One of the most important pieces of advice my father ever gave me was to "consider the source" of an opinion.
Opinions do not materialize in the air; pure, untarnished, and shimmering with truth and justice. They come from people, and all people have their own interests and perspectives which shape their view of the world and, hence, their opinions. This is somewhat easier to see when we hear an opinion with which we disagree. But, is equally true for those opinions that agree with our own point of view.
Much is being made at the moment about a National Intelligence Estimate ("NIE") on Iraq. It was issued last April and leaked just before the mid-term elections. (An innocent coincidence, I'm sure.) The media fuss has forced President Bush to declassify portions of the NIE. The fuss has been caused by a conclusion in the NIE (starkly clear for Bush opponents, and subtly nuanced for his supporters) that the war in Iraq has increased opposition to the U.S. among radical Muslims.
I'd like to weigh in with two points.
First, NIE's are not the final word. They are often no more insightful than what one can find among the more thoughtful media commentators.
Secondly, so what?
I have read NIE's in the past. They are highly classified analyses that represent the consensus viewpoint among a dozen intelligence agencies. Each agency gets a vote on what position the NIE will take. That agency vote is, itself, the product of a consensus developed within the agency and colored by the perspective and objectives of that agency. The result is almost always the lowest common denominator (i.e. the safest and least controversial) opinion.
As an example, in 1973 the King of Jordan secretly gave the U.S. the Egyptian battle plans for their surprise attack on Israel well in advance of that attack. But, because this was inconsistent with the Intelligence Community's consensus that war was not likely, this information was not believed. Hours after the war began, the U.S. intelligence agencies were reporting to the White House that this was no more than a large border raid, it was not a war.
When the topic is technical and ample factual evidence is available, the NIE's can be brilliant and very useful. But, in most cases, the factual evidence is spotty and contradictory. The answer is not clear, and the final opinion rests upon the individual judgements of its authors.
Wise decision makers understand this, and factor it into their decisions.
Lastly, many in the media and the political world are hyperventilating over the conclusion that our actions in Iraq are generating resentment among our nation's enemies. Why is this a surprise? Does one think that those we are trying to kill or capture will support those efforts? Can one imagine that they will not use the actions of the "Great Satan" as a rallying cry to obtain more converts to their cause of terror and jihad? Can one imagine that our enemies will stop their efforts to attack the U.S. if we stop trying to defeat them?
This conclusion of the NIE is neither news or surprising. It is the expected by-product of any offensive action in war time. The question, then, is why is it being made into news?
Consider the source.
