Spy Who Turned Tide With Libya Is Brought Back (from self-imposed exile)To Target Teheran

Telegraph.co.uk ^ | Filed: 18/06/2006 | Toby Harnden in Washington

[fight_truth_decay]

The American spy who persuaded Libya to renounce its weapons of mass destruction is to return to the Central Intelligence Agency, where he will direct an aggressive drive to recruit informants inside Iran to aid possible negotiations over Teheran's nuclear capability.

Stephen Kappes, a former United States Marines officer who resigned from the CIA after a clash with its then director, Porter Goss, has been brought back from self-imposed exile in London by George W Bush.

Iran will be top of his agenda. "He's a remarkable guy, a talented leader and among the finest officers of his generation," said Gary Berntsen, the CIA's key commander during the invasion of Afghanistan, who has worked for Mr Kappes in the Middle East. "He knows the target [Iran] intimately."

The return to CIA headquarters at Langley, Virginia, of Mr Kappes, 54, has boosted flagging morale at the spy agency. A former CIA station chief in Moscow, he led successful efforts to penetrate the network of A Q Khan, the rogue Pakistani scientist, who supplied Iran and Libya with nuclear know-how.

He will be deputy to Gen Michael Hayden, who took over from Mr Goss and characterised his predecessor's tenure as "amateur hour". Mr Kappes is the first career undercover operative to ascend to this level for more than 30 years.

The CIA's first priority is to gather intelligence from inside Iran about the theocratic regime's nuclear capabilities and intentions, and the locations of its secret weapons sites. Such information would be crucial in the event of direct talks - or in launching military strikes if negotiations collapsed.

Mr Kappes is a Farsi and Russian speaker who, while stationed in Frankfurt in the late 1980s, was in charge of collecting information about Ayatollah Khomeini's regime and debriefing Iranian exiles.

Mr Kappes is understood to have told friends months ago that he favoured direct engagement with Iran, even suggesting that there might be a case for restoring diplomatic relations with the country and reopening the American embassy in Teheran, closed since the 1979 hostage crisis.

Earlier this month, the Bush administration made an about-face by proposing direct talks on the nuclear issue if Teheran suspended uranium enrichment. Mr Kappes would be a likely candidate to lead any such negotiations.

Robert Baer, a former CIA agent handler in the Middle East, said: "The CIA has a terrible track record in Iran. In the late 1980s, they lost all their human resources [informants] after the Iranians got into the mail." More than 30 CIA informants were arrested when the Iranians intercepted and deciphered CIA communications in 1989.

In October 2003, Mr Kappes led a 15-strong American and British team that went into Libya to test an overture by President Muammar Gaddafi, suggesting that he might be willing to give up his weapons of mass destruction. The information gathered by Mr Kappes helped to persuade the Libyans that the West had clear evidence of the military intent of their nuclear programme.

Mr Baer, author of Blow The House Down, a novel about 9/11, said that a similar outcome would be difficult to achieve with Teheran while America had poor intelligence-gathering capability in Iran. "We have to open up a negotiating channel to Iran, if nothing else to figure out what they're thinking."

But Mr Berntsen said he believed that negotiations were unlikely to succeed and military action against Iranian nuclear sites would have to be taken.

[Defiant]

Does this mean that Joe Wilson and the Clintonistas are back in charge?

[fight_truth_decay]

Refresher:December 4th, 2004

"John E. McLaughlin, a 32-year CIA veteran who was acting director for two months this summer until Goss took over, resigned after warning Goss that his top aide, former Capitol Hill staff member Patrick Murray, was treating senior officials disrespectfully and risked widespread resignations, the officials said."

"Yesterday, the agency official who oversees foreign operations, Deputy Director of Operations Stephen R. Kappes, tendered his resignation after a confrontation with Murray. Goss and the White House pleaded with Kappes to reconsider and he agreed to delay his decision until Monday, the officials said."

"Several other senior clandestine service officers are threatening to leave, current and former agency officials said.

[Zeroisanumber]

Does this mean that Joe Wilson and the Clintonistas are back in charge?

I'd put Clinton himself in charge of the CIA if he could post the kind of successes that this guy has.

[Ole Okie]

Probably means that Valerie Plame will be promoted to an important position. Maybe she'll bring Joe with her.

[Defiant]

That's assuming that this British newspaper's report of a personel change at CIA is accurate. The anti-Goss bias is reflective of the old Bush regime at CIA, which just happened to attempt to oust the President of the US in the last election, among other covert efforts against the elected leader of the country.

[Zeroisanumber]

That's assuming that this British newspaper's report of a personel change at CIA is accurate. The anti-Goss bias is reflective of the old Bush regime at CIA, which just happened to attempt to oust the President of the US in the last election, among other covert efforts against the elected leader of the country.

From FTD post #3: "Deputy Director of Operations Stephen R. Kappes, tendered his resignation after a confrontation with Murray. Goss and the White House pleaded with Kappes to reconsider..."

Seems like Kappes had and still has the confidence of Director Goss and the administration.

[Defiant]

Uh, Goss is long gone, a victim of bureaucratic infighting with the NID, and a stab in the back from Bush, if you believe sources in DC.

In any event, this guy may well be a great spy, and he may be personally responsible for turning Libya as the article says. No mention of the Iraq War's implied threat in Qadaffi's decision, but, hey, they're Brits and what can you do, they're like CNN all the time, and that's in the conservative papers. It may be good news that he is back at CIA, but the point is, you have to read this stuff critically, and when you see Goss forced out and articles like this lauding the old hands at the CIA, and calling Goss "amateur hour" you can read into it "agenda" and then try to decipher what the agenda is. Lefties at CIA are back in charge and feeding the MSM what they want to print. I'll reserve my judgment on this guy.

[RCNOVA]

Kappas resigned rather than fire a very good officer for political reasons. Kappas is the furthest thing from Joe Wilson and the Clintonistas you will find in the CIA. The kind of political decision that led to Joe Wilson's trip to the Nigeria are the last thing he would do.

[Atchafalaya]

Is anyone in charge of the CIA and do they know who they work for??

[Atchafalaya]

Thanks for Qadaffi; what have you done for us lately?

[Southack]

"Robert Baer, a former CIA agent handler in the Middle East, said: "The CIA has a terrible track record in Iran. In the late 1980s, they lost all their human resources [informants] after the Iranians got into the mail." More than 30 CIA informants were arrested when the Iranians intercepted and deciphered CIA communications in 1989."

OK, please stay with me as this is important.

One of the things that Free Republic started out doing was analyzing the "slant" or spin or propaganda buried in news articles (circa 1998).

It needs to be done with the above. Note the Agent's name, Baer. Note the date that he claims: 1989.

He is telling the world that the CIA spy network inside Iran was exposed and rolled up in 1989, President GHWB's watch (i.e. pre-Clinton).

...And he's lying out of his a$$.

It happened in 1998 when President Clinton was freaked out by India's surprise nuclear test (he ordered all of our Iranian agents to report everything that they had immediately...which led to a communications surge large enough for Iranian counter-intel to nab our guys en masse).

Here's the real story, but notice that there is propaganda even in this article that "absolves" (last quoted sentence) the Clinton Administration and includes a date "range" that could apply to GHWB instead of just to WJC: http://www.theage.com.au/news/World/CIA-debacle-in-Iran-cost-spies-lives/2005/02/13/1108229853474.html

The setback was first outlined by former Pentagon adviser Richard Perle on February 2 in testimony before the House Intelligence Committee. Mr Perle criticised US intelligence capabilities and cited the crackdown on sources in Iran as an example of failures that have beset US spying in the Middle East.

He referred to the "terrible setback that we suffered in Iran a few years ago when in a display of unbelievable, careless management, we put pressure on agents operating in Iran to report with greater frequency and didn't provide improved communications". When the CIA's sources stepped up their reporting, "the Iranian intelligence authorities quickly saw the surge in traffic and, as I understand it, virtually our entire network in Iran was wiped out", he said.

Former CIA officials confirmed portions of Mr Perle's account and provided additional details. But they said the incident occurred in the late 1980s or early 1990s and that it was not clear that the informers were exposed because of any pressure from the agency.

Now, remember the date claimed in the propaganda in the original article for this thread? 1989.

Why do the CIA hacks cite 1989? Two reasons: the first President Bush was in Office then, and the real date was 1998. It was in the second week of May, 1998 when India surprised the CIA by conducting 3 nuclear tests. By citing 1989, they can claim that either they or a reporter thansposed the last two numbers of the year (yes, CIA hacks are this petty/conniving).

That's when the Clinton Administration ordered the data dump from all of our Iranian sources (WJC didn't want to be surprised by an Iranian nuclear test next), and that data dump is what led to the collapse of our network there because the Iranians aren't fools and they were able to catch on with so many clues in front of them.

OK. Thank you for bearing with me. There are a lot of details above and most people just don't read or care to comprehend more than one detail at a time (e.g. headliners), but the above details are actually important enough to wade into.

The lie told by Baer **will** be professionally repeated in the near future. Clintonistas are attempting to re-write History here.

They are counting on apathy and inertia on your part to let their spin win.

[Defiant]

As I said, he may well be a great spy. In the military, it is possible you might get crappy officers, and in the CIA you might get bosses you don't like, and if you are that good at your job, you might want to find a way to keep doing it, if you get satisfaction from stopping terrorist attacks against the US.

[Defiant]

That is exactly the kind of critical thinking I am talking about above. Thank you for this post.

[Southack]

"Does this mean that Joe Wilson and the Clintonistas are back in charge?"

Bite...your...tongue.

Kappes worked with **DICK MEADOWS** in Frankfurt.

Either you know the name or else you've got some serious googling to do tonight. Then you'll know.

[onyx]

You can't miss this!

[RCNOVA]

He is telling the world that the CIA spy network inside Iran was exposed and rolled up in 1989, President GHWB's watch (i.e. pre-Clinton). ...And he's lying out of his a$$.

No, he's not lying. You may be referring to two different events. In 1989 a lot of Iranian agents were wrapped up due to sloppy tradecraft.

[Peach]

Very, very good analysis and a good memory here Southack. I'll have to start an Iran file and add your post to it.

[operation clinton cleanup]

Iran will be top of his agenda. "He's a remarkable guy, a talented leader and among the finest officers of his generation," said Gary Berntsen, the CIA's key commander during the invasion of Afghanistan, who has worked for Mr Kappes in the Middle East. "He knows the target [Iran] intimately."

But Mr Berntsen said he believed that negotiations were unlikely to succeed and military action against Iranian nuclear sites would have to be taken.

So, was he brought back for negotiations or targeting information?

[coconutt2000]

Probably means that Valerie Plame will be promoted to an important position. Maybe she'll bring Joe with her.

Ambassador to the Inuit Nation? ;-)

[SevenMinusOne]

Kappas resigned rather than fire a very good officer for political reasons. Kappas is the furthest thing from Joe Wilson and the Clintonistas you will find in the CIA. The kind of political decision that led to Joe Wilson's trip to the Nigeria are the last thing he would do.

Exactly right - Having Kappas back in is a good thing - His expertise and talents are very much needed at this current time -

[PGalt]

Interesting post. Outstanding thread. Thanks to all who contribute.

[Southack]

"No, he's not lying. You may be referring to two different events. In 1989 a lot of Iranian agents were wrapped up due to sloppy tradecraft."

You are gravely mistaken. There was no rollup of U.S. agents in Iran during Iran-Contra (1986-1990).

[Walkingfeather]

WOW CATCH OF THE WEEK. Nice job!

[Lurker]

For later.

L

[MEG33]

bookmarking

[onyx]

ANOTHER file? LOL --- you're awesome, Peach.

[MilesVeritatis]

The '89 for '98 switch is interesting. It's on the FRadar now. Thanks.

[bpjam]

I don't read Kappas as being a Clintonista. I think he is a real spook and suffers the government weasels poorly. I would want nothing else from somebody who has balls big enough to go to Libya and ask for them to turn over their weapons program. We need ballsy MFs in the CIA, pre Church-commission types, to do the work that hasn't been done enough in the last 30 years. We have become way too dependent upon technology and too afraid of political fall-out to take the risks which accomplished great feats like stealing Russian nuclear subs from right under their noses and bugging the Kremlin or overthrowing communist governments without bring in the Army.

[ElCid89]

Outstanding analysis exposing more attempted disinformation. Unfortunately, this will just be the beginning of this new campaign. In any event, although having Kappas back seems like a very good thing, it will take years to develop a new intelligence network in Iran.

[fight_truth_decay]

Excellent Post

[fight_truth_decay]

Interesting Baer interview via Buzzflash site, liberal; but has some interesting interviews:

BUZZFLASH: Another factor in terms of the relationship that you’ve described as sleeping with the devil, and that you detail in your book, is that the Saudis have very shrewdly given jobs and consulting contracts to politicians and American government officials as they leave their government jobs.

BAER: I could have sat down and done a list of all my former colleagues from the CIA who ended up on the Saudi Arabian payroll. Some of them are known, like Ray Close. Others have gone public, but there are others that haven’t. A bunch of my colleagues went to work for a public consulting firm where the initial capital was paid for by the Saudi embassy to lobby the Hill for the Gulf countries. A former member of the National Security Council under Reagan set this up. And it’s not like it’s a secret. Even Bandar [Bandar bin Sultan, Saudi prince and U.S. ambassador] has said, according to the Washington Post, that if I take care of people coming out of office, the new ones coming in are going to be a lot friendlier to Saudi Arabia once it gets known.

BUZZFLASH: And it’s worked.

BAER: It works great. I’d be really popular in Washington if I could throw around a couple hundred million dollars every year to law firms and others. Another thing the royal family does is cultivate the press through public relations firms.

[Eagles6]

save

[fight_truth_decay]

In the afternoon of Monday, 11 May 1998 Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee stunned the world by announcing at a hurriedly convened press conference that earlier that day India had conducted three nuclear tests. International observers were, if anything, even more astonished by the announcement two days later that two additional tests had been conducted.

The Decision to Test
Pres. Bill Clinton made a last-minute plea to Sharif, Wednesday night. According to presidential spokesman Mike McCurry it was a "very intense" 25-minute call in which the president implored the prime minister not to conduct a test. It was the fourth presidential call to Sharif since India's first explosion on May 11. But the test time had been set - 3:00 p.m. in the afternoon of 28 May 1998.

Dust raised on Koh Kambaran in the Ras Koh mountains by the Pakistan-I test, 28 May 1998

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Pakistan/PakTests.html

[Southack]

"Pres. Bill Clinton made a last-minute plea to Sharif, Wednesday night. According to presidential spokesman Mike McCurry it was a "very intense" 25-minute call in which the president implored the prime minister not to conduct a test. It was the fourth presidential call to Sharif since India's first explosion on May 11. But the test time had been set - 3:00 p.m. in the afternoon of 28 May 1998."

Yes, that was during the "mad scramble." 4 Presidential phone calls to the President of Pakistan from President Clinton himself.

The Clinton Administration had been blind-sided by India's nuclear tests, and the entire Administration was looking completely impotent to stop the Pakistan nuclear tests that followed in that same month of May, 1998.

It was during this "mad scramble" that the Clinton Administration ordered all of our agents in Iran, our field ops, our runners, even our sleeper cells, everyone, to immediately report **everything** that they knew or suspected. The Clintonistas were frightened out of their wits that Iran might further embarrass them with yet another surprise nuclear test that the CIA had missed. They missed India. They couldn't stop Pakistan. A third nation setting off yet another surprise nuclear test right then would have impeached President Clinton (or cost the Dems dearly in the November mid-term elections, at least).

This data dump caused a massive communications surge...to the **same** foreign address.

But Baer and his traitorous allies will lie to your face, saying that wasn't when the Iranians broke our entire spy network in Iran. They'll lie to you saying that the ill-thought order to demand an immediate data dump from all of our agents in Iran came from former CIA Director and current (at that time) President GHW Bush.

Baer will lie to you claiming that our network was busted DURING THE IRAN CONTRA AFTERMATH in 1989 rather than admit the truth that our network there was crushed in 1998.

Look at your own news clip of the mad scramble put on by the Clinton Administration after the Indian nuclear tests, just prior to the Pakistan nuclear tests.

Who was in the mindset to demand an ill-thought-out data dump from our agents in Iran: the caught-off-guard Clinton Administration in May of 1998, or the CIA Director President Bush who was guiding us out of President Reagan's Iran-Contra affair way back in calm 1989?

You'd have to believe in the tooth fairy to believe Baer and his ilk...

[piasa]

Robert Baer ping

[Jeff Chandler]

You're good.

[Criminal Number 18F]

Actually, you misjudge Bob Baer.

Get him started on Clinton's approach to clandestine operations some time. He was involved in a military coup that was going to overthrow Saddam. At the last minute WJC pulled the plug.

It's in Baer's book "See No Evil," which is not political in a partisan sense. Neither is his book bashing Saudi Arabia -- it whacks both Republican and Democratic administrations pretty hard.

My personal impression is that he's simply trying to understand the middle east. A big job.

As far as Iranian sources are concerned -- there have been several times we have needed intel on Iran only to discover that our human intelligence sources in the country are poor (best case) to nonexistent (frequent case). Espionage-wise, it's a hard target.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

[Alia]

Thank you, Southack, for capturing and noting this. Marking.

[dead]

Great post. Thanks for the insight.

[Marine_Uncle]

" They are counting on apathy and inertia on your part to let their spin win."
Gotta get ready for work. Will book mark for later reading. Happy Fathers Day. Have a good one.

[Straight Vermonter]

Excellent post.

[RCNOVA]

Sorry, I know what I am talking about.

[RCNOVA]

The problem with your analysis is that you start from the premise that when Bush Senior was president the CIA was filled with superb professionals and that they became "conniving hacks" during Clinton's administration. It shows a complete lack of understanding of the dynamics of the CIA and their performance, and how long it takes to develop a cadre of professional Case Officers. Clinton essentially decimated the CIA during most of his presidency. His first DCI was Woolsey, who he only met once during Woolsey's entire tenure. Deutsch was sent in to cut the Agency down to size and did so through cutbacks and an attempt, through his XO Nora Slatten to place minorities and women in positions of power regardless of their capabilities. The hacks you are referring to were the people Clinton put into place who had no clue about the complexities of running agent operations. It wasn't until our Embassies in Africa were blown up that Clinton had a mini wake up call and started rebuilding the CIA. It was too little, too late. The idea that everyone in the CIA was a Clintonista is absurd. Furthermore, a Case Office is ultimately responsible for the security of his Agents and can't get them to provide that which they don't know. The assumption that every, or even most, agents in Iran could have provided substantive information on the nuclear issue is a huge leap. Your assessment makes a lot of assumptions which ignore the realities of agent handling and agent communications. While I don't have a lot of respect for Baer (he was a risk seeker, not a risk taker) he is not lying about what happened to the Iranian assetts in 1989. The wrap up of the Iranian assetts in 1989 was the result of lousy tradecraft by the CIA and can't be blamed on Bush senior. This does not mean that some agents were not wrapped up when Perle says they were. The two are not mutually exclusive. We may not like what happened to the CIA during the Clinton presidency, but like it or not the CIA serves at the direction and pleasure of the president and as bad as that can be, it is certainly better than the alternative of a spy agency doing whatever it wants.

[alwaysconservative]

Thank you so much for all your hard work and this important ping! I did not know this and am SO grateful for brilliant FReepers such as yourself to "arm" me with the facts! You would think they would get tired of the rank dishonesty, but apparently not.

Thanks again!

[aculeus]

Unfortunately too many FReepers, unlike President Bush, cannot face even the possibility that Goss was the wrong man for the job.

Yes the CIA has too many anti-Bushites but putting a heavy-handed amateur in charge is not the answer.

More here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1650835/posts

[Coop]

I'd put Clinton himself in charge of the CIA if he could post the kind of successes that this guy has.

I wouldn't put the Impeached Rapist in charge of my daughter's lemonade stand. Especially if she were anywhere in the area.

[Mo1]

Thanks for the ping!

[Grampa Dave]

Thanks for the work and posting this.

Now this has been posted on FR again. When the left wing mediots try to blame this on GBI, you/we can send this to their editors/publishers and ask them if they are trying to be new Dan Rathers.

[strategofr]

"Uh, Goss is long gone, a victim of bureaucratic infighting with the NID, and a stab in the back from Bush, if you believe sources in DC."

Thanks, I never heard this last.

"In any event, this guy may well be a great spy, and he may be personally responsible for turning Libya as the article says. No mention of the Iraq War's implied threat in Qadaffi's decision, but, hey, they're Brits and what can you do, they're like CNN all the time, and that's in the conservative papers. It may be good news that he is back at CIA, but the point is, you have to read this stuff critically, and when you see Goss forced out and articles like this lauding the old hands at the CIA, and calling Goss "amateur hour" you can read into it "agenda" and then try to decipher what the agenda is. Lefties at CIA are back in charge and feeding the MSM what they want to print. I'll reserve my judgment on this guy."

While I am far from knowledgeable about it, I believe Goss was a good guy doing a badly needed cleanup in an agency that has been severely compromised for decades.

It is good to see someone who apparently knows more than myself seeing things the same way.

By the way, what do you think of a pet idea of mine? that this new guy's background (Hayden), being in "national technical means" is not, in itself, a good sign for the CIA, whose great weakness for decades has been a lack of affective HUMINT.