Iraq Briefings: Don't Ask, Don't Tell
GOP and Democratic Lawmakers Frustrated as White House Reveals Little
By Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, September 15, 2002; Page A04
Sen. John McCain strode into the most secure room in the Capitol for a "top secret" briefing by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld on the threat posed by Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.
With the windowless room swept for bugs and lawmakers sworn to deepest secrecy, Rumsfeld proceeded to disclose, well, absolutely nothing this group of lawmakers couldn't have read in the morning papers or watched on TV news channels, according to participants. Actually, they weren't told even that much. "It was a joke," said McCain (R-Ariz.), who soon rose and strode out the door.
This has become an increasingly familiar scene on Capitol Hill, especially since the Bush administration blamed senators this summer for leaking classified information about top-secret intercepts of communications among terrorists in the days leading up to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
Since the leak, the White House has put even tighter controls on classified -- and unclassified -- information available to most lawmakers, even those with special intelligence clearance. The FBI is hunting the alleged leaker, even as the administration promises to consult more closely with Congress on how to deal with Hussein.
It's not the first time legislators have seethed over Bush's tight grip on classified information. Last October, members of both parties strongly objected to the president's decision -- later rescinded -- to limit sensitive briefings to eight of Congress's 535 members.
The president's distrust of lawmakers now appears to be undermining his campaign to win congressional authorization to go to war with Iraq. Rumsfeld and other top advisers are not only keeping most lawmakers in the dark about new intelligence on Iraq, but they also are aggravating relations with Congress by portraying their briefings as top-secret affairs, according to interviews with several lawmakers.
"It becomes almost insulting after a while," said McCain, a staunch supporter of Bush's Iraq policy. "Everyone that goes to them is frustrated." McCain said he's very sympathetic to White House concerns about leaks, but suggested Bush should suspend the briefings rather than go through the "charade" of acting like he's keeping lawmakers in the loop.
House Democratic Caucus Chairman Robert Menendez (N.J.) said several members are skipping the briefings rather than sign a secrecy pledge that restricts what they can and cannot talk about. "I heard nothing that was new, compelling, or that I have not heard before," said Menendez, who was briefed last week by national security adviser Condoleezza Rice and CIA Director George J. Tenet.
Bush, who Friday said he wants Congress to vote on a resolution authorizing war in the next month, has offered the briefings as a means of building support for his Iraqi plans. "The White House will continue to as fully inform as possible members of Congress, while also preserving sensitive intelligence information so no inadvertent disclosure jeopardizes sources or methods or missions," White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said in an interview.
After the handful of briefings held so far, members from both parties grumble that they're learning nothing new or revealing to back Bush's case. If this doesn't change, it could cost Bush when the resolution comes up for a vote, according to lawmakers.
"It makes it a lot harder for members who are policymakers and have a responsibility to their constituents" to vote for a resolution, Menendez said.
White House officials said they can't trust some members of Congress with classified information, which, if leaked, could jeopardize intelligence-gathering methods. "They say they will keep it quiet. They won't. They never do," said a senior White House official. This official said the president is aware of complaints but is unlikely to share much more than has been disclosed. To reveal more, the official said, "is a big risk to take."Vice President Cheney last week said in a television interview that the White House is withholding some "highly classified" information from Congress, but other officials said there's no "smoking gun" or "bombshell" being withheld.
Still, the White House seems to hold back information that might help bolster its case. Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) said they've been given access to information the public hasn't seen, and it has helped solidify their support for going to war with Iraq.
"In the briefings I have gotten, there has been additive information," Gephardt said. "But I understand some of the briefings I have not been at have not been credible or good. Members have told me of their frustrations."
A White House official said Gephardt's strong support for the war effort is evidence of a new, safer and more effective strategy for keeping key lawmakers in the know. The administration has pinpointed a select group of members in both parties whom they trust -- and whose support they need -- for more informative briefings, officials said. This helps explain why Democratic leaders are much more supportive of the Bush strategy than are rank-and-file members, the officials said.
Gephardt, for instance, had a private meeting Friday with Tenet to discuss the Iraq situation. The Missouri Democrat said the White House has gladly made top officials available to him since last September's terrorist attacks, and that as the trust has built, more information has flowed to him.
Lott talks often with Rice and others, and is Bush's most aggressive backer. Lott prodded the Senate to pass a resolution granting the president wide latitude and doing it before the United Nations Security Council votes on sending inspectors back into Iraq.
The White House plans another round of briefings this week, including more small group meetings in which more sensitive information can be shared. But unless the circle expands dramatically, some lawmakers say, many members will wonder why the administration isn't revealing anything new.
"It has us wondering," Menendez said, "if the administration does really have real, substantive, compelling information that, if shared, would change attitudes with Congress, the public and our allies."
© 2002 The Washington Post Company |
