reply to Judge Posner' by Philip Zelikow ex dir 9/11 panel

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

...... Forwarded Message .......
From: Philip Zelikow <pdz6n () virginia edu>
To: "'Dave Farber'" <dave () farber net>

Judge Posner's article is a healthy contribution.  It praises the entire
narrative -- an "improbable literary triumph" -- and does not engage it.
Left to be at least a little provocative, the book review focuses almost
entirely on a few of the policy recommendations.  There he stimulates people
to think harder about our ideas -- a good thing that may result in a deeper
appreciation of what we have done.  

On the subject he selects, Posner perceptively identifies the temptation to
construct policy recommendations that do something -- the predisposition to
tinker, to construct recommendations that appear to be responsive even if
substantively they are not.  The Commission could easily have fallen prey to
this temptation. 

Judge Posner likes most of the recommendations he comments upon in detail.
But his premise on the intelligence recommendation seems to be that he can't
see how a better managed intelligence community could have made much
difference.  He does not disagree with our diagnosis of the failings.  He
instead seems to find them largely immaterial to his depiction of the
problem.  Therefore why bother, especially since he argues that surprises
are practically inevitable.  

It is hard to know what an intelligence community with a sensible management
structure and a real management strategy for this new challenge could have
accomplished.  Our basic premise, admittedly optimistic, is that good,
strong management of a 30-40 billion dollar enterprise so central to
countering terrorism is better than bad or weak management of it.  This is
true even though the good results cannot be specified with precision in
advance.  Good management is an enabler.  

Since we cannot rewrite history it cannot be evident what, if anything, DCI
Tenet could have done with such authority during the 1990s.  But the
particular management abilities of DCI Tenet should not matter much in
deciding whether his successor should inherit a more manageable system.

In chapter 11 we did offer some particular arguments on the salience of
intelligence analysis and management to the 9/11 story.  We also summarized
maladies -- including deficiencies in high policy -- that went beyond
intelligence.  Judge Posner did not directly engage these arguments. 

The headline is a "dissent," but the text of Judge Posner's essay shows his
opinion is 'concurring in part and dissenting in part.'  He in fact seems to
be concurring with most and dissenting from little.  One of the unfortunate
characteristics of the public debate on the Commission debate has been the
disproportionate focus on the intelligence reorganization recommendations at
the expense of almost everything else.  One of the puzzles of Judge Posner's
essay is that he reinforces this phenomenon even as he decries it.

End text.

Philip Zelikow


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/