WIREDGOV

The US Intelligence Community is under sustained attack from its own government. Countries like the UK will try to minimise the fallout but will have to consider the US a less reliable intelligence partner for the duration of the crisis.

The US Intelligence Community is under attack. That in itself is not news – its officers wage a daily, usually unseen struggle with adversary services from countries like Russia, China and Iran. What is new is that this adversary now sits in Washington DC: the current US administration. It knows precisely where US intelligence is vulnerable and how to wound it.

The Call is Coming from Inside the House

Clashes between intelligence professionals and political leaders are not unusual. After events like the Iraq War, or Russia’s expanded invasion of Ukraine, politicians have often demanded reforms or new leadership. But the scale and intensity of the current upheaval is almost unprecedented, and probably not matched by anything seen in more than a generation

Within seven months of President Donald Trump's inauguration, the heads of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the National Security Agency (NSA) have been forced out, along with the NSA's deputy, the acting Chair of the National Intelligence Council (NIC), and other intelligence officials. FBI officials linked to investigations of 6 January or Trump’s earlier conduct have been sidelined. Serving intelligence staff have seen their security clearances stripped: a career-ending punishment. Units dealing with election interference and foreign influence had their mandates curtailed or disbanded. In effect, Washington has launched a purge of its own intelligence apparatus.

It is the 'Russia, Russia, Russia Hoax'

The rationale is no secret. Senior officials, most notably Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and FBI Director Kash Patel, say they are cleansing the community of 'politicisation' and 'abuse' supposedly committed under Democratic administrations. The core of their case is that US intelligence abetted what Trump calls the 'Russia collusion hoax' or in Gabbard’s phrase a 'years-long coup against the president'.

The allegation is grave, but the evidence is thin. Declassified material has not disproved the 2016 Intelligence Community Assessment on Russian interference. Instead, it shows the assessment was produced under pressure and at speed – uncomfortable but familiar conditions for analysts facing urgent, high-profile questions. Journalistic reviews have found the administration's claims conflate different issues, confusing Russian influence operations with hacking attempts. The charge of a grand conspiracy remains unsubstantiated.

From briefing the Russians on intelligence reportedly provided by another country, to tweeting unaltered US imagery, or leaking UK counter-terrorism investigations, recent administrations have been remarkably lax about protecting both their own and others' secrets

Nor do the leading accusers carry much credibility. Gabbard has often been criticised for minimising Russian and Syrian behaviour in the Middle East. Ratcliffe, initially rejected in the previous Trump Administration as too inexperienced for the DNI post, later moved away from his stated intention to be 'apolitical'. Patel clashed with other officials in the first Trump administration's national security team as he bounced from role to role and was later described as 'untrustworthy, cancerous with staff'. Their crusade reads less like reform and more like retaliation against unwelcome analysis.

Click here for the full press release