June 18, 2009

The men and women who join U.S. intelligence organizations are patriots who choose to serve their country in silence and not for public recognition. Most labor for years in anonymity - some risking their lives in the process - without being able to discuss their work. Their achievements are usually shrouded in secrecy. Given the sensitive nature of their work, Congress historically has been deferential to intelligence officers not accused of wrongdoing and has avoided drawing them into political disputes. That is, until now.

On May 4, Philip Mudd, a veteran intelligence officer who has worked for the CIA and the FBI, was nominated to be undersecretary for intelligence and analysis at the Department of Homeland Security. Last week, Mudd withdrew his nomination out of concern that attacks by Senate Democrats over his work on anti-terror programs would be a "distraction" to the Obama administration. This past November, CIA officer John Brennan pulled his nomination to be CIA deputy director for the same reason.

Democrats are using highly qualified intelligence officers as pawns in a political game. These officers are being punished not for any wrongdoing but for their success in administering innovative anti-terror programs that kept our nation safe from terrorist attack over the last seven years. The programs they helped run were not rogue operations; they were briefed to, reviewed by, and funded by Congress. Indeed, the record shows that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi was among the U.S. lawmakers who were briefed on these programs from the start.

Given the previous congressional support for anti-terrorism programs, intelligence officers were confused when Pelosi said during a May 14 press conference (in response to a question about whether the CIA had briefed her on these programs), "They [the CIA] mislead us all the time." Pelosi later answered "yes" when asked whether she believed the CIA had lied to her. The speaker has ignored Republican demands that she either apologize for accusing the CIA of lying or present evidence to back up her claim. While CIA director Leon Panetta responded to Pelosi's comments by defending agency employees, there is not much Panetta can do by himself to reverse the effects of recent Democratic political attacks on U.S. intelligence.

President Obama, unfortunately, has been part of the problem. His statement that the CIA committed "mistakes" in its interrogation programs, along with his decision to release memos on terrorist interrogations, sent a message to intelligence professionals that he will not stand behind them.
It's time to stop this assault on our intelligence community, which is not just wrong but also dangerous. It is having a chilling effect that is discouraging risk-taking and robbing U.S. officials of crucial intelligence. The United States faces serious threats from radical jihadists, weapons proliferation, and global economic turmoil. We need an intelligence corps that is prepared to take responsible risks without fear of being undercut by changing political moods.

Philip Mudd's withdrawal of his nomination should be a wake-up call. It is vital that President Obama and congressional Democratic leaders stop politicizing U.S. intelligence and attacking our intelligence professionals.

- Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R., Mich.) is the ranking member on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence

Read the Article