(3 of 3)
Q. Isn't collecting technological secrets pretty much what the KGB is up to?
A. The KGB may have disappeared, but the interests of the Russian intelligence service in Western technology continues. We see operations, attempted recruitments. Their resources have been reduced, but they are more highly focused now than before. As a matter of fact, we sense that the military intelligence, the GRU, has become more aggressive in seeking technical secrets.
Q. Have any other former Soviet republics begun spying?
A. None that have come to my attention.
Q. Why won't the intelligence community accept the notion that a reduced international threat can result in reduced intelligence budgets?
A. We've already taken hits. We've lost billions of dollars. This has caused substantial personal cuts. In real terms our 1993 budget is a 2.5% cut. But it's the President's decision, not mine. When the President and Secretary of Defense proposed a further $50 billion in cuts, they didn't take a single nickel of it from the intelligence budget. I think that says something about their priorities. They are prepared to cut defense in lieu of intelligence.
Q. But doesn't this represent an ostrichlike refusal to acknowledge the vast decrease in the threat to U.S. security?
A. My job is not to defend a particular budget level. My job is to tell people these are the requirements you want me to collect and analyze, and this is the amount of money I think it will take to do that job responsibly. If the Congress and the Administration tell me I have to spend less on intelligence, then I intend to tell them what they have to give up.