Anyone familiar with the spy movie genre knows that the intelligence world is one wrought with big secrets, giant egos and even larger inefficiencies. Corrupt directors conspire to oust innocent, patriotic agents, but the agents always manage to escape against all odds due to a complete lack of coordination between the National Security Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency.
A recent two-year Washington Post investigation, published last Monday, reveals that this world of fiction is frighteningly similar to the real world. Top Secret America, the title of The Post's series, is described as an unthinkably complex, inefficient and potentially dangerous body of government organizations, industries, independent analysts and contractors that have arisen in the post-9/11 era ("The Secrets Next Door"). I believe that these results offer an interesting lesson for students here at Dartmouth namely, that we need to learn the importance of cooperation, the danger of ego and the beauty of simplicity.
Slate Magazine reports the numbers 1,271 government agencies and 1,931 private companies focused on intelligence and national security employ 854,000 individuals with top secret or higher clearance ("The Geek Labyrinth," July 22). While the numbers themselves are staggering, the larger issue is the lack of communication between all those employees. As retired Lieutenant General John Vines explained in Slate's article, no one has "the authority, responsibility or a process in place to coordinate all these interagency and commercial activities." For this reason, it is impossible to evaluate whether the various agencies are actually "making us more safe," Vines said. In the post-9/11 rush to beef up our intelligence system, we forsook all notions of cooperation and simplicity in favor of a mad grab for power, prestige and budget allocations. As The Post explains, the problem is not "academic issues," such as a lack of focus or shortage of resources. Instead, tragedies such as the Fort Hood shooting a 2009 mass shooting perpetrated by a U.S. Army major turned Islamic terrorist occurred due to a lack of cohesiveness and communication.
Because heads of agencies and corporations want to protect their knowledge and sources, as well as secure additional funding, they work independently rather than as a fluid whole.
Here at Dartmouth, we are blessed with an atmosphere not present at many other prestigious colleges and universities. Given our small, tight-knit student population, we have the opportunity to work more cooperatively and less competitively. Though certain fields of study will always be plagued by a "one-upmanship, get-yours" mentality, many courses and activities create opportunities for collaboration that are sadly absent in the nation's intelligence community. At Dartmouth, we can ask for help, learn lessons from peers and share knowledge and information within the bounds of the Academic Honor Code.
Although most of us probably will not end up working for national security, it is important to use this as an example of what can go wrong when we try to solve a problem by throwing money at it rather than encouraging better use of the resources we have at our disposal. While policymakers hoping to protect the nation after 9/11 had the best of intentions, their efforts instead became counter-productive.
As the next battalion of leaders in government, industry and other fields, we need to apply our Dartmouth experiences to the real world. If we are truly here to learn, we should understand that we never learn as much alone as we do with our peers. As we move on to whatever jobs we may pursue beyond Hanover, we will only continue to learn and bring about positive change through collaboration with others.
It is a sad, ironic truth expressed by those interviewed for the series that the U.S. government, because of lack of cohesion, could not have researched itself as thoroughly as The Post. As long as we continue to accept organizations that work in secrecy, isolation and competition, we will continue to fail to piece together vital information until it is too late.
All the information analysis in the world will be for naught if there is no communication or cooperation between those performing the analyses.
Take a look at The Post's website, and think about it for yourself. And if you find yourself behind a desk somewhere in 10 years making the big decisions, remember the cooperative nature of Dartmouth and just how valuable such an environment can truly be.
