CIA AREA CHIEF LOSES POST OVER DRUG CASE FLAP

WashingtonThe CIA's chief of Latin American espionage operations has been
removed from his post after attempting to intervene on behalf of a boyhood
friend who had been arrested on narcotics charges in the Dominican
Republic, according to U.S. intelligence officials.

A lengthy investigation by CIA management determined that the chief of the
Latin American division of the CIA's Directorate of Operations had
attempted to use his influence to aid the friend, who had also worked
briefly for the CIA in the Dominican Republic.

CIA management concluded that the intervention represented an abuse of the
division chief's senior position.

The decision to remove him, closely following allegations of CIA
responsibility for crack cocaine traffic in Los Angeles, comes at a time of
heightened sensitivity at the spy agency to any perception of a link
between it and drug dealing.

At the same time, however, the action sparked criticism within the agency
from those who believe the division chief was punished too harshly.

The Times agreed not to name the officer, who is still serving undercover
after being reassigned to a nonmanagement position. A 1982 law bans the
publication of names of undercover agents if it could hurt U.S. espionage
activities.

The CIA initially referred the case to the Justice Department to determine
whether to launch a criminal investigation of the officer. Although Justice
found no grounds for prosecution, a CIA management accountability board
recommended that he be forced to step down from his senior management
position.

He was removed as Latin American division chief in November, roughly a year
after he tried to come to the aid of his old friend. The CIA has already
notified both the House and Senate intelligence oversight committees about
the decision.

Its officials say congressional leaders have expressed support for their
handling of the matter.

U.S. intelligence officials play down suggestions that the CIA's decision
to punish the officer was influenced by the intense political pressure on
the agency that has grown out of published allegations of a CIA link to the
spread of crack cocaine in Southern California.

Still, others familiar with the controversy surrounding the CIA's division
chief are convinced that the political heat played a role in the case.

The pressure stems from a controversial 1996 series in the San Jose
MercuryNews that charged that during the 1980s, a California drug ring
operating with CIA protection deliberately introduced crack to black
neighborhoods in Los Angeles and sent millions of dollars in profits to the
contra guerrillas fighting to overthrow the leftist Sandinista government
in Nicaragua.

The allegations in the MercuryNews have since been widely debunked by
other major news organizations, but the charges have nonetheless resonated
among the CIA's legion of critics, most notably within the African American
community.

John Deutch, CIA director at the time, took the extraordinary step of
attending a town meeting on the issue in Watts last November. Fending off
angry hecklers during the 90minute session, Deutch offered assurances that
the CIA would fully investigate the charges, and the CIA's inspector
general is still conducting a wideranging probe.

U.S. intelligence officials stress that there is no evidence that the
deposed Latin American division chief had any connections to narcotics
trafficking.

In fact, the officer had a track record as an able drug fighter, having
previously served as deputy chief of the CIA's counternarcotics center.
"He has been heavily involved in counternarcotics work, and the twist that
this was somehow an act of condoning drugs is ridiculous," said a senior
U.S. intelligence official.

But U.S. intelligence officials insist that the officer's judgment failed
him when he tried to help his friend, who had been arrested in the
Dominican Republic last fall for possessing 2 ounces of cocaine.

The arrested man, who also faced an illegal weapon charge, had formerly
worked for the CIA's station in the Dominican Republic, acting in what the
agency calls an "accommodations" rolesetting up post office boxes and
running other errands.

The CIA's Latin American division chief, who had befriended the man during
their boyhood in the Dominican Republic, was told by a mutual friend and by
the CIA's station chief in the Dominican Republic that many of his friend's
personal possessions had been confiscated at the time of his arrest.

"When [the division chief] learned of [the situation], he contacted our
chief of station and asked him to talk to his contacts to make sure the
individual was not mistreated," a senior U.S. intelligence official said.
"And he asked that if charges were dropped that his property be returned to
him. [The division chief's] motivation was built more out of friendship
than anything else."

U.S. intelligence officials emphasize that the division chief did not seek
to win his friend's release from prison, nor did he ask the CIA's station
chief to meddle in Dominican Republic legal proceedings. "At no time did he
attempt to get the charges dropped," said a senior U.S. intelligence
official.

But once word of his actions reached the top ranks of the CIA, officials
realized the division chief had acted inappropriately. "We put an awful lot
of trust in our folks, and especially in people in senior management
positions," observed a senior U.S. intelligence official. "His involvement
of the station [in the Dominican Republic] was an error in judgment, and it
created at least the perception of a misuse of his influence and power."

The senior intelligence official added that the efforts to have the CIA's
station chief use his contacts in the local government on behalf of a man
imprisoned on drug charges "could also be seen by the local government as a
signal that the CIA was taking a position on the case. We thought that was
totally inappropriate."

Still, the CIA's decision to punish the division chief, who was very
popular with his subordinates, has sparked controversy within the spy
agency. Many feel the agency is so tied down by legal and political
pressures there is no longer any room for CIA officers to take the risks
necessary to gather intelligence overseas.

"Maybe it would have been better if he had not asked the station chief to
get involved, but this should not have evolved into a massive investigation
and scandal," said a former CIA official. "It just seems to me that it did
not warrant all of the political and legal handwringing."

Senior U.S. intelligence officials dismiss the argument that the current
case reflects a growing aversion to risk at the CIA. "It is true that there
are a good number of people who are upset by this decision," one said. "He
is an officer who is extremely well respected and well liked. But even he
recognizes that there was an error in judgment, that there was a perception
issue that he should have been attentive to in such a senior post."

Copyright Los Angeles Times