Our Unilateral Counterterrorism Operations in Somalia

A detainee in what Jeremy Scahill describes as “a secret prison buried in the basement of Somalia’s National Security Agency (NSA) headquarters, where prisoners suspected of being Shabab members or of having links to the group are held”–one with key US involvement–describes his internment this way.

I have been here for one year, seven months. I have been interrogated so many times. Interrogated by Somali men and white men. Every day. New faces show up. They have nothing on me. I have never seen a lawyer, never seen an outsider. Only other prisoners, interrogators, guards. Here there is no court or tribunal.

Scahill’s entire article, describing our counterterrorism efforts in Somalia, is of course a must read, particularly given questions raised by the Ahmed Abdulkadir Warsame indictment.

But given my non-debate with Benjamin Wittes about drones and sovereignty (though these programs go far beyond drone strikes), I wanted to point to Scahill’s description of the arrangement the US has with Somalia in this.

According to well-connected Somali sources, the CIA is reluctant to deal directly with Somali political leaders, who are regarded by US officials as corrupt and untrustworthy. Instead, the United States has Somali intelligence agents on its payroll. Somali sources with knowledge of the program described the agents as lining up to receive $200 monthly cash payments from Americans. “They support us in a big way financially,” says the senior Somali intelligence official. “They are the largest [funder] by far.”

[snip]

It is unclear how much control, if any, Somalia’s internationally recognized president, Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed, has over this counterterrorism force or if he is even fully briefed on its operations. The CIA personnel and other US intelligence agents “do not bother to be in touch with the political leadership of the country. And that says a lot about the intentions,” says Aynte. “Essentially, the CIA seems to be operating, doing the foreign policy of the United States. You should have had State Department people doing foreign policy, but the CIA seems to be doing it across the country.”

While the Somali officials interviewed for this story said the CIA is the lead US agency coordinating the Mogadishu counterterrorism program, they also indicated that US military intelligence agents are at times involved. When asked if they are from JSOC or the Defense Intelligence Agency, the senior Somali intelligence official responded, “We don’t know. They don’t tell us.”

Not only is the bulk of our relationship with Somalia going through these intelligence channels to intelligence channels. But it also relies on African Union forces.

The [defense bill authorizing increased counterterrorism support in Somalia], however, did not authorize additional funding for Somalia’s military, as the country’s leaders have repeatedly asked. Instead, the aid package would dramatically increase US arming and financing of AMISOM’s forces, particularly from Uganda and Burundi, as well as the militaries of Djibouti, Kenya and Ethiopia.

I understand that Somalia is one of the most challenging places to work, given the absence of any viable state (save, perhaps, al-Shabaab). But our direct–and secret–control of other territories is worth thinking seriously about.

image_print
18 replies
  1. DWBartoo says:

    Thought-provoking, indeed.

    Clearly, if the US intends to dominate the world, as it must, if simply to control whistle-blowers, then being immeshed in the “security apparatus” of various nations or psuedo-states would seem even more promising than playing footsie with the vagaries of foreign intrigue and “alien” politicians, and naturally, over time, the political classess of various nations will become more docile and ammenable to Washington’s dictates.

    What could possumly go wrong?

    DW

  2. marksb says:

    I read this and I don’t see a “policy” at work. Seems more like a rogue operation. The thing that I wonder is if the CIA leadership in charge of this operation is coordinating in any useful way with the folks in the Administration and State that are charged with strategic policy. Who is dictating the mission, the rules of engagement, the communications channels, the coordination with the U.S. State Dept?
    Cowboys in Africa.

    • Garrett says:

      One of the ways a murky CIA/JSOC/Somali intelligence joint operation would be doctrine, and not a rouge operation, is under the “Comprehensive Approach“. The working at levels below national leadership strikes me as being a direct implementation of it.

        • Garrett says:

          A hopefully better link to the Marine paper on Comprehensive Approach.

          And from last year, a reference about it, in the Review Report of the Quadrennial Review Report:

          The need for enhanced “whole of government” capabilities will be driven by the complex operating conditions, strong potential for civilian interaction, and the need in many cases to work closely with the agencies of a foreign government. It is in the interest of the Department of Defense to work closely with the National Security Council, the State Department, State/AID, and DHS to develop support for more enhanced civilian capability and for putting into operation “whole of government” and Comprehensive Approach solutions to security challenges.

          Comprehensive Approach is a deep intertwining of Military, Intelligence, State, NGOs, foreign militias, and just about everything else, with military needs as the driver.

          Don Rumsfeld dressed down a bit to bring the NGOs in. When, of course, it is a very very bad thing for an NGO to get intertwined with Don Rumsfeld.

          Provincial Reconstruction Teams in Afghanistan is a prime example of the approach.

  3. workingclass says:

    Heh. The Spooks are out of control. You picked up on that. The CIA has traditionally been the president’s private secret army. I guess somewhere in the constitution it says the president will also be an emperor and will have a private secret army to enforce his will abroad. It’s not surprising that they have gone into business for themselves.

  4. Ironcomments says:

    Again I must refer to the words of Truman about the agency he created.
    “… For some time I have been disturbed by the way CIA has been diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the Government. This has led to trouble and may have compounded our difficulties in several explosive areas.
    I never had any thought that when I set up the CIA that it would be injected into peacetime cloak and dagger operations. Some of the complications and embarrassment I think we have experienced are in part attributable to the fact that this quiet intelligence arm of the President has been so removed from its intended role that it is being interpreted as a symbol of sinister and mysterious foreign intrigue—and a subject for cold war enemy propaganda.
    With all the nonsense put out by Communist propaganda about “Yankee imperialism,” “exploitive capitalism,” “war-mongering,” “monopolists,” in their name-calling assault on the West, the last thing we needed was for the CIA to be seized upon as something akin to a subverting influence in the affairs of other people…There is something about the way the CIA has been functioning that is casting a shadow over our historic position and I feel that we need to correct it.”

    The satrap of Somalia really isn’t that different from our future colony of Afghanistan except that the U.S. just gave up on the facade of using diplomatic and legal channels to run the country through some puppet leader.

  5. marksb says:

    OK, all good points, and I’m wondering if we are seeing this “devine knowledge” thing that conservatives act out. I mean the way they KNOW they are right–like they have an absolute knowledge from God–and anyone with a different viewpoint (especially if it’s “liberal”) are not only wrong, but evil.

    To my memory, CIA members have always been among the most conservative folks in government. I follows that perhaps they are acting based on their understanding of what is “right”, since there is basically no strategic policy in regard to Somalia. It’s a complete vacuum in terms of leadership and government control; that vacuum invites the CIA to run their version of the truth, as they see it should be.

    It’s just a theory.

  6. holeybuybull says:

    With the “unrest” in Syria and Egypt, the USA/CIA needs another country to send renditioned people for torture.

  7. MadDog says:

    …I understand that Somalia is one of the most challenging places to work, given the absence of any viable state (save, perhaps, al-Shabaab). But our direct–and secret–control of other territories is worth thinking seriously about.

    Yeah! Somalia may be the tip of the iceberg in Scahill’s piece, but I found that one of the more interesting tidbits is our operations in Kenya.

    JSOC (and soon apparently the CIA’s drone fleet) has basing facilities in Djibouti, so it looks like the ops of AFRICOM’s U.S. Special Operations Command, Africa (SOCAFRICA) are on the upswing:

    …SOCAFRICA’s objectives are to build operational capacity, strengthen regional security and capacity initiatives, implement effective communication strategies in support of strategic objectives, and eradicate violent extremist organizations and their supporting networks

    (My Bold)

    • MadDog says:

      I should also mention that while in other “area” US commands, for example CENTCOM, the vast majority of US forces are “regular” Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force units, it appears that AFRICOM is dominated by Special Operations units.

      Probably both in numbers as well as strategies, tactics, and operations.

  8. jo6pac says:

    I understand that Somalia is one of the most challenging places to work, given the absence of any viable state (save, perhaps, al-Shabaab). But our direct–and secret–control of other territories is worth thinking seriously about.

    That’s the best part of a country like this

  9. MadDog says:

    OT – More news on the Durham CIA deaths Grand Jury via Matt Apuzzo And Adam Goldman of AP:

    AP sources: Feds eye CIA officer in prisoner death

    A CIA officer who oversaw the agency’s interrogation program at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and pushed for approval to use increasingly harsh tactics has come under scrutiny in a federal war crimes investigation involving the death of a prisoner, witnesses told The Associated Press.

    Steve Stormoen, who is now retired from the CIA, supervised an unofficial program in which the CIA imprisoned and interrogated men without entering their names in the Army’s books…

    Just a guess here, but since he went public to the Erie Online, Former CIA agent David Martine may be one of the AP sources/witnesses.

    And something that I was unware of (but EW and others may have known):

    …in November 2003, CIA officers brought a prisoner, Manadel al-Jamadi, to Abu Ghraib and, instead of turning him over to the Army, took him to a shower stall. They put a sandbag over his head, handcuffed him behind his back and chained his arms to a barred window. When he leaned forward, his arms stretched painfully behind and above his back.

    The CIA interrogated al-Jamadi alone. Within an hour, he was dead…

    For some reason, I had thought the US military was doing the interrogations with CIA involvement, and not that the CIA alone was doing interrogations.

Comments are closed.