The towers have fallen. Nearly 3,000 people are dead. The United States has just suffered the deadliest attack on its soil since Pearl Harbor, and the perpetrators are not a nation-state, but a shadowy network operating from caves in Afghanistan and apartments in Hamburg. In the weeks following September 11, President Bush delivered an ultimatum to the world: "You are either with us, or you are with the terrorists." Allied nations rush to declare their solidarity. NATO invokes Article 5 for the first time in its history. Intelligence agencies that once guarded their secrets jealously are now expected to share everything.
But solidarity does not mean agreement. Behind closed doors, allied intelligence chiefs confront agonizing questions. How much surveillance of our own citizens is acceptable? What do we share with partners we do not fully trust? Do we arrest suspects now, or monitor them to uncover the broader network? And when American allies request cooperation in detention and interrogation programs that may violate our own laws, what do we say?
As delegates representing the intelligence agencies of the United States and its closest allies, you must navigate these dilemmas in real time. The enemy is patient, adaptable, and already among us. The choices made in this room will shape the architecture of counterterrorism for a generation, but at what cost? In the desperate pursuit of security, what are we willing to become?
But solidarity does not mean agreement. Behind closed doors, allied intelligence chiefs confront agonizing questions. How much surveillance of our own citizens is acceptable? What do we share with partners we do not fully trust? Do we arrest suspects now, or monitor them to uncover the broader network? And when American allies request cooperation in detention and interrogation programs that may violate our own laws, what do we say?
As delegates representing the intelligence agencies of the United States and its closest allies, you must navigate these dilemmas in real time. The enemy is patient, adaptable, and already among us. The choices made in this room will shape the architecture of counterterrorism for a generation, but at what cost? In the desperate pursuit of security, what are we willing to become?