Intelligence services: The new leviathan
According to The Washington Post, there are now 854,000 people with “Top Secret” security clearance working at some 3,000 different intelligence agencies and private firms at a cost of some $75 billion annually.
A free daily digest of the biggest news stories of the day - and the best features from our website
Thank you for signing up to TheWeek. You will receive a verification email shortly.
There was a problem. Please refresh the page and try again.
Bigger doesn’t always mean better, said Doyle McManus in the Los Angeles Times. Further proof of that truism could be found last week in The Washington Post’s three-part exposé of the U.S. intelligence industry, which since 9/11 has ballooned into a sprawling “intelligence leviathan.” Federal spending on intelligence has more than doubled, and there are now 854,000 people with “Top Secret” security clearance employed at some 3,000 different intelligence agencies and private firms, at a cost to taxpayers of some $75 billion annually. This bloated bureaucracy isn’t necessarily keeping us safer, said Steven Pearlstein in The Washington Post. There is so much redundancy in the system, so much “wasteful duplication of effort,” that all these agencies have wound up competing rather than cooperating.
The Post’s series was a politically motivated hit job, said Rowan Scarborough in Human Events Online. During the 1990s, the Clinton administration left the intelligence agencies broken, underfunded, and demoralized, just as Osama bin Laden was creating al Qaida. After 9/11, the Bush administration saw the “urgent need for unique expertise,” and brought in private contractors with specialized skills, created new computer systems and satellites, and expanded the CIA and National Security Agency. It was a “robust response by a nation at war,” and the interception of terrorist communications, data mining, and other sophisticated intelligence programs surely stopped many subsequent attacks from succeeding. In counterterrorism, redundancy can be “a good thing,” said Dan Drezner in ForeignPolicy.com. Having multiple agencies working independently to identify threats greatly reduces the risk that any particular threat will be missed.
That sounds good in theory, said Fred Kaplan in Slate.com. But in practice, the intelligence industry has become so “crushingly complex” that no single agency—let alone a single individual—has a clear picture of who is responsible for what. Which intelligence programs are producing useful information? Which aren’t? Does one agency have pieces of a puzzle that another agency is missing? High-ranking government officials admit that no one really knows. And since everything in this massive new subculture is top secret, it’s nearly impossible for Congress or other outsiders to conduct a real top-to-bottom review. Our intelligence-gathering system has “spiraled out of control,” and we may one day come to regret it.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Continue reading for free
We hope you're enjoying The Week's refreshingly open-minded journalism.
Subscribed to The Week? Register your account with the same email as your subscription.
Sign up to our 10 Things You Need to Know Today newsletter
A free daily digest of the biggest news stories of the day - and the best features from our website
-
All about Zealandia, the Earth’s potential 8th continent
The Explainer The secret continent went undiscovered for over 300 years
By Devika Rao Published
-
A reckoning over looted art
The Explainer Thousands of artifacts in U.S. and European collections were stolen from their countries of origin. Should they be sent back?
By The Week Staff Published
-
A surge in surge pricing
Feature And more of the week's best financial insight
By The Week Staff Published