line or the people are all faceless. I’m glad I was not near it. I don’t know what I would have done or how I might have rationalized it. When you see real evil in front of you, it takes something special to resist the fear. I know that many in the military and others were out of control but avoided accountability. I’m glad the law now is clear. It’s against the law. Period. However, this Administration may try to change it. CIA will refuse if asked but someone else will do it.”
Primary Resource: Senate Intelligence Committee Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program
Related: One CIA Lawyer Could've Stopped the Waterboarding Before It Started, Here's Why He Didn't (ABC News)
[Do you have a tip or question for Code and Dagger? Reach us at CodeAndDagger@protonmail.com. And if you like what you read and want to help keep the site running (kind of) smoothly, click here to learn how you can support the site. ]