After the 2016 election the Obama administration dithered for weeks about how to respond to Russia’s interference, in part because of what one senior advisor called typical “rice bowl behavior” among competing U.S. agencies.
“Rice bowl behavior” is, apparently, when “various elements of the interagency [were] happy to see somebody else’s rice bowl broken, but they were protective of their own,” according to Susan Rice, who served as then-President Barack Obama’s national security advisor.
As the administration debated what to do about Russia’s hacking of the Democratic National Committee, Rice said the State Department was wary of expelling Russian diplomats because Russia could expel American diplomats, the Intelligence Community was wary of naming Russian intelligence “elements” in sanctions, and the military and National Security Agency “expressed concern” about taking cyber actions against Russia that could expose their cyber capabilities.
Related: Lithuanian Intel Report Sounds Russian Alarm
Rice’s characterization of bureaucratic infighting comes from a report published today [PDF] by the Senate Intelligence Committee, which examined the Obama administration’s response to Russian interference in the 2016 presidential race.
Sen. Richard Burr, the Republican chairman of the committee, accused Obama’s White House of being “frozen by ‘paralysis of analysis’” and failing to act.
The 54-page report, some of which is heavily redacted, runs through the administration’s early indication of Russian cyber mischief, the discovery — from The Washington Post — of the DNC hack, the direct warnings to the Russian government to knock it off, the subsequent release of the emails and finally the Obama administration’s post-election public attribution and response, including sanctions and the expulsion of dozens of Russian officials from the U.S.
The report notes that no less than five times did the administration warn Russia to stop its malicious cyber activity, including one in-person warning from Obama to Russian President Vladimir Putin on the sides of a G20 summit in September 2016.
Related: Treason for $50, Soviet Spymaster Talks Walk-Ins and ‘Rogues’
The summit was “the best target of opportunity to put the finger right into Putin’s chest and tell him that we knew what he was doing, that it needs to stop, and that if there were further indications that they had taken steps beyond what we knew they had already done, that there would be serious consequences for the Russians,” Rice said.
But Putin denied the accusation and instead insisted Russia had been the victim of election interference, and Russia reacted similarly to the other warnings. Administration officials argued that the warnings worked since Russia is not believed to have tampered with voting systems as was feared. Congressional critics point to the publication of the stolen emails and the unabated use of fake accounts on social media to sow discord as evidence that the Russians did not, in fact, back off.
Sen. Mark Warner, the Democratic vice-chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in a statement that there were “many flaws with the U.S. response to the 2016 attack, but it’s worth noting that many of those were due to problems with our own system – problems that can and should be corrected.”
“All Americans, particularly those of us in government and public office, must work together to push back on foreign interference in our elections without regard for partisan advantage,” he said.
Primary Source: US Government Response to Russian Activites (PDF)
[Like what you see and read on Code and Dagger? Become a Patreon and help keep the lights on. Do you have a tip or question? Reach out at CodeAndDagger@protonmail.com.]