Update:

A poster’s comment suggests that I might have been uncritical in accepting this report at face value. Here’s some background:

“Perhaps the most severe competition in our government today is between the Special Forces in the DOD and the CIA over who runs clandestine operations” – Chalmers Johnson, in Counterpunch, May 6, 2010

From Pratap Chatterjee at IPS:

“Mike Furlong, a top Pentagon official, is alleged to have run a covert network of contractors to supply information for drone strikes and assassinations in Afghanistan and Pakistan for the U.S. government.
The contract built upon his decade-long experience in running propaganda programmes for the military in Bosnia, Kosovo and Iraq.

Officially, Furlong worked in strategic communications for Gen. David Petraeus, the head of the U.S. Central Command. In reality, Furlong was in charge of a project titled “CAPSTONE” under which he hired former C.I.A. and Special Forces operatives who helped him gather intelligence on the whereabouts of “suspected militants and the location of insurgent camps” that was then transmitted to high-ranking Pentagon and CIA officials for “possible lethal action in Afghanistan and Pakistan.”

To do this, Furlong tapped the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organisation, a Pentagon research organisation to reduce the threat from roadside bombs, to provide him with a 24.6-million-dollar pot of money via two obscure contracting offices – the Cultural Engagement Group at the Special Operations Command Central in Tampa, Florida, and the Counter Narcoterrorism Technology Programme Office in Dahlgren, Virginia.

With this money, he hired a newly minted company called International Media Ventures (IMV) of St. Petersburg, Florida, and attempted to subcontract other individuals and companies to run surveillance operations in South Asia.

One of the companies Furlong attempted to subcontract was AfPax Insider, a subscription service run by Robert Young Pelton, author of “The World’s Most Dangerous Places”, and Eason Jordan, a former chief news executive for CNN. After learning more about what Furlong wanted to do, Pelton told IPS that he opted out of the programme in late 2009.

“When we suspected what he was doing, we protested. That moral stand cost us millions,” he said.

At the time Pelton made his concerns known to IPS that Furlong might have set up IMV for clandestine operations. He says that he told Furlong that “kinetic action” (i.e., drone strikes) was incompatible with “the now accepted counterinsurgency strategy.”

In a front page news story written by Mark Mazetti and Dexter Filkins in the New York Times on Monday, Furlong’s secret operation was exposed after the Central Intelligence Agency filed an official complaint with the Pentagon’s inspector general.

The New York Times reports that Furlong boasted to unnamed military officials that “a group of suspected militants carrying rockets by mule over the border had been singled out and killed as a result of his efforts.”

And from  the opposite side of the political spectrum, Big Journalism:

“Emasculated, the only thing the CIA is capable of these days is sitting by the roadside throwing stones at the brave men and women who pass by on the way to courageously taking the fight to our enemies.

And as these men and women fight, there’s a despicable tactic occasionally employed in the world of espionage.  It’s known as graymail.  Graymail is when one party threatens to expose a nation’s classified information unless (and until) it gets what it wants. In this case, Pelton and Jordan will keep talking to anyone who’ll listen until they get what they want.  And orchestrating everything, like one of the jealous, ugly stepsisters in Cinderella, is the Central Intelligence Agency.

Make no mistake, the CIA badly wants to humiliate the Department of Defense; even if it means destroying a great man like Mike Furlong in the process.  Gotta love that graymail.

This is nothing more than a shakedown, plain and simple.  It’s also something the CIA should be extremely ashamed of, especially considering that an agency which once so prided itself on tradecraft has, in this case, been so incredibly obvious.

Think about it.  What are the odds that at a time when the CIA, Pelton, and Jordan were all upset with the Department of Defense, a memo was magically written and fortuitously leaked by the CIA station chief in Kabul complaining about “Furlong’s activities”?  What an incredible coincidence!  (And if you indeed believe it was a coincidence, I’ve got some original photos of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid spitting on Lenin’s grave I’d like to sell you.)

Anyone with a modicum of brain power can see what’s going on here.  If the Central Intelligence Agency would put half as much effort into repairing its own damaged house as it has into spewing venom at the D.O.D. and besmirching the character of an exceptional and honorable warrior like Mike Furlong, our nation would be a hell of a lot safer (despite what our clueless Leon Panetta says) than it is now.”

Well, from that, it seems that interdepartmental feuding might have something to do with the report (although that too is nothing new).

The New York Times reports on the expansion of US surveillance in several Middle Eastern countries:

“The top American commander in the Middle East has ordered a broad expansion of clandestine military activity in an effort to disrupt militant groups or counter threats in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Somalia and other countries in the region, according to defense officials and military documents.

The secret directive, signed in September by Gen. David H. Petraeus, authorizes the sending of American Special Operations troops to both friendly and hostile nations in the Middle East, Central Asia and the Horn of Africa to gather intelligence and build ties with local forces. Officials said the order also permits reconnaissance that could pave the way for possible military strikes in Iran if tensions over its nuclear ambitions escalate.

While the Bush administration had approved some clandestine military activities far from designated war zones, the new order is intended to make such efforts more systematic and long term, officials said. Its goals are to build networks that could “penetrate, disrupt, defeat or destroy” Al Qaeda and other militant groups, as well as to “prepare the environment” for future attacks by American or local military forces, the document said. The order, however, does not appear to authorize offensive strikes in any specific countries.

In broadening its secret activities, the United States military has also sought in recent years to break its dependence on the Central Intelligence Agency and other spy agencies for information in countries without a significant American troop presence.

General Petraeus’s order is meant for small teams of American troops to fill intelligence gaps about terror organizations and other threats in the Middle East and beyond, especially emerging groups plotting attacks against the United States.

But some Pentagon officials worry that the expanded role carries risks. The authorized activities could strain relationships with friendly governments like Saudi Arabia or Yemen — which might allow the operations but be loath to acknowledge their cooperation — or incite the anger of hostile nations like Iran and Syria. Many in the military are also concerned that as American troops assume roles far from traditional combat, they would be at risk of being treated as spies if captured and denied the Geneva Convention protections afforded military detainees.

The precise operations that the directive authorizes are unclear, and what the military has done to follow through on the order is uncertain. The document, a copy of which was viewed by The New York Times, provides few details about continuing missions or intelligence-gathering operations.

Several government officials who described the impetus for the order would speak only on condition of anonymity because the document is classified. Spokesmen for the White House and the Pentagon declined to comment for this article. The Times, responding to concerns about troop safety raised by an official at United States Central Command, the military headquarters run by General Petraeus, withheld some details about how troops could be deployed in certain countries.

The seven-page directive appears to authorize specific operations in Iran, most likely to gather intelligence about the country’s nuclear program or identify dissident groups that might be useful for a future military offensive. The Obama administration insists that for the moment, it is committed to penalizing Iran for its nuclear activities only with diplomatic and economic sanctions. Nevertheless, the Pentagon has to draw up detailed war plans to be prepared in advance, in the event that President Obama ever authorizes a strike.

“The Defense Department can’t be caught flat-footed,” said one Pentagon official with knowledge of General Petraeus’s order.

The directive, the Joint Unconventional Warfare Task Force Execute Order, signed Sept. 30, may also have helped lay a foundation for the surge of American military activity in Yemen that began three months later.

Special Operations troops began working with Yemen’s military to try to dismantle Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, an affiliate of Osama bin Laden’s terror network based in Yemen. The Pentagon has also carried out missile strikes from Navy ships into suspected militant hideouts and plans to spend more than $155 million equipping Yemeni troops with armored vehicles, helicopters and small arms.

Officials said that many top commanders, General Petraeus among them, have advocated an expansive interpretation of the military’s role around the world, arguing that troops need to operate beyond Iraq and Afghanistan to better fight militant groups.

The order, which an official said was drafted in close coordination with Adm. Eric T. Olson, the officer in charge of the United States Special Operations Command, calls for clandestine activities that “cannot or will not be accomplished” by conventional military operations or “interagency activities,” a reference to American spy agencies.

While the C.I.A. and the Pentagon have often been at odds over expansion of clandestine military activity, most recently over intelligence gathering by Pentagon contractors in Pakistan and Afghanistan, there does not appear to have been a significant dispute over the September order.

A spokesman for the C.I.A. declined to confirm the existence of General Petraeus’s order, but said that the spy agency and the Pentagon had a “close relationship” and generally coordinate operations in the field.

“There’s more than enough work to go around,” said the spokesman, Paul Gimigliano. “The real key is coordination. That typically works well, and if problems arise, they get settled.”

During the Bush administration, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld endorsed clandestine military operations, arguing that Special Operations troops could be as effective as traditional spies, if not more so.

Unlike covert actions undertaken by the C.I.A., such clandestine activity does not require the president’s approval or regular reports to Congress, although Pentagon officials have said that any significant ventures are cleared through the National Security Council. Special Operations troops have already been sent into a number of countries to carry out reconnaissance missions, including operations to gather intelligence about airstrips and bridges.

Some of Mr. Rumsfeld’s initiatives were controversial, and met with resistance by some at the State Department and C.I.A. who saw the troops as a backdoor attempt by the Pentagon to assert influence outside of war zones. In 2004, one of the first groups sent overseas was pulled out of Paraguay after killing a pistol-waving robber who had attacked them as they stepped out of a taxi.

A Pentagon order that year gave the military authority for offensive strikes in more than a dozen countries, and Special Operations troops carried them out in Syria, Pakistan and Somalia.

In contrast, General Petraeus’s September order is focused on intelligence gathering — by American troops, foreign businesspeople, academics or others — to identify militants and provide “persistent situational awareness,” while forging ties to local indigenous groups.”

My Comment

Just a quick break down of the salient facts to make sure you get the gist of this:

1.  General Petraeus (top US commander in the Middle East) has tasked the military to take up espionage, hitherto the provenance of the CIA.

Army officers and personnel are now going to be spooks.

2.  The military is going to be spying in hostile (as defined by Petraeus and the Pentagon) as well as friendly countries in “the Middle East, Horn of Africa, and Central Asia.”

Frankly, I’m not confident that this espionage will stop just there. It’s a license to spy anywhere in the world, on “our” side and on “theirs.”

3. It’s not just the military that will be spying, but also “businessmen and academics.” I wonder how foreign countries will react. Will they want to continue doing business with the US? Will they engage in more counter espionage?

Another point. Not only will all military personnel/American businessmen/academics from now on be automatically suspected of spying, if they get caught at it, they’re going to be treated as spies. Spies aren’t accorded the same treatment as fighting men on the field, but suffer much harsher sanctions. No Geneva Conventions for spies.

4. The spying does not have to be authorized by the President and can take place without reporting to Congress. This is the most astonishing part. The military leadership can simply initiate activities without anyone the executive (or, with less novelty, the legislative branch) knowing about it.

Note: Similar programs have been in force for a while now, including the Joint Special Ops Command (JSOC), the executive assassination ring (reporting to Vice President Cheney , and P2OG, but, if I’m not mistaken, they would have required authorization from the executive to be initiated. In addition, they involved military special forces.  I’m not sure that civilians and businessmen in the US have previously been inducted into espionage in quite this way.