Covert Operations
Covert operations refer to secretive actions taken by a government to influence political, economic, or military conditions in another country without disclosing its involvement. These operations can encompass a wide range of activities, including direct military actions and various forms of propaganda. The United States has a significant history of engaging in covert operations, particularly during the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, which have notably shaped global politics.
A critical distinction in the realm of covert operations is between "covert" and "clandestine" actions. While covert operations aim to conceal the identity of the sponsoring state, clandestine operations focus on obfuscating the operation itself. Legal frameworks surrounding covert operations can be vague, particularly in the U.S., where laws allow the Department of Defense to undertake such actions with minimal oversight. Notable examples include U.S. involvement in conflicts like the Vietnam War and the more recent Timber Sycamore operation, where support was provided to Syrian rebel groups.
In contemporary contexts, electronic covert operations, often referred to as cyberwarfare, have emerged as a prominent method, illustrated by the Stuxnet incident targeting Iran's nuclear facilities. The use of private contractors for covert operations has sparked debate, especially concerning legal and ethical implications. Overall, covert operations represent a complex and often controversial aspect of foreign policy, influencing international relations while raising questions about legality and accountability.
Covert Operations
Summary
This primer on covert operations details definitions, examples, and impacts on foreign policy and intelligence analysis. It primarily focuses on US covert operations, as the United States has been involved and continues to play a role in many reported operations. Furthermore, US covert operationsalong with its NATO alliessignificantly impacted world politics in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries.
Covert operations are "operations that seek to influence political, economic, or military conditions abroad without exposing or highlighting the role of the state conducting them." According to Elkus, "because of the multiplicity of forms that cover operations can take, it is difficult to generally describe [covert operations]." There is a broad tactical spectrum of covert operations, ranging from direct action to propaganda campaigns. Sometimes, a covert operation is so large it cannot be denied—for example, some US drone strikes in Afghanistan.
However, operations "conducted secretly to preserve tactical surprise, but then acknowledged after the fact" are not technically considered covert. A good example of this is the killing of Osama Bin Laden. US soldiers entered Pakistan secretly, but President Obama made a public announcement describing the mission after the mission was carried out. An important distinction should be made when considering covert and clandestine operations. The critical distinction is that clandestine operations obfuscate the operations' sponsor as much as possible. Naturally, there is overlap, and intelligence agencies like the CIA deal in covert and clandestine affairs. Generally, clandestine is most frequently paired with intelligence gathering, while covert is associated with a specific action.
In-Depth Overview
While true that covert operations are broad and impact a considerable swath of international relations, the following concepts are relevant to modern usage:
Legality: In the United States, laws governing covert action are vague. Some laws are designed to keep the CIA in contact with Congress as much as possible. However, no laws regarding the Department of Defense exist. According to one interpretation of the law, the "Defense Department can conduct covert operations abroad without local governments' permission and with little or no Congressional oversight or recourse."
Policy: Covert operations undoubtedly affect foreign policy. However, most governments are comfortable withor at least acceptthe notion that allies spy on one another. Problems generally arise when agents enter foreign soil, do something they are not allowed to, and get caught. Not only is this embarrassing for the sponsor nation, but it also makes the host nation leery of future cooperation.
A good example of this problem is the 2010 Mossad assassination of Mahmoud Al-Mabhouha high-ranking member of Hamasin Dubai. When tapes were released to news outlets, an eleven-person team was caught on camera and made world news. This operation also revealed that Mossad was assuming the identities of European foreign nationals while traveling—an act European governments did not appreciate.
Intelligence: Some scholarsespecially in the USsuggest intelligence delivered to policymakers is shaped by analysts' positive bias. Factors for this bias include public opinion, the value of strategic intelligence, and interagency competition. It is argued American intelligence agencies will push for covert operations to secure "organizational goods" such as budgets, autonomy, and influence.
Examples: The most well-known American covert operations are campaigns with specific agendas, not ad-hoc missions. Such campaigns include paramilitary operations in Laos during the Vietnam War, the Iran-Contra affair in Nicaragua, and operations in Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation. Reports emerged in 2009 that the private military company Academiformerly Xe and Blackwaterpaired with US Special Forces to conduct operations inside Pakistan. Another known example is Timber Sycamore (2012-2017), in which the US CIA supplied training, weapons, and equipment to the rebel Free Syrian Army.
Legality
In the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, much of the legal discussion around security in the US focused on domestic surveillance. Before 9/11, however, foreign security garnered the most attention from lawmakers. The last significant alterations to laws governing covert operations occurred in 1991 as part of the Intelligence Authorization Act. The act intended to prevent the controversy caused by the Iran-Contra affair. It created two requirements for covert operations:
- There must be a written presidential findingwhich cannot be issued retroactivelystating that the action is important to US national security.
- The sitting administration must notify the House and Senate intelligence committees of the action as soon as possible after the finding has been issued and before the operation has begun. A built-in provision allows for "extraordinary circumstances," and in that case, the president must inform the committees "in a timely fashion."
The law binds "any department, agency, or entity of the United States Government" to this reporting framework. However, "traditional… military activities or routine support to such activities" are exempt—and that is why it is possible for US Special Forces to operate autonomouslylegally speakingwithin active theaters of war, such as the Middle East.
Contractors
The use of contractors in covert operations is an increasingly controversial subject. Most contractors who participate in covert operations are former Special Forces soldiers who elect to work in the private sectortypically receiving significantly greater compensation, comparatively. The United States employs contractors when they "don't have enough soldiers." In late 2009, news broke that the US was using contractors to assassinate "high-value" targets and conduct other "sensitive actions" inside Pakistan.
Naturally, these types of actions create tension between the two nations involved. It also ventures into uncharted legal territory. According to retired Army Lt. Col. Jeffrey Addicott, a former senior legal counsel for Army Special Forces:
"We are using contractors for things that in the past might have been considered a violation of the Geneva Convention. If we were subjected to the International Criminal Court, some of these guys could easily be picked up, charged with war crimes, and put on trial. That's one of the reasons we're not members of the International Criminal Court."
Electronic Covert Operations
Covert Operations in the twenty-first century have transformed such that electronic mediagenerally called cyberwarfarehas become a preferred arena. A prime example is an alleged 2010 incident where US and Israeli operatives cooperated to infiltrate a computer worm called Stuxnet into software that controlled centrifuges that were part of Iranian nuclear reactors. The reactors were used at an Iranian research facility alleged to be manufacturing weapons-grade fissionable material for atomic weaponry. The worm allegedly caused the Iranian centrifuges to spin at excessive and destructive high rates of speed while simultaneously masking control software from detecting the malfunction. The covert operation, reported in the press but not officially acknowledged by the US or Israeli governments, is thought to have disrupted the Iranian program for two years.
Bibliography
Aronsson-Storrier, Marie. Publicity in International Lawmaking: Covert Operations and the Use of Force. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2000.
De Bruin, Erica. "Covert Operations Fail More Than Not, So Why Do Leaders Order Them?" Modern War Institute at West Point, 30 Sept. 2021, mwi.westpoint.edu/covert-operations-fail-more-often-than-not-so-why-do-leaders-order-them. Accessed 21 Aug. 2024.
Elkus, Adam, “Covert Operations and Policy”, Infinity Journal, vol. 2, no. 1, Winter 2011, pages 13-16.
Fruhlinger, Josh. "Stuxnet Explained: The First Known Cyberweapon." CSO, 31 Aug. 2022, www.csoonline.com/article/562691/stuxnet-explained-the-first-known-cyberweapon.html. Accessed 21 Aug. 2024.
Kibbe, Jennifer D. "The Rise of the Shadow Warriors." Foreign Affairs,
Scahill, Jeremy. "The Secret US War in Pakistan." The Nation, 7 Dec. 2009, www.thenation.com/article/archive/secret-us-war-pakistan.
Stiefler, Todd. "CIA's Leadership and Major Covert Operations: Rogue Elephants or Risk-Averse Bureaucrats?" Intelligence and National