The perils of presidential openness: strikes, secrecy and performative opacity

Abstract

In a world of increasing openness, secrecy retains its value. Covert operations, including strikes against individuals, can provide intelligence agencies with the ability to operate strategically, while limiting domestic entanglements and international provocation. But presidents increasingly push the boundaries, retrospectively using their decisions performatively for political advantage. This can confront agencies with a dilemma wherein they are pressed to demonstrate the rationale for a covert mission in ways that undermine future operational security. Evidence from the strikes on Osama bin Laden and Iran’s General Soleimani will be used to argue that retrospective briefs designed to enhance legitimacy or prestige are problematic. Instead, these active disclosures, sometimes by senior figures, can lead to a general unravelling of secrecy which has the potential to threaten future operational credibility and effectiveness.