Pentagon's secret weapon

The following article by Lynda Hurst appeared in the Ideas section of The Toronto Star on Saturday, September 13, 2008. The story nicely complements my previous blog dealing with the need for a concerted research effort to improve surveillance technology in Afghanistan.


So what was Bob Woodward talking about?

Some sort of electromagnetic weapon? An invisible death ray? The Voice of God device that (allegedly) makes someone think they're listening to the Almighty?

It's a bird, it's a plane, it's ... well, Woodward knows – as he assured 60 Minutes and Larry King this week – but he's not telling.

The famed investigative journalist and author says a top-secret capability developed by the U.S. military has changed the course of the war in Iraq. Whatever "it" is, it's being used to locate, target and kill key Al Qaeda figures and other insurgents. And he credits it with the dramatic drop in violence otherwise widely attributed to last year's surge of U.S. troops.

Woodward has compared the "thing" to the top-secret Manhattan Project that developed the atomic bomb, saying, "Some day in history, it will be described to people's amazement." But the details must remain secret for now or it would "get people killed."

That's a confusing remark, given that he also says the terrorists are well aware of the new capability: "The enemy has a heads up because they've been getting wiped out and a lot of them have been killed. It's not news to them."

The rest of us are, however, to take his word for it that the secret is "a wonderful example of American ingenuity solving a problem in war."

It should be noted that Woodward has a new book out, The War Within: Secret White House History 2006-2008, a fact that leaves analysts split on whether he is merely hyping his wares or being (uncharacteristically) naive.

Far from being the historic breakthrough Woodward suggests, the "secret" is likely the semi-covert work being done by the U.S. military's Clandestine Tagging, Tracking and Locating program, known as CTTL.

It's an array of new technologies that, among other things, are designed to track people from long distances or from above, without the targets realizing, thereby reducing risk to the trackers. The cutting-edge devices use nano- and biotechnology to create sensors, tags and thermal, biometric "signatures" of people, including "perfumes and stains," that can be loaded into locating devices.

Problem is – according to a Special Operations Command briefing last year that withheld classified details – the devices were then two years (now one year) away from being finished product.

Woodward's hints "sound like the much-ballyhooed CTTL, but from what I've been told, they're still far off from doing it accurately," says U.S. technology analyst Sharon Weinberger, former editor-in-chief of Defence Technology International.

The Manhattan Project was classified top-secret, she says, "but nuclear fission (the science on which the A-bomb was based) was already out there. There's no evidence of that here. Has there been a tremendous breakthrough in biometrics? I don't think so."

Weinberger says she wonders whether Woodward was shown a PowerPoint presentation or real evidence? And she's intrigued that the U.S. Defence Science Board has said in the past that the war on terrorism "cannot be won without a Manhattan Project-like tagging, tracking and locating program." Interesting that Woodward uses the same language.

The ability to track people has grown exponentially in Iraq, says Weinberger. "Whenever the U.S. is at war, there is a real-world sandbox where lots of money is put into new technologies, things like sensors and unmanned vehicles.

"But has there been a single breakthrough? I don't know what I don't know."

Ah, the return of unknown unknowns.

Wesley Wark, a leading intelligence analyst at the University of Toronto, thinks Woodward is "very starry-eyed about whatever it is. I think he's been sold a solution to the mystery of why the surge in Iraq has worked so well, and he's spinning it."

At most, he could be referring to a new form of "tagging," says Wark. Toward the end of the Cold War, the Soviets developed chemical tagging, whereby a target was touched with an invisible phosphorescent substance that could be picked up by thermal imagery. The U.S. replaced it with laser tags, which require a spotter to identify a target who can then be plucked out by shining a laser beam.

"Maybe there's a new generation of thermal tagging, in which you can remotely tag someone or a new gizmo flying around in the sky," says Wark. "But I doubt it."

The tactic of targeted assassinations isn't new, he says (former president Bill Clinton authorized them against terrorists in 1998) "but the success rate is. Why now?"

Wark thinks the drop in violence is a combination of technology, increased troops on the ground, the "Anbar Awakening" of late 2006 – when tens of thousands of Sunnis turned against Al Qaeda and started cooperating with the U.S. – plus fusion cells.

Fusion cells?

They're the military's fast-reaction teams, comprising intelligence and forensic professionals, political analysts, mapping experts, computer specialists piloting unmanned aircraft, and Special Operations squads.

But they're hardly a secret. Last week, just before excerpting Woodward's book, the Washington Post described how they work:

"The CIA provides intelligence analysts and spycraft with sensors and cameras that can track targets, vehicles or equipment for up to 14 hours. FBI forensic experts dissect data, from cellphone information to the `pocket litter' found on captives. Treasury officials track funds flowing among extremists and from governments. National Security Agency staffers intercept conversations or computer data, and members of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency use high-tech equipment to pinpoint where suspected extremists are using phones or computers."

For example, information gathered in a midnight raid – collected by helmet-mounted cameras that can scan rooms, people, documents and cellphone entries and relay the pictures back to headquarters – often leads to a second or third raid before dawn. Headquartered in Saddam Hussein's old fighter jet hangar, the cells are making 10 to 20 captures a night. Since June, they've killed 10 senior Al Qaeda members

"The capabilities for high-end special joint operations that exist now only existed in Hollywood in 2001," David Kilcullen, a terrorism expert and government adviser, told the Post.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the pond, the British are claiming a "black ops" outfit called Task Force Black, made up of elite U.S. and U.K. special forces, is responsible for the surge's success. It has taken 3,500 insurgents off the streets of Baghdad and reduced bombings from about 150 a month to just two. The task force uses intelligence gleaned the time-honoured way: via spies and informers.

Defence analyst John Pike, who runs GlobalSecurity.org, flatly rejects Woodward's claims of a top-secret capability: "Our intelligence, surveillance and data fusion has increased to a degree undreamt of 10 years ago. That's it. There is no secret wonder sauce."

If there was? "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof," he says dryly.

As for that Voice of God, a.k.a. Voice of Allah, gizmo: It's a device apparently being worked on by the military that operates at a distance, delivering a message that only a single person can hear, presumably to the effect of "Stop the bloodshed" or a plain "Surrender."

At a recent defence-tech workshop, it was reported that the Voice has been tested in Iraq. It was pointed at one insurgent in a group, who whipped around looking in all directions and began a heated conversation with his colleagues who didn't hear the message.

Whether he called for an end to the violence or an Aspirin is unknown.