Breaking Cover Page 3

What I didn’t realize was that the CIA was split into multiple segments, known as directorates, each with a unique mission. The CIA consisted of the following:

  The Directorate of Operations (which would be called the National Clandestine Service from 2005 to 2015, when it would be renamed the Directorate of Operations)

  The Directorate of Intelligence (which would be renamed the Directorate of Analysis in 2015)

  The Directorate of Science and Technology

  The Directorate of Support

  The Directorate of Operations collected and evaluated intelligence; the Directorate of Intelligence analyzed the information, placing it into context for policymakers and other intelligence consumers; the Directorate of Science and Technology ensured intelligence collectors had the technical tools they needed to do their jobs; and the Directorate of Support ensured the CIA had the necessary staff to execute the full range of intelligence activities.

  Now it is likely that I heard this description of the CIA during the information session I attended at Georgetown, but having no context for the kind of people who get hired by the CIA, I didn’t think much about its makeup or organization. So when I threw my résumé into the CIA box and was later contacted by recruiters regarding the analyst position, that’s the road I went down. I had no idea there were other options.

  “The place to be,” said Justin, “is the Directorate of Operations.” The men and women in this directorate identified, developed, recruited, and handled sources to acquire secret information of interest to US policy makers.

  Granted, this seemed even more of a long shot—at least where I was concerned. While Justin and Joseph could easily see themselves in the middle of all the action, I could not even begin to envision myself in such a role.

  After listening to Justin, Joseph decided to apply. He thought that I should too, but I declined. I had no choice. In the rejection letter I’d received, I had been told that I could reapply to other jobs at the CIA, but I had to wait an entire year before doing so. Six months had already gone by, but I wasn’t in any rush to start that whole ugly process all over again. I was more than happy to wait and watch, to see how far Joseph and Justin would move through the convoluted employment process first.

  Joseph submitted his résumé and almost immediately heard back from recruiters. He received a phone call in which they asked basic biographical questions and queried why he was interested in working for the CIA. They must have liked his responses because shortly thereafter, he received a letter in the mail inviting him to an informational session to learn more about the Directorate of Operations.

  The event took place at a facility in the northern Virginia area with a group of about sixty candidates. One speaker described what it was like to be an undercover officer and work abroad. Another described the three main career thrusts: operations officer (OO), collection management officer (CMO), and staff operations officer (SOO). All of these types of officers are involved in the collection and dissemination of human intelligence—some more directly than others.

  Recruiters asked the candidates to carefully consider which of the positions they preferred since they’d need to choose one before leaving the meeting. It seemed a little nuts to ask applicants to make this decision so early in the hiring cycle, before anyone had a clear understanding of which position was a good match. But again, who was I to question the CIA?

  They also explained that the hiring process was long and intrusive because the CIA needs to be sure that they hire people with backgrounds, experience, and personalities best suited to the job. They are looking for a strange combination of qualities: They want people who are honest, but can lie. They want people who have not broken the law, but who are willing to do so (by carrying out intelligence acts abroad, we are breaking the laws of the foreign country). They want people who are authentic and forthright, but who have the capacity to manipulate. They want people who can work well in a team, but who can execute operations by themselves (most operations are solo). They want people who will plan and fully coordinate their operations in advance, but who are able to make changes on the fly, according to circumstances.

  To summarize, the CIA is looking for walking contradictions.

  The hiring and vetting process is also intensive because recruiters are seeking complicated human beings who can be trusted with some of the nation’s most sensitive tasks. Furthermore, being an intelligence officer is not something a person does for only eight hours a day. Working undercover, leading a secret life, and lying to most people about what one really does is a full-time job. Intelligence is an all-encompassing profession that requires sacrifice in the service of a greater cause. This is not something you waltz into halfheartedly.

  Officers don’t just live their cover; they must be able to defend it. Their lives, work, and well-being depend on their ability to do this convincingly, so they must be able to handle the pressure that this entails. Defending their cover refers to their ability to answer questions about themselves and their jobs without inviting additional scrutiny or leading people to doubt their identity or intentions. Such questions come from a variety of people, all the way from unwitting family, friends, and casual observers to potentially hostile groups such as foreign governments, security services, police, undercover officers, or enemy groups.

  To respond successfully to inquiries about their identities, jobs, activities, associations, or travel, officers have to be able to react quickly, to think on their feet. They must be clever and creative. They cannot give any indications that they are disquieted by questions. And above all, they must respond with confidence and grace. Maintaining calm under the most trying circumstances is something every officer must be able to do, over and over again. Preparation and consistency are key, but there will always be situations they never see coming and must respond to anyway.

  CIA agents have to learn to appear normal and maintain the facade that “nothing’s going on here,” even when they are doing something that would appear fishy to bystanders. When I’d become an agent myself, I once had to play the part of a source who may have been compromised by a terrorist group during a training exercise conducted for another government entity.

  The students in the training exercise were instructed to maintain constant surveillance on me to flush out the truth. They put me through a multihour exercise, making me walk for miles through all kinds of locations to determine whether I was dragging bad guys to the meeting site. Then to ensure I wasn’t wired, the students gave me directions over my cell phone to lift my shirt and show my belly while turning around in a circle. They were presumably hiding out in a parking garage fifty yards in front of me, using binoculars to see whether I was wired or being followed. Now this command would have been fine had there been no casual observers around, but I was walking through a park, with many people behind me on the trail. How do I do this without looking like a total nut or raising the suspicions of these bystanders? I wondered.

  I quickly raised my shirt to show my stomach, while dancing around in a crazy circle and howling, “Ahhhh! Bee! Get out, get out!” Nobody blinked.

  That was an instance of thinking fast during a fleeting operational scenario. Keeping a clear head when dealing with unexpected incidents is a critical aspect of the job.

  Maintaining their cover is a burden officers bear throughout their career in the Directorate of Operations. But it doesn’t stop when they leave the CIA: They must protect their cover even after retiring from the agency. Dropping cover requires special permission, so officers who leave the CIA are legally obliged to protect that cover, to maintain the stories they have told, until given special dispensation to say otherwise.

  In addition to the pressures of maintaining their cover, candidates must be aware that intelligence is a risky job. In many places in the world, recruiting and handling spies is a dangerous business. Not everyone can handle the pressure of carrying out illegal acts under the noses of foreign security services that are actively looking to identify (and ultimat
ely detain) spies and thwart CIA operations.

  Intelligence officers know what the worst-case scenarios are and are taught how to minimize the risk. Though they don’t fixate on all that can go wrong, if they’re discovered abroad in hostile territory, their activities or associations could land them in prison or get them killed. In the best-case scenario, they would be detained, interrogated, and then expelled from the country. Such incidents rarely occur thanks to the painstaking planning that goes into every operation, big and small. But candidates must be cognizant that this isn’t a game. The threats are real, and the missions can be perilous.

  Vetting practices are stringently applied throughout the employment process to ensure that enemies of the United States do not penetrate the ranks of intelligence officers. Joseph later told me that at his initial meeting one of the recruiters, who had spent most of his career in the Middle East, joked to the group, “For all we know, there could be an al-Qa’ida member sitting here amongst us.”

  Being the only person of Middle Eastern descent in the room, Joseph felt a little awkward. He hoped nobody was looking at him and wondering whether he was a terrorist or counterintelligence threat.

  At the end of the meeting, applicants filled out a form confirming their continued interest in being considered for the CIA. Each candidate was asked to choose one of the three positions they had heard about in the session. Joseph checked a box, handed in the form, and then came home and told me all about it. He was so excited.

  As for me, I was still conflicted. The CIA made perfect sense for someone like Joseph. He was smart, confident, and a world traveler, and he had already proven his courage in the face of intense opposition. While I had my degree and a handful of mission trips under my belt, I thought that I was less of an action person and more of a people person. All the spies I had seen on TV or in the movies were hard-nosed, operational types. I was more relational, more sensitive. I just wasn’t sure I was wired for a position like this.

  A few weeks later, Joseph was invited for three days of interviews and processing. That is where he met a recruiter named Jill. Jill spent hours getting to know Joseph, asking him questions like “Why do you want to work for the CIA?”

  Personally, I think candidates’ answers to this question go a long way in showing recruiters applicants’ understanding of the job, as well as their motivations for wanting to join. For instance, a candidate who answers, “Because I’m really good with a weapon” doesn’t have a realistic understanding of the CIA’s mission and activities. The job is not a law enforcement position.

  Joseph’s response was quite different: “Because I was born in the Middle East and spent most of my formative years there, I understand the threat of Islamic extremism to the world. I suffered as a young Christian at the hands of extremists in my hometown. Given this background, I feel I have a deep understanding of both Islam and extremism, and believe that I can make a contribution to America’s security. As a new immigrant, I value the freedom that this country stands for. Many Americans take these freedoms for granted. I don’t. I would be honored to defend those freedoms because I know what it is not to have them. Furthermore, I speak Arabic, and I look Middle Eastern . . . I can blend in.”

  At some point during the interview, Joseph mentioned that he had a spouse who knew the Middle East well and had a graduate degree in Arab studies. This really got Jill’s attention. After asking some questions about me and my background, she told Joseph that I would also be a good candidate for the NCS. She suggested that Joseph share this information with me and that if I was interested, I should apply—immediately.

  When Joseph told me how interested Jill was in me, I was dubious. After all, the agency had already turned me down once, and I had no idea why. Still, Joseph’s chances were looking extremely good, and I had to admit, it would be kind of cool to work side by side. So I threw caution to the wind and reapplied. What could it hurt to try? The worst thing they could say was no.

  As soon as I submitted my résumé, Joseph alerted Jill. A couple of weeks later, my phone rang. It was a recruiter for the Directorate of Operations who wanted to ask me a few questions. I couldn’t believe my ears. I thought I had to wait a year. What exactly did Joseph say about me to that woman?

  The recruiter was surprisingly friendly and easy to talk to. She asked me a variety of questions to test my knowledge of international affairs. To my amazement, I passed the interview and was invited to a small gathering at a public location to learn more about the agency’s recruitment process, much like the one Joseph had attended a month or two before.

  The recruiters explained that they were searching for men and women with a deep curiosity about the world. They wanted people who were well-traveled, adventurous, and familiar with other languages, and who had studied abroad. Even more specifically, they wanted emotionally intelligent individuals with solid people skills who could read others well and key into their personalities, moods, motivations, and feelings.

  I almost fell out of my chair. I had never heard such a strange job description. It was as if they were describing me to a T. I wanted to jump up and down like a rambunctious little kid with my hand in the air yelling, “Me! Me! Me! That’s me!”

  I have always had an uncanny ability to figure people out. It is not enough to know what someone does; I have to understand why he or she does it. I am driven to identify people’s values, ascertain their strengths and weaknesses, and ultimately interpret why they behave the way they do. People are complicated creatures, and I am motivated to figure them out because it helps me to make sense out of life. It brings order out of the chaos.

  In addition, I was born with a strong empathetic nature. Back when I was in the third grade, a new boy named Joey joined our class midway through the year. I assumed from Joey’s high-water pants and straggly hair that he was probably from a poor background. His clothes were dirty, and he smelled as though he didn’t bathe regularly. He was shy and withdrawn, with eyes full of sadness. Joey clearly needed a playmate, but I was a girl, and this was third grade. Someone might have accused us of “liking” each other, and that would have been unacceptably embarrassing!

  None of the kids wanted to hang out with Joey, so I went to one of my male friends and implored him to intervene.

  “Ben, you know the new boy, Joey, right? Will you play with him during recess? I think he needs a friend. I would do it, but I’m a girl.”

  That afternoon, Ben reluctantly brought Joey into the play group, and it was the first time I saw Joey having a good time at school. I felt such a sense of relief to know that Joey wasn’t sitting in the corner nursing a broken heart.

  This same concern for others’ well-being and emotions surfaced regularly at home, too. Whenever my parents argued, I would compile a list of things that each of them could do to meet the other’s expectations. I desperately wanted them to get along, to feel better. When I presented the list to my parents, they were shocked that a ten-year old would be trying to help them work out their issues. But I did. It was just my nature.

  I also became quite adept at reading body language. For example, when my mother came home from work, I knew whether she’d had a good day or a bad day within seconds of her parking her car and walking in the door: The way she carried her bags, the way she breathed, and the speed with which she greeted us told me a lot. I adored my mom and was every bit as familiar with her behavior and emotions as she was with mine.

  I never imagined that this proficiency in reading and understanding others would be the foundation for a career in intelligence. The traits I always considered weaknesses were actually perceived as strengths—by the CIA of all places!

  Throughout the briefing, the recruiters kept throwing out the words espionage and manipulation while monitoring the crowd for telltale signs of anxiety. They announced—in no uncertain terms—that this was not a game. This was real life. We would be hired to manipulate others in order to obtain critical intelligence.

  One recruiter fixed us w
ith a somber stare as he explained, “Intelligence officers recruit spies to commit espionage against their country or turn against the other members of their insurgent group. If this is unpalatable to you, if it goes against your values or morals or just doesn’t fit your personality, then please self-select out of the process.”

  Several people stood and left the room right then, never to return.

  Strangely, I did not find the recruiter’s explanation off-putting. Words like espionage have such negative connotations, but I saw them as being acceptable if applied in a particular way. For me, the ends justify the means if what is being done is in the best interests of those involved in the transaction.

  In other words, my motivations are key. I would never be comfortable trying to persuade someone to act in a certain way if I was doing so with malicious intentions. If, however, I can find a way to appeal to someone in an honest and forthright manner (arguably one of the most effective methods of selling anything), then I don’t see my values as being incompatible with the requirements of the job.

  In my mind, manipulation meant that I would be using my powers of persuasion to shape another person’s ideas or behavior. I would be working to get something I needed from him or her, which would require a strategy and the intention to achieve a certain set of objectives.

  A variety of professions require such skills to do the job well. This is what salespeople, marketers, real estate agents, business associates, and diplomats do. The significant difference is that the stakes in the CIA are higher and far more serious than sales bonuses or the bottom line. The couple walks off the car lot without buying a Toyota from you, negotiations break down and the business deal fizzles, the potential client does not choose your company. Such situations pale in comparison to the life-and-death scenarios that play out in the world of counterterrorism and counterintelligence.

  The other critical piece to point out is that the recruiters were not suggesting that we should be Manipulators (with a capital M), only that we should have the emotional maturity to compartmentalize how and when we “turned it on.”