CIA doubles down on see-no-Russian Havana syndrome spin

The mission of the CIA is to acquire protected information from abroad from which CIA analysts can then extrapolate assessments for policymakers. The CIA often successfully performs this work via means of sacrifice and skill.

Unfortunately for America but fortunately for Russia, the CIA’s handling of the so-called Havana syndrome issue remains highly problematic.

That’s the only logical conclusion we can make from the short internal memo CIA Director Bill Burns sent to his workforce on Monday. In that memo, Burns affirmed the agency’s support for its prior assessment on Havana syndrome, or what the intelligence community refers to as “Anomalous Health Incidents.” Namely, that Havana syndrome is highly unlikely to be the result of a foreign actor. This matters because Havana syndrome has seen hundreds of U.S. military and government officials complain of strange, unexplained ailments while serving at home and abroad. Symptoms include dizziness, extreme pressure in the head, and unsteady gait. Some suspected victims now suffer serious, lifelong ailments. Others have even died prematurely. And while a large number of Havana syndrome reportees are very likely suffering from prior-undiagnosed or unrelated medical ailments, there is very significant evidence of a hostile Russian connection to dozens of other reports.

Why did Burns send out his Monday memo?

The simple answer: because of the Insider magazine’s March 31 reporting that ties Russia’s GRU military intelligence service operatives to both locations and periods in which U.S. government and military employees reported Havana syndrome-associated symptoms. In October 2021, the Washington Examiner was first to report on evidence pointing to a GRU link to Havana syndrome incidents.

Burns’s detail-short doubling down on his agency’s analysis is problematic for three reasons.

First, even if in a classified fashion, Burns should explain to his workforce whether the CIA’s investigation of Havana syndrome matches the basic rigor of the Insider’s investigation. For a start, he should note whether CIA assessed victims were shown photos of GRU unit 29155 officers in a similar manner to the Insider’s investigation. Burns should also explain what, if not engaged in Havana syndrome-related activities, he believes unit 29155 officers were actually doing in proximity to reporting U.S. victims. Maybe, as with the GRU’s explanation as to what its nerve-agent spraying 29155 assassins were doing in Salisbury, England, in March 2018, Burns believes they were tourists on Cathedral sightseeing adventures? But if so, he should say so.

Second, because Burns’s memo offered no answer to the Insider’s reporting and other reporting, including from the Washington Examiner, which shows that evidence of Russia’s Havana syndrome hand is neither fragmentary nor thin.

We know that identified Russian intelligence officers have operated in close proximity to Americans who then report Havana syndrome-related symptoms. We know Russia possesses radio frequency/microwave pulse systems that would cause the exact same effects Havana syndrome victims report. We know that the CIA has been briefed on these systems by the foremost experts. We also know that the CIA’s operational cadres and some of America’s closest foreign intelligence partners strongly believe that Russian RF/MW activities are almost certainly involved here.

This cuts to the broader problem: Burns’s rhetoric reflects an intelligence community record of deliberately ignoring evidentiary lines of effort that might point to Russia. Indeed, I understand that the CIA has failed to investigate the circumstantial but compelling evidence suggesting that George W. Bush may have been a victim of Havana syndrome during the 2007 G7 Summit.

True, the intelligence community does not have the smoking gun evidence of a seized Russian RF/MW device in its possession. But even here, the CIA’s efforts seem lackluster. While three sources have told me that the CIA has attempted to secure a Havana syndrome device, two sources say that this effort has been hamstrung by unwillingness on the part of the Biden administration and Burns to authorize a sufficiently aggressive physical posture against Russian intelligence operatives who, intelligence suggests, might be in possession of such devices. This stands in stark contrast to the highly aggressive tactics Russian intelligence and security officers apply toward U.S. intelligence officers. (For just one example of this, in 2017, a CIA officer in Moscow was attacked on Russian FSB orders after he successfully evaded FSB surveillance. The Russians then aired security camera footage on state media.)

All of this underlines why former Defense Department lead investigator for Havana syndrome, Greg Edgreen — and, I have confirmed, at least one former U.S. Cabinet secretary with a national security brief — have offered their confidence that Russia is responsible for Havana syndrome.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Top line: Perhaps Russia is not at all responsible for Havana syndrome. But considering the abundant evidence suggesting otherwise, Burns should explain why he offers no additional context for his avowed support of what appears to be an assessment antithetical to CIA standards. After all, the CIA’s motto is the biblical verse, “The Truth shall set you free.”

Unfortunately, Burns’s memo suggests that when it comes to Havana syndrome, intelligence community leaders still believe the truth is too dangerous to seek or see.