Iran Has America's Super Spy Drone. So What?

Getting caught every once in a while is all part of the intelligence game.

BY MICAH ZENKO | DECEMBER 9, 2011

On May 1, 1960, an American U-2 surveillance plane was downed by a SA-2 surface-to-air missile over the Sverdlovsk area of the Soviet Union. The U-2's mission -- code-named Operation Grand Slam -- was to photograph Soviet ballistic missile sites to inform the missile-gap debate raging in Washington. Though Grand Slam was the 24th deep-penetration flight over Soviet territory in four years, and CIA analysts warned of improvements in Soviet air-defense radars and missiles, the risks were deemed worth taking. As Secretary of State Christian Herter had noted in a plea to President Dwight Eisenhower to resume the U-2 flights: "The intelligence objective outweighs the danger of getting trapped."

Is history repeating itself? On Thursday, Iranian state television showed two men in military uniforms running their hands across the swept-wing frame of what the broadcast claimed was an RQ-170 Sentinel drone. An unnamed U.S. official said with "high confidence" that the drone displayed was the Sentinel that had gone missing 140 miles inside of Iran. (Only days earlier, a senior official had claimed: "The Iranians have a pile of rubble and are trying to figure what they have.") Several officials have acknowledged that the drone was under CIA control on an intelligence collection mission inside Iran.

It is understandable that an event with headlines that include the words "Iran," "drone," and "nuclear" generate a great deal of attention. Yet, for all the bytes and ink expended in discussing the downed Sentinel drone, it is neither surprising nor particularly revealing. As was true in 1960, the benefits of spying on Iran outweigh the dangers of the program being revealed or a downed aircraft, and are what Americans should expect from the $55 billion spent last year on national intelligence. To understand why this downed drone is such an ordinary event requires an understanding the day-to-day process of the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC).

Here's how it works. Senior policymakers provide tasking guidance to the IC through the National Intelligence Priorities Framework (NIPF), which is the "sole mechanism for establishing national intelligence priorities," according to an Office of the Directorate of National Intelligence (ODNI) directive. The NIPF process is coordinated by the ODNI, and results in a matrix listing the intelligence priorities of policymakers based on topics covered at National Security Council meetings and discussions with cabinet officials. The NIPF is updated every six months and signed by the president. As was described to me recently, the matrix consists of some 30 issues of concern for collection ranked in horizontal bands, running from A (most important) to C (least important), with some 180 state and non-state groups listed on the vertical axis. Finally, the matrix is color-coded based on the degree of current priority. After the ranking, the matrix is then translated into specific guidance from the DNI to senior IC managers for allocating collection and analytical resources.

Though the NIPF is highly classified, it is likely that there is no higher priority intelligence target than Iran's nuclear program, ballistic-missile sites, and air-defense system. Given that the Sentinel was reportedly on a CIA mission, there is certainly a presidential memoranda of notification (or several) that broadly authorizes the covert collection efforts in Iran. Moreover, assuredly the Senate and House intelligence committees have been briefed often and thoroughly about the CIA's use of the Sentinel over Iran.

Since Iran is among the most important intelligence collection priority, it would only make sense for the United States to utilize its most advanced capabilities, just as the U-2 spy plane was a half-century ago. The United States has reportedly been flying drones of various capabilities and missions over Iran since as early as April 2004, some of which Iranians believed to be UFOs. The following year, Iran protested the drone flights to the United States through Swiss diplomatic channels, and via letters to the U.N. Security Council, demanding "an end to such unlawful acts." The RQ-170 Sentinel drone itself, pictures of which were first published in 2007, had flown from Afghan airbases over Iran "for years," according to the Associated Press. (Of course, Iran also flies surveillance drones against U.S. military assets, as demonstrated in this grainy video of the USS Ronald Reagan.)

 

Micah Zenko is a fellow in the Council on Foreign Relations. He blogs at Politics, Power, and Preventive Action, and tweets at @micahzenko.

THE_OBSERVER

7:44 PM ET

December 9, 2011

Busted

The author should also mention that the deliberate entering of another's country's airspace to spy is a serious international violation. I'm sure the gun-happy Americans would have gone to war if Iran had done something similar over the USA. Instead the USA is now caught in it's own game and the Iranians are taking this matter up with the UN.

 

HURRICANEWARNING

9:32 PM ET

December 9, 2011

quit whining...

Enough already. This is life. There are double standards. The biggest, strongest kid on the block ends up making the rules. End of story. EVERY COUNTRY ON EARTH ENGAGES IN ILLEGAL ESPIONAGE ACTIVITIES. For Iran to claim we were "violating their sovereignty" would be hilarious. What about when they bombed our embassies in Lebanaon, kidnapped and killed our soldiers and agents in Iraq, or recently tried to assassinate a Saudi Diplomat on US soil. How's that for violation of sovereignty? This is how the game is played, grow up. The world is not black and white, and no one has ever given a shit about the rules. He who has the most guns makes the rules. That has, more or less, been a fact since the beginning of time. Deal with it. Reality dictates that we spy on Iran so that we can obtain the proper intelligence to determine whether or not a pre-emptive strike is necessary. This intel gathering could save lives, both Iranian and American. What's your problem with that exactly?

 

MSAM

5:40 AM ET

December 10, 2011

If you believe that it's the

If you believe that it's the law of the jungle when it comes to international affairs, that those with guns get to dictate terms, then can you please stop pretending to represent the civilized world. And to stop using the phoney pretenses of international law and human rights to target other states.

 

MSAM

10:46 PM ET

December 9, 2011

Violating another country's

Violating another country's air space for spying is an act of aggression. It is illegal under international law. Those who seem to think that international rules are a waste of time and not worth following should not then bitch and moan about iran's alleged violations of so called international laws and resolutions.

 

ANON45

1:21 AM ET

December 10, 2011

Iran really doesn't have a leg to stand on...

The US has claimed the drone malfunctioned on the Afghan border and veered into Iran. Iran can't prove otherwise. So legally Iran is without recourse or evidence from authoritative objective sources, unless they can get video of inside the control room when the pilot of the drone was flying.

Morally Iran doesn't have a pot to piss in. Perhaps we can have Iran explain in more detail what its own drones were doing in Iraq violating airspace under US jurisdiction that were tracked for hours across the border before they were shot down? Or perhaps how they kidnapped US citizens from across a border?

 

MSAM

5:17 AM ET

December 10, 2011

American news outlets have

American news outlets have repeatedly reported that this drone was operated by the CIA as a program to spy on Iran. A program ongoing for years. So they story of a malfunction causing the drone to end up deep inside Iran is farfetched. Those who are willing to accept US claims that defy credibility are of course easly pursuaded by flimsy evidence presented to implicate Iran In all sort of nefarious operations in iraq. Never mind that the US invaded Iraq and killed tens of thousands of people.

 

SHAAMYL77

11:21 AM ET

December 10, 2011

Lies

Lies, lies and more lies to cover up earlier lies!

 

ANON45

12:15 PM ET

December 10, 2011

Has the US government supported that claim?

Or are they sticking with their claims of malfunction? At this point it is Iran's word against the US on the issue, and we both know which has more power and influence within the UN.

It's about as acceptable as Iran's claims that its secret nuclear programs are for peaceful purposes, so yes I do expect many, especially other country's governments, to accept that as the case, as some countries accept that Iran is developing nuclear facilities for peaceful purposes against the outcry of an organization that helps facilitate nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.

Good to see you didn't contest my other claims, you also know that Iran cannot claim any superiority of any kind, in which case I don't mind this falling down to bald realpolitik.

 

MSAM

3:16 PM ET

December 10, 2011

The difference is I am not

The difference is I am not parroting Iranian governments positions and claims like you seem to do when you accept US's claims of Iran's "evil" deeds in Iraq.

 

ANON45

5:36 PM ET

December 10, 2011

You do in spirit.

Well unless you expect the Iranian government or its state media to tell you when it does 'evil', I don't know what you expect. The US has a free independant (from the government) media which serves to give its institutions a certain amount of transparency.

With regards to Iran, you won't get the Iranian media telling any story other than what the government wants it to tell.

You criticize the US for possibly sending recon drones into Iran's airspace while remaining silent on the reason they might be sent there, becausse Iran is not truthful to the IAEA, because Iran has secret nuclear plants, and because Iran by all accounts is trying to achieve nuclear weapons capability in direct violation to its treaty obligations.

You don't see what's wrong with that because you view the NPT as a mere piece of toilet paper.

It is of course our duty to find out with all due haste Iran's progress, to further discover Iran's intentions, and to take further action if Iran cannot be dissuaded through diplomacy.

 

MSAM

6:50 PM ET

December 10, 2011

If you think that the US

If you think that the US media is independent of the government then I refer you to their disgraceful conduct in the lead up to the Iraq invasion. Fact is, in order for US journalists to maintain their relationship and access to the government and to avoid being labelled as appeasers and unamerican they often report US government's claims and accusations without any real objectivity. As for the rest of your post, you again make the same claims western governments have made regarding Iran, claims that run counter to the fact that not a single piece of independent evidence has ever been presented to show a military dimension to Iran's nuclear program. Those who to treat the NPT like a piece of toilet paper are those countries who are in complete defiance of their responsibilities under the protocol to work towards disarmament and non-proliferation, chief amongst the US.

 

IBAGUMI

5:08 AM ET

December 11, 2011

endless war

I guess there's no end to this war game, there will be more and more :|

Iba
holistic treatment for acne

 

TRAVELAGENTES

7:00 AM ET

December 10, 2011

very well done.

President Obama announced Friday that the United States will withdraw nearly all troops from Iraq by the end of the year, effectively bringing the long and polarizing war in Iraq to an end.

"After nearly 9 years, America's war in Iraq will be over," said Mr. Obama.

He said the last American troops will depart the country by January 1 "with their heads held high, proud of their success, and knowing that the American people stand united in our support for our troops."

"The transition in Afghanistan is moving forward, and our troops are finally coming home," he added, saying in the White House briefing room that U.S. troops "will definitely be home for the holidays."

The war in Iraq has meant the death of more than 4,400 U.S. troops and come at a cost of more than $700 billion. Asked in a briefing following Mr. Obama's remarks if it was worth it, Antony Blinken, National Security Adviser to Vice President Joe Biden, said, "history is going to have to judge."

America has already withdrawn nearly 100,000 troops from Iraq already as part of the current draw-down; nearly 40,000 "non-combat" troops remain. Mr. Obama said Friday that "Iraqis have taken full responsibility for their country's security" and said that the relationship between the United States and Iraq going forward will be one of equals.

"It will be a normal relationship between sovereign nations, an equal partnership based on mutual interest and mutual respect," he said.

Mr. Obama discussed the planned announcement earlier in the day with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki over secure video conference. He said al-Maliki "spoke of the determination of the Iraqi people to forge their own future," and that the two leaders are "in full agreement about how to move forward."

Mr. Obama said he had invited al-Maliki to the White House in December and vowed that the United States and Iraq will embark on a "strong and enduring partnership."

"As I told Prime Minister Maliki, we will continue discussions on how we might help Iraq train and equip its forces, again, just as we offer training and assistance to countries around the world," said the president. "After all, there will be some difficult days ahead for Iraq and the United States will continue to have an interest in an Iraq that is stable, secure and self-reliant.

Mr. Obama had vowed to end the war in Iraq as a presidential candidate. He spoke out passionately against the war in 2002, though later said the United States had an "absolute obligation" to stay in the country as long as it took to achieve success.

Mr. Obama said the United States will be "moving forward from a position of strength" and that the troop departure "will be a time to reflect on all that we've been through in this war."

"I'll join the American people in paying tribute to the more than 1 million Americans who have served in Iraq," he said. "We'll honor our many wounded warriors and the nearly 4,500 American patriots and their Iraqi and coalition partners who gave their lives to this effort."Mr. Obama said he had invited al-Maliki to the White House in December and vowed that the United States and Iraq will embark on a "strong and enduring partnership."

"As I told Prime Minister Maliki, we will continue discussions on how we might help Iraq train and equip its forces, again, just as we offer training and assistance to countries around the world," said the president. "After all, there will be some difficult days ahead for Iraq and the United States will continue to have an interest in an Iraq that is stable, secure and self-reliant.

Mr. Obama had vowed to end the war in Iraq as a presidential candidate. He spoke out passionately against the war in 2002, though later said the United States had an "absolute obligation" to stay in the country as long as it took to achieve success.

Mr. Obama said the United States will be "moving forward from a position of strength" and that the troop departure "will be a time to reflect on all that we've been through in this war."

"I'll join the American people in paying tribute to the more than 1 million Americans who have served in Iraq," he said. "We'll honor our many wounded warriors and the nearly 4,500 American patriots and their Iraqi and coalition partners who gave their lives to this effort."
Mr. Obama said he had invited al-Maliki to the White House in December and vowed that the United States and Iraq will embark on a "strong and enduring partnership."

"As I told Prime Minister Maliki, we will continue discussions on how we might help Iraq train and equip its forces, again, just as we offer training and assistance to countries around the world," said the president. "After all, there will be some difficult days ahead for Iraq and the United States will continue to have an interest in an Iraq that is stable, secure and self-reliant.

Mr. Obama had vowed to end the war in Iraq as a presidential candidate. He spoke out passionately against the war in 2002, though later said the United States had an "absolute obligation" to stay in the country as long as it took to achieve success.

Mr. Obama said the United States will be "moving forward from a position of strength" and that the troop departure "will be a time to reflect on all that we've been through in this war."

"I'll join the American people in paying tribute to the more than 1 million Americans who have served in Iraq," he said. "We'll honor our many wounded warriors and the nearly 4,500 American patriots and their Iraqi and coalition partners who gave their lives to this effort."
Mr. Obama said he had invited al-Maliki to the White House in December and vowed that the United States and Iraq will embark on a "strong and enduring partnership."

"As I told Prime Minister Maliki, we will continue discussions on how we might help Iraq train and equip its forces, again, just as we offer training and assistance to countries around the world," said the president. "After all, there will be some difficult days ahead for Iraq and the United States will continue to have an interest in an Iraq that is stable, secure and self-reliant.

Mr. Obama had vowed to end the war in Iraq as a presidential candidate. He spoke out passionately against the war in 2002, though later said the United States had an "absolute obligation" to stay in the country as long as it took to achieve success.

Mr. Obama said the United States will be "moving forward from a position of strength" and that the troop departure "will be a time to reflect on all that we've been through in this war."

"I'll join the American people in paying tribute to the more than 1 million Americans who have served in Iraq," he said. "We'll honor our many wounded warriors and the nearly 4,500 American patriots and their Iraqi and coalition partners who gave their lives to this effort."Mr. Obama said he had invited al-Maliki to the White House in December and vowed that the United States and Iraq will embark on a "strong and enduring partnership."

"As I told Prime Minister Maliki, we will continue discussions on how we might help Iraq train and equip its forces, again, just as we offer training and assistance to countries around the world," said the president. "After all, there will be some difficult days ahead for Iraq and the United States will continue to have an interest in an Iraq that is stable, secure and self-reliant.

Mr. Obama had vowed to end the war in Iraq as a presidential candidate. He spoke out passionately against the war in 2002, though later said the United States had an "absolute obligation" to stay in the country as long as it took to achieve success.

Mr. Obama said the United States will be "moving forward from a position of strength" and that the troop departure "will be a time to reflect on all that we've been through in this war."

"I'll join the American people in paying tribute to the more than 1 million Americans who have served in Iraq," he said. "We'll honor our many wounded warriors and the nearly 4,500 American patriots and their Iraqi and coalition partners who gave their lives to this effort."Mr. Obama said he had invited al-Maliki to the White House in December and vowed that the United States and Iraq will embark on a "strong and enduring partnership."

"As I told Prime Minister Maliki, we will continue discussions on how we might help Iraq train and equip its forces, again, just as we offer training and assistance to countries around the world," said the president. "After all, there will be some difficult days ahead for Iraq and the United States will continue to have an interest in an Iraq that is stable, secure and self-reliant.

Mr. Obama had vowed to end the war in Iraq as a presidential candidate. He spoke out passionately against the war in 2002, though later said the United States had an "absolute obligation" to stay in the country as long as it took to achieve success.

Mr. Obama said the United States will be "moving forward from a position of strength" and that the troop departure "will be a time to reflect on all that we've been through in this war."

"I'll join the American people in paying tribute to the more than 1 million Americans who have served in Iraq," he said. "We'll honor our many wounded warriors and the nearly 4,500 American patriots and their Iraqi and coalition partners who gave their lives to this effort."

thanks

Travel agent of Travel agency

 

MARTY MARTEL

9:16 AM ET

December 10, 2011

So China will get it

No matter how much US spies, it won’t be able to stop Iran’s nuclear program with big daddies like China and Russia supporting it.

End result will be that China will get American knowhow on the cheap. It is new for China even if it is outdated technology for US.

And Mr. Zenko knows that China will get newer technology as well when newer super drone will crash tomorrow.

 

XTIANGODLOKI

11:50 AM ET

December 10, 2011

This hurts US influence in the region

The real impact of this event has more to do with Iran and Israel than the US. The current Iranian government will use to push back against US influence. It can easily start up an anti-spy campaign to silence the pro-west Iranians. This will also be a blow to US' efforts to hinder Iran's nuke capabilities. The drone technology will be studied by other nations, though I am not sure how far is China.

The problem with US and Iran is that the US doesn't really benefit much from containing Iran. The US public will not stomach a war with Iran to begin with even if there is evidence of Iran building nukes, because the nukes will not be aimed at the US but at Israel.

 

LOYD ESKILDSON

3:10 PM ET

December 10, 2011

Iran Has Our Spy Drone - SO WHAT?

The first poster makes an excellent point - our drones undoubtedly cost billions to develop. More importantly, however, let's ask how the drone ended up in Iran, intact.

Obviously, it wasn't shot down, nor is it likely that it simply ran out of fuel and landed safely via inherent stability. (These designs are inherently unstable, and normally utilize computer-guided controls.)

Ergo, hackers took control - probably Chinese and/or Russian hackers in the lead. (Nice payback from Iran for Stuxnet!)

Thus, our highly vaunted technology lead has been neutralized, in this instance and who knows how many others. Meanwhile, as others already stated, this shows the U.S. on the wrong side of international law - again! And our prestige takes ANOTHER beating!

The next question is "Why were we there?" The obvious answer - doing Israel's bidding, as we have since President Truman. Not new news, but it doesn't help to publicly rub salt into a old wound. Republicans and Democrats fight regularly over who the title of 'Most supportive of Israel.' The 'cost' so far - two Arab oil embargoes, billions in foreign aid bribes to Egypt etc., billions more in military and financial aid to Israel, the enmity of millions of Muslims, 9/11, and obvious derision by the rest of the world for our hypocrasy.

No, Mr. Zenko. Getting caught AGAIN is not the cost of pursuing high-value intelligence - it is the cost of being stupid, of minding everyone else's business, and of being hypocritical! And this time it will cost far more than the U-2 incident, or the crash-landing of a U.S. electronics spy-plane in 2001 China!

 

SANTECHNIKA

3:59 PM ET

December 10, 2011

It's could be even more tricky

It's really hard same times even think what is really behind all this. Because USA(?or someone else) game with world main resources (oil) is really tricky.
The real reason why Iran has that super drone could be very smart or very very stupid.
Sincerely,
Santechnika

 

THE_OBSERVER

12:10 AM ET

December 11, 2011

Reverse engineering

To the author, Micah Zenko, who seems to think this is no big deal.

The Chinese or the Russians will have some of their best aeronautical, computer, electronic, mechanical engineers and material scientists looking over the drone. The data is probably encrypted to a very high-level and hence is off-limits but they will probably be more interested in the technology and the corresponding capabilities of the drone.

Let me run you through a list of what is going to happen:

(1) They will first measure and photograph the drone.
(2) The shape is probably known already but the layers and chemical composition of the anti-radar coatings will be studied.
(3) With the coatings removed, they will then x-ray it for the internal layout in a bomb-resistant x-ray machine.
(4) If safe they will unscrew any relevant bolts or use an oxy-acetylene torch to open the bird. Everything will be studied: the metallurgy of the casing and plane body; the mechanical systems and corresponding materials; optics; radar systems; any jamming systems; batteries, etc
(5) Microprocessor boards will have the circuitry reversed engineered noting all the different components including the hardened micro-processors;
(6) Assemblers/dissassemblers will be used on any retrievable code.

Now unless the Americans deliberately dropped a dud in Iran, the Chinese or the Russians will be able to do 3 things:
(1) Compare their current levels of expertise and technology with what is said to be 1990s US technology.
(2) Test stealth detecting technologies against at least the shape and materials used in the coatings.
(3) If the technology is indeed superior to whatever the Chinese or Russians have then this loss could allow either the Chinese, Russians, or both, to develop similar stealth, radar, jamming technologies including fuel-economic stealth drones at a cost savings.

 

ONEN

1:00 PM ET

December 11, 2011

No big issue

I believe the drone is not an important issue. There must be some protection regarding loss of secrets. A drone is just a piece of technology that probably everyone will have before long. pips

 

THE_OBSERVER

5:36 PM ET

December 11, 2011

Easy said than done

You must have some garage then if you can make one up in there

 

BASPINOZA

4:02 PM ET

December 11, 2011

That was first class "flying

That was first class "flying Sh*t".

 

RAJKANDI

9:54 PM ET

December 11, 2011

A US ploy

Could it not be that the US deliberately 'lost' its drone over Iran after having filled it with false technology and bugs to spy on Iran from the inside and provide the Iranians with false information I have read that some gaming laptops also have some bugs in them for spying.

 

JAKE STERNBERGER

11:35 PM ET

December 11, 2011

Intelligence Budget

Zenko is right that 55 billion is spent on national intelligence, but it is worth noting that the National Intelligence Program (NIP) only accounts for about 65% of the total intelligence budget.

The NIP covers all civilian intelligence agencies (CIA, NSA, NRO, NGA) but not military intelligence agencies. The Military Intelligence Program (MIP) comprises the remainder of the intelligence budget. For some perspective, note that the total intelligence budget for 2009 was about 75 billion and the total in 2010 was about 80 billion.

Needless to say, COMETLINEAR's first comment on this page is absurd given that the figure he estimates is roughly equivalent to the per annum expenditure of the entire National Intelligence Program.

 

JASIEK2

8:32 AM ET

December 12, 2011

Scary times

Scary times
toy shop

 

LAUSOL

11:27 AM ET

December 12, 2011

Futuristic Times

That looks like a future ufo. I hope it is just a photoshop trick because if they have that technology then something must be wrong...
asesoria fiscal barcelona

 

SHAMS ZAMAN

1:32 PM ET

December 12, 2011

Oh Really??

Nice try to just hide the embarrassment. It indeed is a deep blow to US prestige to have lost the most sophisticated and expensive drone in such a manner that it was caught in the net completely intact. Seems the defeat on every front is becoming the destiny of the US for its wicked policies being followed around the globe. If still the US fails to learn the lesson, it will meet the same fate which the other imperialist empires met. It, in no way is invincible.

 

TOPNOTCH

1:17 AM ET

December 13, 2011

hmmm!!!

I would like to think this drone is useless for them if they are trying to mimic it to try and spy on the states as they would already have the technology to spot it on radar. I also wonder if this is a setup by the states to have and inside view of whats going on inside there base, because obviously this would be brought to a highly protected baseof some sort in Iran and if they don't know what is going on inside this drone they could be in trouble. It could have enough C4 on it to take out a building, if they landed it safely it wouldn't detonate but the states could be in total control still of whats going on with this thing. Something seem's odd to me and the states doesnt seem to have a real urgency to say much yet.