The Life and Times of the CIA
review of the book - Legacy of
Ashes: The History of the CIA by Tim Weiner
by Chalmers Johnson
TomDispatch
www.zmag.org, July 25, 2007
The American people may not know it but
they have some severe problems with one of their official governmental
entities, the Central Intelligence Agency. Because of the almost
total secrecy surrounding its activities and the lack of cost
accounting on how it spends the money covertly appropriated for
it within the defense budget, it is impossible for citizens to
know what the CIA's approximately 17,000 employees do with, or
for, their share of the yearly $44 billion-$48 billion or more
spent on "intelligence." This inability to account for
anything at the CIA is, however, only one problem with the Agency
and hardly the most serious one either.
There are currently at least two criminal trials underway in Italy
and Germany against several dozen CIA officials for felonies committed
in those countries, including kidnapping people with a legal right
to be in Germany and Italy, illegally transporting them to countries
such as Egypt and Jordan for torture, and causing them to "disappear"
into secret foreign or CIA-run prisons outside the U.S. without
any form of due process of law.
The possibility that CIA funds are simply being ripped off by
insiders is also acute. The CIA's former number three official,
its executive director and chief procurement officer, Kyle "Dusty"
Foggo, is now under federal indictment in San Diego for corruptly
funneling contracts for water, air services, and armored vehicles
to a lifelong friend and defense contractor, Brent Wilkes, who
was unqualified to perform the services being sought. In return,
Wilkes treated Foggo to thousands of dollars' worth of vacation
trips and dinners, and promised him a top job at his company when
he retired from the CIA.
Thirty years ago, in a futile attempt to provide some check on
endemic misbehavior by the CIA, the administration of Gerald Ford
created the President's Intelligence Oversight Board. It was to
be a civilian watchdog over the Agency. A 1981 executive order
by President Ronald Reagan made the board permanent and gave it
the mission of identifying CIA violations of the law (while keeping
them secret in order not to endanger national security). Through
five previous administrations, members of the board -- all civilians
not employed by the government -- actively reported on and investigated
some of the CIA's most secret operations that seemed to breach
legal limits.
However, on July 15, 2007, John Solomon of the Washington Post
reported that, for the first five-and-a-half years of the Bush
administration, the Intelligence Oversight Board did nothing --
no investigations, no reports, no questioning of CIA officials.
It evidently found no reason to inquire into the interrogation
methods Agency operatives employed at secret prisons or the transfer
of captives to countries that use torture, or domestic wiretapping
not warranted by a federal court.
Who were the members of this non-oversight board of see-no-evil,
hear-no-evil, speak-no-evil monkeys? The board now in place is
led by former Bush economic adviser Stephen Friedman. It includes
Don Evans, a former commerce secretary and friend of the President,
former Admiral David Jeremiah, and lawyer Arthur B. Culvahouse.
The only thing they accomplished was to express their contempt
for a legal order by a president of the United States.
Corrupt and undemocratic practices by the CIA have prevailed since
it was created in 1947. However, as citizens we have now, for
the first time, been given a striking range of critical information
necessary to understand how this situation came about and why
it has been so impossible to remedy. We have a long, richly documented
history of the CIA from its post-World War II origins to its failure
to supply even the most elementary information about Iraq before
the 2003 invasion of that country.
Declassified CIA Records
Tim Weiner's book, Legacy of Ashes, is important for many reasons,
but certainly one is that it brings back from the dead the possibility
that journalism can actually help citizens perform elementary
oversight on our government. Until Weiner's magnificent effort,
I would have agreed with Seymour Hersh that, in the current crisis
of American governance and foreign policy, the failure of the
press has been almost complete. Our journalists have generally
not even tried to penetrate the layers of secrecy that the executive
branch throws up to ward off scrutiny of its often illegal and
incompetent activities. This is the first book I've read in a
long time that documents its very important assertions in a way
that goes well beyond asking readers merely to trust the reporter.
Weiner, a New York Times correspondent, has been working on Legacy
of Ashes for 20 years. He has read over 50,000 government documents,
mostly from the CIA, the White House, and the State Department.
He was instrumental in causing the CIA Records Search Technology
(CREST) program of the National Archives to declassify many of
them, particularly in 2005 and 2006. He has read more than 2,000
oral histories of American intelligence officers, soldiers, and
diplomats and has himself conducted more than 300 on-the-record
interviews with current and past CIA officers, including ten former
directors of central intelligence. Truly exceptional among authors
of books on the CIA, he makes the following claim: "This
book is on the record -- no anonymous sources, no blind quotations,
no hearsay."
Weiner's history contains 154 pages of end-notes keyed to comments
in the text. (Numbered notes and standard scholarly citations
would have been preferable, as well as an annotated bibliography
providing information on where documents could be found; but what
he has done is still light-years ahead of competing works.) These
notes contain extensive verbatim quotations from documents, interviews,
and oral histories. Weiner also observes: "The CIA has reneged
on pledges made by three consecutive directors of central intelligence
-- [Robert] Gates, [James] Woolsey, and [John] Deutch -- to declassify
records on nine major covert actions: France and Italy in the
1940s and 1950s; North Korea in the 1950s; Iran in 1953; Indonesia
in 1958; Tibet in the 1950s and 1960s; and the Congo, the Dominican
Republic, and Laos in the 1960s." He is nonetheless able
to supply key details on each of these operations from unofficial,
but fully identified, sources.
In May 2003, after a lengthy delay, the government finally released
the documents on President Dwight D. Eisenhower's engineered regime
change in Guatemala in 1954; most of the records from the 1961
Bay of Pigs fiasco in which a CIA-created exile army of Cubans
went to their deaths or to prison in a hapless invasion of that
island have been released; and the reports on the CIA's 1953 overthrow
of Iranian prime minister Mohammad Mossadeq were leaked. Weiner's
efforts and his resulting book are monuments to serious historical
research in our allegedly "open society." Still, he
warns,
"While I was gathering and obtaining declassification authorization
for some of the CIA records used in this book at the National
Archives, the agency [the CIA] was engaged in a secret effort
to reclassify many of those same records, dating back to the 1940s,
flouting the law and breaking its word. Nevertheless, the work
of historians, archivists, and journalists has created a foundation
of documents on which a book can be built."
Surprise Attacks
As an idea, if not an actual entity, the Central Intelligence
Agency came into being as a result of December 7, 1941, when the
Japanese attacked the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor. It functionally
came to an end, as Weiner makes clear, on September 11, 2001,
when operatives of al-Qaeda flew hijacked airliners into the World
Trade towers in Manhattan and the Pentagon in Washington, DC.
Both assaults were successful surprise attacks.
The Central Intelligence Agency itself was created during the
Truman administration in order to prevent future surprise attacks
like Pearl Harbor by uncovering planning for them and so forewarning
against them. On September 11th, 2001, the CIA was revealed to
be a failure precisely because it had been unable to discover
the al-Qaeda plot and sound the alarm against a surprise attack
that would prove almost as devastating as Pearl Harbor. After
9/11, the Agency, having largely discredited itself, went into
a steep decline and finished the job. Weiner concludes: "Under
[CIA Director George Tenet's] leadership, the agency produced
the worst body of work in its long history: a special national
intelligence estimate titled 'Iraq's Continuing Programs for Weapons
of Mass Destruction.'" It is axiomatic that, as political
leaders lose faith in an intelligence agency and quit listening
to it, its functional life is over, even if the people working
there continue to report to their offices.
In December 1941, there was sufficient intelligence on Japanese
activities for the U.S. to have been much better prepared for
a surprise attack. Naval Intelligence had cracked Japanese diplomatic
and military codes; radar stations and patrol flights had been
authorized (but not fully deployed); and strategic knowledge of
Japanese past behaviors and capabilities (if not of intentions)
was adequate. The FBI had even observed the Japanese consul-general
in Honolulu burning records in his backyard but reported this
information only to Director J. Edgar Hoover, who did not pass
it on.
Lacking was a central office to collate, analyze, and put in suitable
form for presentation to the president all U.S. government information
on an important issue. In 1941, there were plenty of signals about
what was coming, but the U.S. government lacked the organization
and expertise to distinguish true signals from the background
"noise" of day-to-day communications. In the 1950s,
Roberta Wohlstetter, a strategist for the Air Force's think tank,
the RAND Corporation, wrote a secret study that documented the
coordination and communications failings leading up to Pearl Harbor.
(Entitled Pearl Harbor: Warning and Decision, it was declassified
and published by Stanford University Press in 1962.)
The Legacy of the OSS
The National Security Act of 1947 created the CIA with emphasis
on the word "central" in its title. The Agency was supposed
to become the unifying organization that would distill and write
up all available intelligence, and offer it to political leaders
in a manageable form. The Act gave the CIA five functions, four
of them dealing with the collection, coordination, and dissemination
of intelligence from open sources as well as espionage. It was
the fifth function -- lodged in a vaguely worded passage that
allowed the CIA to "perform such other functions and duties
related to intelligence affecting the national security as the
National Security Council may from time to time direct" --
that turned the CIA into the personal, secret, unaccountable army
of the president.
From the very beginning, the Agency failed to do what President
Truman expected of it, turning at once to "cloak-and-dagger"
projects that were clearly beyond its mandate and only imperfectly
integrated into any grand strategy of the U.S. government. Weiner
stresses that the true author of the CIA's clandestine functions
was George Kennan, the senior State Department authority on the
Soviet Union and creator of the idea of "containing"
the spread of communism rather than going to war with ("rolling
back") the USSR.
Kennan had been alarmed by the ease with which the Soviets were
setting up satellites in Eastern Europe and he wanted to "fight
fire with fire." Others joined with him to promote this agenda,
above all the veterans of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS),
a unit that, under General William J. "Wild Bill" Donovan
during World War II, had sent saboteurs behind enemy lines, disseminated
disinformation and propaganda to mislead Axis forces, and tried
to recruit resistance fighters in occupied countries.
On September 20, 1945, Truman had abolished the OSS -- a bureaucratic
victory for the Pentagon, the State Department, and the FBI, all
of which considered the OSS an upstart organization that impinged
on their respective jurisdictions. Many of the early leaders of
the CIA were OSS veterans and devoted themselves to consolidating
and entrenching their new vehicle for influence in Washington.
They also passionately believed that they were people with a self-appointed
mission of world-shaking importance and that, as a result, they
were beyond the normal legal restraints placed on government officials.
From its inception the CIA has labored under two contradictory
conceptions of what it was supposed to be doing, and no president
ever succeeded in correcting or resolving this situation. Espionage
and intelligence analysis seek to know the world as it is; covert
action seeks to change the world, whether it understands it or
not. The best CIA exemplar of the intelligence-collecting function
was Richard Helms, director of central intelligence (DCI) from
1966 to 1973 (who died in 2002). The great protagonist of cloak-and-dagger
work was Frank Wisner, the CIA's director of operations from 1948
until the late 1950s when he went insane and, in 1965, committed
suicide. Wisner never had any patience for espionage.
Weiner quotes William Colby, a future DCI (1973-1976), on this
subject. The separation of the scholars of the research and analysis
division from the spies of the clandestine service created two
cultures within the intelligence profession, he said, "separate,
unequal, and contemptuous of each other." That critique remained
true throughout the CIA's first 60 years.
By 1964, the CIA's clandestine service was consuming close to
two-thirds of its budget and 90% of the director's time. The Agency
gathered under one roof Wall Street brokers, Ivy League professors,
soldiers of fortune, ad men, newsmen, stunt men, second-story
men, and con men. They never learned to work together -- the ultimate
result being a series of failures in both intelligence and covert
operations. In January 1961, on leaving office after two terms,
President Eisenhower had already grasped the situation fully.
"Nothing has changed since Pearl Harbor," he told his
director of central intelligence, Allen Dulles. "I leave
a legacy of ashes to my successor." Weiner, of course, draws
his title from Eisenhower's metaphor. It would only get worse
in the years to come.
The historical record is unequivocal. The United States is ham-handed
and brutal in conceiving and executing clandestine operations,
and it is simply no good at espionage; its operatives never have
enough linguistic and cultural knowledge of target countries to
recruit spies effectively. The CIA also appears to be one of the
most easily penetrated espionage organizations on the planet.
From the beginning, it repeatedly lost its assets to double agents.
Typically, in the early 1950s, the Agency dropped millions of
dollars worth of gold bars, arms, two-way radios, and agents into
Poland to support what its top officials believed was a powerful
Polish underground movement against the Soviets. In fact, Soviet
agents had wiped out the movement years before, turned key people
in it into double agents, and played the CIA for suckers. As Weiner
comments, not only had five years of planning, various agents,
and millions of dollars "gone down the drain," but the
"unkindest cut might have been [the Agency's] discovery that
the Poles had sent a chunk of the CIA's money to the Communist
Party of Italy." [pp. 67-68]
The story would prove unending. On February 21, 1994, the Agency
finally discovered and arrested Aldrich Ames, the CIA's chief
of counterintelligence for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe,
who had been spying for the USSR for seven years and had sent
innumerable U.S. agents before KGB firing squads. Weiner comments,
"The Ames case revealed an institutional carelessness that
bordered on criminal negligence." [p. 451]
The Search for Technological Means
Over the years, in order to compensate for these serious inadequacies,
the CIA turned increasingly to signals intelligence and other
technological means of spying like U-2 reconnaissance aircraft
and satellites. In 1952, the top leaders of the CIA created the
National Security Agency -- an eavesdropping and cryptological
unit -- to overcome the Agency's abject failure to place any spies
in North Korea during the Korean War. The Agency debacle at the
Bay of Pigs in Cuba led a frustrated Pentagon to create its own
Defense Intelligence Agency as a check on the military amateurism
of the CIA's clandestine service officers.
Still, technological means, whether satellite spying or electronic
eavesdropping, will seldom reveal intentions -- and that is the
raison d'être of intelligence estimates. As Haviland Smith,
who ran operations against the USSR in the 1960s and 1970s, lamented,
"The only thing missing is -- we don't have anything on Soviet
intentions. And I don't know how you get that. And that's the
charter of the clandestine service [emphasis in original, pp.
360-61])."
The actual intelligence collected was just as problematic. On
the most important annual intelligence estimate throughout the
Cold War -- that of the Soviet order of battle -- the CIA invariably
overstated its size and menace. Then, to add insult to injury,
under George H. W. Bush's tenure as DCI (1976-77), the agency
tore itself apart over ill-informed right-wing claims that it
was actually underestimating Soviet military forces. The result
was the appointment of "Team B" during the Ford presidency,
led by Polish exiles and neoconservative fanatics. It was tasked
to "correct" the work of the Office of National Estimates.
"After the Cold War was over," writes Weiner, "the
agency put Team B's findings to the test. Every one of them was
wrong." [p. 352] But the problem was not simply one of the
CIA succumbing to political pressure. It was also structural:
"[F]or thirteen years, from Nixon's era to the dying days
of the Cold War, every estimate of Soviet strategic nuclear forces
overstated [emphasis in original] the rate at which Moscow was
modernizing its weaponry." [p. 297]
From 1967 to 1973, I served as an outside consultant to the Office
of National Estimates, one of about a dozen specialists brought
in to try to overcome the myopia and bureaucratism involved in
the writing of these national intelligence estimates. I recall
agonized debates over how the mechanical highlighting of worst-case
analyses of Soviet weapons was helping to promote the arms race.
Some senior intelligence analysts tried to resist the pressures
of the Air Force and the military-industrial complex. Nonetheless,
the late John Huizenga, an erudite intelligence analyst who headed
the Office of National Estimates from 1971 until the wholesale
purge of the Agency by DCI James Schlesinger in 1973, bluntly
said to the CIA's historians:
"In retrospect.... I really do not believe that an intelligence
organization in this government is able to deliver an honest analytical
product without facing the risk of political contention. . . .
I think that intelligence has had relatively little impact on
the policies that we've made over the years. Relatively none.
. . . Ideally, what had been supposed was that . . . serious intelligence
analysis could.... assist the policy side to reexamine premises,
render policymaking more sophisticated, closer to the reality
of the world. Those were the large ambitions which I think were
never realized." [p. 353]
On the clandestine side, the human costs were much higher. The
CIA's incessant, almost always misguided, attempts to determine
how other people should govern themselves; its secret support
for fascists (e.g., Greece under George Papadopoulos), militarists
(e.g., Chile under Gen. Augusto Pinochet), and murderers (e.g.,
the Congo under Joseph Mobutu); its uncritical support of death
squads (El Salvador) and religious fanatics (Muslim fundamentalists
in Afghanistan) -- all these and more activities combined to pepper
the world with blowback movements against the United States.
Nothing has done more to undercut the reputation of the United
States than the CIA's "clandestine" (only in terms of
the American people) murders of the presidents of South Vietnam
and the Congo, its ravishing of the governments of Iran, Indonesia
(three times), South Korea (twice), all of the Indochinese states,
virtually every government in Latin America, and Lebanon, Afghanistan,
and Iraq. The deaths from these armed assaults run into the millions.
After 9/11, President Bush asked "Why do they hate us?"
From Iran (1953) to Iraq (2003), the better question would be,
"Who does not?"
The Cash Nexus
There is a major exception to this portrait of long-term Agency
incompetence. "One weapon the CIA used with surpassing skill,"
Weiner writes, "was cold cash. The agency excelled at buying
the services of foreign politicians." [p. 116] It started
with the Italian elections of April 1948. The CIA did not yet
have a secure source of clandestine money and had to raise it
secretly from Wall Street operators, rich Italian-Americans, and
others.
"The millions were delivered to Italian politicians and the
priests of Catholic Action, a political arm of the Vatican. Suitcases
filed with cash changed hands in the four-star Hassler Hotel.
. . . Italy's Christian Democrats won by a comfortable margin
and formed a government that excluded communists. A long romance
between the [Christian Democratic] party and the agency began.
The CIA's practice of purchasing elections and politicians with
bags of cash was repeated in Italy -- and in many other countries
-- for the next twenty-five years." [p. 27]
The CIA ultimately spent at least $65 million on Italy's politicians
-- including "every Christian Democrat who ever won a national
election in Italy." [p. 298] As the Marshall Plan to reconstruct
Europe got up to speed in the late 1940s, the CIA secretly skimmed
the money it needed from Marshall Plan accounts. After the Plan
ended, secret funds buried in the annual Defense appropriation
bill continued to finance the CIA's operations.
After Italy, the CIA moved on to Japan, paying to bring Nobusuke
Kishi to power as Japan's prime minister (in office 1957-1960),
the country's World War II minister of munitions. It ultimately
used its financial muscle to entrench the (conservative) Liberal
Democratic Party in power and to turn Japan into a single-party
state, which it remains to this day. The cynicism with which the
CIA continued to subsidize "democratic" elections in
Western Europe, Latin America, and East Asia, starting in the
late 1950s, led to disillusionment with the United States and
a distinct blunting of the idealism with which it had waged the
early Cold War.
Another major use for its money was a campaign to bankroll alternatives
in Western Europe to Soviet-influenced newspapers and books. Attempting
to influence the attitudes of students and intellectuals, the
CIA sponsored literary magazines in Germany (Der Monat) and Britain
(Encounter), promoted abstract expressionism in art as a radical
alternative to the Soviet Union's socialist realism, and secretly
funded the publication and distribution of over two and a half
million books and periodicals. Weiner treats these activities
rather cursorily. He should have consulted Frances Stonor Saunders'
indispensable The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of
Arts and Letters.
Hiding Incompetence
Despite all this, the CIA was protected from criticism by its
impenetrable secrecy and by the tireless propaganda efforts of
such leaders as Allen W. Dulles, director of the Agency under
President Eisenhower, and Richard Bissell, chief of the clandestine
service after Wisner. Even when the CIA seemed to fail at everything
it undertook, writes Weiner, "The ability to represent failure
as success was becoming a CIA tradition." [p. 58]
After the Chinese intervention in the Korean War, the CIA dropped
212 foreign agents into Manchuria. Within a matter of days, 101
had been killed and the other 111 captured -- but this information
was effectively suppressed. The CIA's station chief in Seoul,
Albert R. Haney, an incompetent army colonel and intelligence
fabricator, never suspected that the hundreds of agents he claimed
to have working for him all reported to North Korean control officers.
Haney survived his incredible performance in the Korean War because,
at the end of his tour in November 1952, he helped to arrange
for the transportation of a grievously wounded Marine lieutenant
back to the United States. That Marine turned out to be the son
of Allen Dulles, who repaid his debt of gratitude by putting Haney
in charge of the covert operation that -- despite a largely bungled,
badly directed secret campaign -- did succeed in overthrowing
the Guatemalan government of President Jacobo Arbenz in 1954.
The CIA's handiwork in Guatemala ultimately led to the deaths
of 200,000 civilians during the 40 years of bloodshed and civil
war that followed the sabotage of an elected government for the
sake of the United Fruit Company.
Weiner has made innumerable contributions to many hidden issues
of postwar foreign policy, some of them still on-going. For example,
during the debate over America's invasion of Iraq after 2003,
one of the constant laments was that the CIA did not have access
to a single agent inside Saddam Hussein's inner circle. That was
not true. Ironically, the intelligence service of France -- a
country U.S. politicians publicly lambasted for its failure to
support us -- had cultivated Naji Sabri, Iraq's foreign minister.
Sabri told the French agency, and through it the American government,
that Saddam Hussein did not have an active nuclear or biological
weapons program, but the CIA ignored him. Weiner comments ruefully,
"The CIA had almost no ability to analyze accurately what
little intelligence it had." [pp. 666-67, n. 487]
Perhaps the most comical of all CIA clandestine activities --
unfortunately all too typical of its covert operations over the
last 60 years -- was the spying it did in 1994 on the newly appointed
American ambassador to Guatemala, Marilyn McAfee, who sought to
promote policies of human rights and justice in that country.
Loyal to the murderous Guatemalan intelligence service, the CIA
had bugged her bedroom and picked up sounds that led their agents
to conclude that the ambassador was having a lesbian love affair
with her secretary, Carol Murphy. The CIA station chief "recorded
her cooing endearments to Murphy." The agency spread the
word in Washington that the liberal ambassador was a lesbian without
realizing that "Murphy" was also the name of her two-year-old
black standard poodle. The bug in her bedroom had recorded her
petting her dog. She was actually a married woman from a conservative
family. [p. 459]
Back in August 1945, General William Donovan, the head of the
OSS, said to President Truman, "Prior to the present war,
the United States had no foreign intelligence service. It never
has had and does not now have a coordinated intelligence system."
Weiner adds, "Tragically, it still does not have one."
I agree with Weiner's assessment, but based on his truly exemplary
analysis of the Central Intelligence Agency in Legacy of Ashes,
I do not think that this is a tragedy. Given his evidence, it
is hard to believe that the United States would not have been
better off if it had left intelligence collection and analysis
to the State Department and had assigned infrequent covert actions
to the Pentagon.
I believe that this is where we stand today: The CIA has failed
badly, and it would be an important step toward a restoration
of the checks and balances within our political system simply
to abolish it. Some observers argue that this would be an inadequate
remedy because what the government now ostentatiously calls the
"intelligence community" -- complete with its own website
-- is composed of 16 discrete and competitive intelligence organizations
ready to step into the CIA's shoes. This, however, is a misunderstanding.
Most of the members of the so-called intelligence community are
bureaucratic appendages of well-established departments or belong
to extremely technical units whose functions have nothing at all
to do with either espionage or cloak-and-dagger adventures.
The sixteen entities include the intelligence organizations of
each military service -- the Air Force, Army, Coast Guard, Marine
Corps, Navy, and the Defense Intelligence Agency -- and reflect
inter-service rivalries more than national needs or interests;
the departments of Energy, Homeland Security, State, Treasury,
and Drug Enforcement Administration, as well as the FBI and the
National Security Agency; and the units devoted to satellites
and reconnaissance (National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, National
Reconnaissance Office). The only one of these units that could
conceivably compete with the CIA is the one that I recommend to
replace it -- namely, the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence
and Research (INR). Interestingly enough, it had by far the best
record of any U.S. intelligence entity in analyzing Iraq under
Saddam Hussein and estimating what was likely to happen if we
pursued the Bush administration's misconceived scheme of invading
his country. Its work was, of course, largely ignored by the Bush-Cheney
White House.
Weiner does not cover every single aspect of the record of the
CIA, but his book is one of the best possible places for a serious
citizen to begin to understand the depths to which our government
has sunk. It also brings home the lesson that an incompetent or
unscrupulous intelligence agency can be as great a threat to national
security as not having one at all.
Chalmers Johnson's latest book is Nemesis: The Last Days of the
American Republic (Metropolitan Books, 2007). It is the third
volume of his Blowback Trilogy, which also includes Blowback and
The Sorrows of Empire. A retired professor of international relations
from the University of California (Berkeley and San Diego campuses)
and the author of some seventeen books primarily on the politics
and economics of East Asia, Johnson is president of the Japan
Policy Research Institute.
[This article first appeared on Tomdispatch.com, a weblog of the
Nation Institute, which offers a steady flow of alternate sources,
news, and opinion from Tom Engelhardt, long time editor in publishing,
co-founder of the American Empire Project and author of Mission
Unaccomplished (Nation Books), the first collection of Tomdispatch
interviews.]
Chalmers
Johnson page
Home Page