As U.S. spy agencies ramped up their work to catch foreign meddling in this year’s election, a team of CIA experts studied lessons learned from the contentious 2020 vote. Unexpectedly, their report sparked a controversy within parts of the intelligence community. In a rare move, their study was withdrawn shortly after it was issued in the spring after rank-and-file officers protested that it failed to address the allegations of politics seeping into intelligence that arose in the 2020 election and that remain unresolved for some today. Reissued in September, the study remains classified and its full contents aren’t publicly known. Several people familiar with the matter would say only that it included recommendations on how intelligence leaders could best examine and report election threats attributed to Russia, China and other American adversaries. The dispute over a relatively routine study and its unusual withdrawal highlight ongoing concerns over how to address the varying foreign threats to U.S. elections — including disinformation, cyber espionage and the amplification of existing divisions within American society. In an increasingly polarized America, some of those tensions have spilled over inside the nominally apolitical world of intelligence, some former officers say. Some officers have alleged intelligence leaders in 2020 played down findings on Russia to suit the demands of former President Donald Trump, who fired a director of national intelligence in one dispute over Moscow’s election meddling. Others say election-related intelligence on China in particular was wrongly played down out of a belief that politicians would misuse it. The study was requested by the former election threats executive at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which oversees the 18 U.S. spy agencies. It was ultimately republished with what’s known as a “scope note” explaining the study was focused primarily on senior leaders and not intended to delve into the politicization of intelligence or other potential issues around elections. Several people described the debate over the study on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence matters. Tim Barrett, the top spokesman for Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, said intelligence officials have expanded training on objectivity in analysis and worked to better collaborate across agencies. “We are committed to impartial and inclusive analysis and will continue to provide the insights needed to safeguard our democracy,” Barrett said in a statement. The CIA’s Center for the Study of Intelligence produces internal histories of key moments and issues faced across the intelligence community. Its reports are intended to guide current and future officers. Nicholas Dujmovic, a retired CIA officer who served on the agency’s history staff, said any decision to withdraw a study would be unusual, but not unprecedented. Dujmovic, now a professor at the Washington-based Catholic University of America, said he did not have specific knowledge of the recently republished study. “We’re in the intelligence business. We’re in the truth business,” he said. “Occasionally, if we have information that a study is flawed, we might pull it back and rework it.” One of the study’s recommendations was for intelligence agencies to adopt a definition across countries of “election influence” and “election interference.” The lack of a standard practice was flagged by the intelligence community’s analytic ombudsman, Barry Zulauf, shortly after the 2020 election. Zulauf wrote in a separate report — an unclassified version of which was released […]

The post Spy Agencies Pulled 2020 Vote Study Amid Internal Dissent appeared first on The Yeshiva World.