Where there's smoke, there's fire.
That is a phrase routinely used by the Bureau of Diplomatic Security to support the suspension and revocation of security clearances of Foreign Service Officers, based on unsubstantiated allegations, in violation of government-wide guidelines.
We hate that phrase. And usually, it is untrue.
So we really get unhappy when someone decides to try to prove it true. As appears to be happening now.
We have been following with interest the blogs and descriptions of the case of Peter Van Buren's book, and we must say, we are becoming increasingly disappointed.
When the case first arose, it seemed open and shut. Mr. Van Buren had written a book, sought Department of State approval, complied with the written procedures, then, after there was no objection during the mandatory time period, submitted it for publication. Months later, after the book was published, the State Department had decided to object, and had contacted the publisher behind Mr. Van Buren's back to accuse him of wrongdoing and ask that the book be recalled.
The State Department clearly looked to be in the wrong. The case raised a number of important issues about how the system worked - or did not. Van Buren looked like a person who had been wronged, and against whom there was a risk of illegal retaliation.
Had the story ended there, and his clearance been suspended, there would have been no doubt. He would have clearly been the victim of retaliation. Which is why, had the matter ended there, there would have been little likelihood of his clearance being pulled, or even, really, a serious disciplinary action.
Since the story broke, however, Mr. Van Buren has been blogging up a storm, using the media exposure to flog his book. And seizing, it would appear, every opportunity to, at the very least, push further the edge of the already-bursting envelope.
In doing so, he has raised real questions about his behavior and suitability, that have nothing to do with his book.
He has blogged, for example, about his improper refusal to participate fully in the investigation of which he is the subject, and about his refusal to identify his contacts - a requirement of all holders of government clearances.
And he has, apparently knowingly, published links to information which the government, for smart reasons or stupid ones, has told employees not to access.
And about how, now that his clearance is suspended (temporarily - while under investigation), he is will be frequenting that and other sites that publish classified materials.
He's like Lindsay friggin Lohan, with fewer redeeming qualities.
In short, he has taken what could have been a clear-cut case of write and wrong (get it?) and turned it into a really good case for the supporters of DS rule-breaking to use to say: "Where there's smoke there's fire." With him fanning his own fires as a means to sell a book.
We may have meant well, in Iraq, but we are not at all sure that Mr. Van Buren means well. And his posturing does not help those of us who are trying to fix systems that truly are broken, in the way DS handles security clearances.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
Sorry I am late, I was doing navel shots with Lindsey Lohan.
To try and clarify some points:
1) I am promoting my book. So would you. I want people to read it because I think it has something to say. Like any author, I am working with the media to feature stories, write reviews, etc. The media writes stories about what is happening, so if State keeps doing things, that is what the media will write about. Nothing new.
2) Like Native Americans who think they still own Okalahoma, the Department must acknowledge the reality of Wikileaks. You can be right, but also irrelevant. For better or worse and irrespective of what you/I think, the entire world can read our cables now. We waste time and make ourselves look silly acting otherwise.
3) If DS would revoke my clearance, I would have a chance to defend myself. We all know they rarely do that, preferring to let people languish for years in "temporary status" when DS thinks they smell smoke (the police are never wrong, eh?) but the darn law does not support a revocation. This kind of action was disclaimed as early as the Magna Carta.
4) I am waiting for someone, anyone, to articulately and factualy discredit anything I wrote in the book. Prove I am wrong, argue a point with evidence. All I see are lame personal attacks against me. Who cares about me? Let's agree I am a lousy guy, mean to cats, etc. So what? That does not negate anything I wrote.
5) I put my full, real name on what I write. No web names or anonymous crap.
Gotta go. Lindsey is breaking parole again and we're going skinney dipping with Julian Assange.
Peter
This analysis is spot-on. While State has questions to answer about how they handled/bungled this, Van Buren has been painted as a martyr and a victim -- which he certainly is not. He went in eyes wide open and continues to dig himself in deeper and deeper. Seems pretty clear this is less about patriotism and more about self-promotion.
Suspending clearances of employees who fall into disfavor is the standard way management has found to rid themselves of an employee they cannot fire. It's quite effective. Let's face it, any employer would not like an employee to publicly criticize them. It's a form of damage control management has at their disposal. That being said, I think the choice Peter made to be outspoken had to have been made with the knowledge that it would most likely cause him to fall into disfavor. If he didn't think that would happen, he'd have to have been very naive. What he has to say though, does need to be said and far too few people are willing to risk losing their jobs (effectively) to bring these issue to the public, who have (usually) no idea how their government is doing business, good or bad. After all, writing a book doesn't guarantee it will be read by anyone and if no one reads the bloody thing, no money is made. Why take such a risk? It's like worse than Vegas odds. This is why more people haven't written these kinds of books, in my opinion.
Post a Comment