From: Brad Dolan 
Subject: (fwd) Gingrich Wants CIA to Spend $18 Million to Overthrow
               Government of Iran
Message-ID: 
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 09:20:59 -0500 (EST)


---------- Forwarded message ----------

The Wall Street Journal reports [27 October 1995, page A16] that US
House of Representatives Speaker Newt Gingrich "... is seeking to set
aside an estimated $18 million in the US intelligence budget to
finance a potential covert action aimed at ousting the Iranian
government... For some years, the US has carried out a relatively low-
level covert action that began before President Clinton took office in
1993... This action currently is budgeted in the range of $4 million
annually.... Congressional Quarterly's Congressional Monitor published
the first report on the issue in its editions yesterday... Senate
Intelligence Committee Chairman Arlen Specter ... has publicly called
for a "dialogue" with Iran as the best US policy. Mr. Gingrich, by
contrast... advocated a strategy that "ultimately is designed to force
the replacement of the current regime in Iran..."..."

A few observations.

1 - If we stipulate that these budget figures are correct, they
provide some interesting insight into the debate which has
periodically surfaced on news:alt.politics.org.cia concerning the size
of the covert operations budget, which has been semi-officially
estimated to be about 2% of either the entire ~$30 billion
intelligence budget [as I have contended], or of the ~$3 billion CIA
budget [which of course only accounts for about half the total funds
at the disposal of CIA]. The debate has been over whether the covert
operations budget is about ~$500 million [aka real money], or ~$50
million [ie, more money than I have, but peanuts in the larger scheme
of things]. I would submit that the character of the reporting on this
story substantiates the former rather than the later estimate. If we
were spending only ~$50 million each year on covert ops, the headline
would read "Gingrich Seeks 40% Increase in Covert Ops Budget!",
whereas since we are actually spending ~$500 million, the focus of the
story is on the increase in spending for the Iranian operation.

2 - Regardless of one's opinon's concerning the current political
situation in Iran, it is rather difficult to imagine that the paltry
sum of $18 million is likely to result in a stable regime with
policies significantly more to the liking of Newt and Company. Iranian
civic society is mobilized far more extensively than four decades ago
when Kermit Roosevelt could pull a few wires and topple a government.

3 - Given the track record of the US intelligence community in Iran,
it seems to me that CIA would be stuck between a rock and a hard
place. An investment of a few tens of millions of dollars is unlikely
to materially affect the situation. But it is difficult for me to
imagine that a more robust investment, which could influence events,
could escape notoriety and the probable backlash that would ensue.

4 - It seems to me that the main point of such an initiative would be
to annoy the Iranian leadership, and to reinforce the current
estrangement between Washington and Tehran. It is not immediately
apparent to me whose interests are served as a result. But with the
Pentagon looking for "rogue states" to justify continuing to spend
Cold War levels of money on the military, keeping Tehran in the
"hostile" column makes a lotta sense. Millions of dollars spent by CIA
aggravating Tehran will produce tens of billions of dollars for US
military contractors to build weapons...

--
John Pike
Federation of American Scientists
http://www.fas.org/pub/gen/fas/irp/

---SnetMgr 0.60 [r0001]
 * Origin: snet-l@world.std.com <-> FidoNet (1:330/202)