(2 of 2)
But there was also a quieter and potentially more profound reaction: Given the skill of this operation, how trustworthy are the other sources the CIA has been using to help target its drone attacks against al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Pakistan? The standard claim has been that the CIA's human intelligence against al-Qaeda--and other threats--has improved dramatically in recent years. "In a very perverse way, this attack may be the best testimony of all that human intelligence has improved," said the former official. But spies are, by nature, paranoid, and there will be suspicion now that any new and even some trusted sources are "dangles"--that is, double agents working for al-Qaeda. This could cripple future operations. "People tend to get very cautious in a hurry when this sort of thing happens," says Bob Baer, a former covert operator. "Remember, [James] Angleton tore the place apart looking for Soviet moles."
Suddenly, every aspect of the intelligence community's work in Afghanistan is being called into question. According to a report, made public--remarkably--by Major General Michael Flynn, military intelligence has been "ignorant" about the local power structures in combat areas, imperiling U.S. troops on the ground. And it is likely that the attack on FOB Chapman will spill over into the efforts to train the Afghan army and police--which was always an iffy proposition and now faces a massive security question: How many of these trainees are actually reporting to Mullah Omar and bin Laden? After eight years in Afghanistan, is it possible that we're still fighting blind?