ລິ້ງ ສຳຫລັບເຂົ້າຫາ

logo-print

ອົງ​ການ​ສືບ​ລັບ ສ​ຫລ ໃນ​ໄລ​ຍະ​ຂ້າມ​ຜ່ານ ຍັງ​ຈະ​ເພັ່ງ​ເລັງ​ໃສ່ ຄວາມ​ຈິງ ໃນ​ເວ​ລານີ້


​ທ່ານ​ໂຈ​ເຊັ​ຟ ແມັກ​ກວຍ​ເອີ ຮັກ​ສາ​ການ ຫົວ​ໜ້າ​ສືບ​ລັບ​ແຫ່ງ​ຊາດ ຄົນ​ໃໝ່.

ຫົວ​ໜ້າ​ສືບ​ລັບ​ຄົນ​ໃໝ່​ຂອງ​ສະ​ຫະ​ລັດ​ສັນ​ຍາ​ວ່າ ໜ່ວຍ​ສືບ​ລັບ​ຕ່າງໆ​ຂອງ​ປະ​ເທດ​ຈະ​ບໍ່​ຖືກ​ຂັດ​ຂວາງ​ໃນ​ການ​ປະ​ຕິ​ບັດ​ໜ້າ​ທີ່​ຂອງ​ພວກ​ເຂົາ​ເຈົ້າ ນຶ່ງມື້​ຫລັງຈາກ​ຫົວ​ໜ້າ​ຄົນ​ກ່ອນ ແລະ​ຜູ້​ຮອງ​ຂອງ​ທ່ານ ໄດ້​ພາ​ກັນອອກ​ຈາກ​ລັດ​ຖະບານ.

ຮັກ​ສາ​ການ​ຜູ້​ອຳ​ນວຍ​ການ​ອົງ​ການ​ສືບ​ລັບ​ແຫ່ງ​ຊາດ ທ່ານ​ໂຈ​ເຊັ​ຟ ແມັກ​ກວຍເອີ ກ່າວ​ຢູ່​ໃນ​ຖະ​ແຫຼງ​ການ​ທີ່​ນຳ​ອອກ​ເຜີຍ​ແຜ່​ໃນ​ວັນ​ສຸກວານນີ້​ວ່າ “ຫ້ອງ​ການຜູ້​ອຳ​ນວຍ​ການ​ອົງ​ການ​ສື​ບ​ລັບ​ແຫ່ງ​ຊາດ ຍັງ​ຈະ​ເພັ່ງ​ເລັງ​ໃສ່​ການ​ນຳ​ພາ​ປະ​ຊາຄົມ​ສືບ​ລັບ ແລະ​ສະ​ໜອງ​ຂໍ້​ມູນ​ທີ່​ສຳ​ຄັນໆ ເພື່ອ​ສະ​ໜັບ​ສະ​ໜັບ​ຄວາມ​ໝັ້ນ​ຄົງແຫ່ງ​ຊາດ​ຂອງ​ພວກ​ເຮົາ.”

​ທ່ານ​ແມັກ​ກວຍ​ເອີ ອະ​ດີດ​ສະ​ມາ​ຊິກ​ໜ່ວຍ​ກ້າ​ຕາຍ​ເນ​ວີ​ຊຽ​ລ (Navy SEAL) ຜູ້​ຊຶ່ງ​ມາ​ຈົນ​ຮອດ​ວັນ​ພະ​ຫັດ​ຜ່ານ​ມານີ້ ແມ່ນ​ຮັບ​ໜ້າ​ທີ່​ເປັນ​ຜູ້​ອຳ​ນວຍ​ການ ​ສູນກາງ​ຕໍ່​ຕ້ານການ​ກໍ່​ການ​ຮ້າຍນັ້ນຍັງ​ກ່າວ​ວ່າ “ຍິນ​ດີ​ທີ່​ຈະ​ປະ​ຕິ​ບັດ​ຕາມ​ເສັ້ນ​ທາງ” ຂອງ​ອະ​ດີດ​ຜູ້​ອຳ​ນວຍ​ການອົງ​ການ​ສືບ​ລັບ​ແຫ່ງ​ຊາດ​ ທ່ານ​ແດນ ໂຄ​ທ​ສ໌ ຜູ້​ຊຶ່ງພ້ອມ​ກັບ​ຜູ້​ຮອງ​ຂອງ​ທ່ານ ທ່ານ​ນາງ​ຊູ ກໍ​ດັອນ “ເພື່ອ​ນຳ​ພາ​ ປະ​ຊາ​ຄົມ​ສືບ​ລັບຜ່ານ​ຜ່າບັນ​ຫາ​ທ້າ​ທາຍ ​ໃນ​ການ​ປ່​ຽນ​ແປ​ງ​ຢ່າງ​ໃຫຍ່​ຂອງ​ໂລກ ທີ່​ປະ​ເທດ​ຂອງພວກ​ເຮົາ​ໄດ້​ປະ​ສົບ​ພົບ​ມາ.”

ພວກ​ເຈົ້າ​ໜ້າ​ທີ່​ສືບ​ລັບ ທັງ​ໃນ​ອະ​ດີດແລະ​ປັດ​ຈຸ​ບັນ ຈຳ​ນວນ​ນຶ່ງ ເບິ່ງ​ທ່ານ​ແມັກກວຍ​ເອີ​ ຜູ້​ຊຶ່ງ​ປະ​ສົບ​ຄວາມ​ສຳ​ເລັດ​ໃນ​ອາ​ຊີບ​ວຽກ​ການ ໃນ​ກອງ​ທັບ​ເຮືອ ກ່ອນທີ່​ຈະ​ຍ້າຍ​ມາ​ຮັບ​ໜ້າ​ທີ່ ໃນ​ດ້ານ​ຕໍ່​ຕ້ານ​ການ​ກໍ່​ການ​ຮ້າຍນັ້ນ ເປັນ​ບຸກ​ຄົນ​ທີ່​ຄວບຄຸມ​ຕົນ​ເອງ ສາ​ມາດ​ເປັນ​ຜູ້​ນຳ​ພາ​ ແລະ​ເອົາ​ຈິງ​ເອົາ​ຈັງ​ແບບ​ງຽບໆ ເພື່ອ​ໃຫ້​ເປັນທີ່​ແນ່​ໃຈ​ວ່າ​ບັນ​ດາ​ອົງ​ການ​ສືບ​ລັບ​ຂອງ​ສະ​ຫະ​ລັດ ຍັງ​ສືບ​ຕໍ່​ສະໜອງ ການ​ຊັ່ງ​ຊາ​ທີ່​ເປັນ​ຈິງ ແລະ​ກົງ​ໄປ​ກົງ​ມາ ຕໍ່​ພວກ​ກຳ​ນົດ​ນະ​ໂຍ​ບາຍ.

ຄວາມ​ເຕັມ​ໃຈທີ່​ຈະ “ປະ​ເຊີນ​ໜ້າ​ກັບ​ພວກ​ທີ່​ກຳ​ຕຳ​ແໜ່ງ​ສຳ​ຄັນ” ​ດັ່ງ​ທີ່​ພວກ​ເຈົ້າ​ໜ້າ​ທີ່​ສືບ​ລັບ​ມັກ​ຈະ​ເວົ້າ​ວ່າ ແມ່ນ​ສິ່ງ​ທີ່​ໄດ້​ເຮັດ​ໃຫ້​ທັງ​ທ່ານ​ໂຄ​ທ​ສ໌​ແລະ​ທ່ານ​ນາງ​ກໍ​ດັອນເປັນ​ທີ່​ຮັກ​ແລະ​ເຄົາ​ລົບ ສຳ​ລັບ​ປະ​ຊາ​ຄົມ​ສືບລັບ​ ແລະ​ໃນທົ່ວ​ວົງ​ການ​ລັດ​ຖະ​ບານ​ສະ​ຫະ​ລັດ.

ນອກນັ້ນ ມັນ​ຍັງ​ເປັນ​ສິ່ງ​ທີ່​ມີ​ທ່າ​ທາງວ່າໄດ້​ຊ່ວຍ​ໃນ​ການ​ຈາກ​ໄປ​ຂອງ​ພວກ​ທ່ານນຳ​ດ້ວຍ.

ໃນ​ຫຼາຍໆ​ໂອ​ກາດ ທ່ານ​ໂຄ​ທ​ສ໌​ໄດ້​ເຮັດ​ໃຫ້​ປະ​ທາ​ນາ​ທິ​ບໍ​ດີ​ດໍ​ໂນ​ລ ທ​ຣຳ ​ບໍ່​ພໍ​ໃຈ ຍ້ອນໄດ້​ສະ​ແດງ​ການ​ຄັດ​ຄ້ານ​ຢ່າງ​ເປີດ​ເຜີຍກ່ຽວ​ກັບ​ການ​ຕັດ​ສິນ​ໃຈ​ທີ່​ຈະ​ພົບ​ປະກັບ​ເຈົ້າ​ໜ້າ​ທີ່​ຣັດ​ເຊຍ ຕາມ​ລຳ​ພັງ ຢູ່​ທີ່​ຫ້ອງ​ການ​ຮູບ​ຊົງ​ໄຂ່ ໃນ​ທຳ​ນຽບ​ຂາວ​ຫຼືການ​ບໍ່​ເຫັນ​ພ້ອມ​ກັບ​ການ​ຊັ່ງ​ຊາ​ຂອງ​ປະ​ທາ​ນາ​ທິ​ບໍ​ດີກ່ຽວ​ກັບ​ເກົາ​ຫຼີ​ເໜືອ​ ອີ​ຣ່ານແລະ​ກຸ່ມ​ລັດ​ອິ​ສ​ລາມ.

ຫຼັງ​ຈາກ​ການ​ຮັບ​ຟັງ​ຄຳ​ໃຫ້​ການ ເມື່ອ​ເດືອນ​ມັງ​ກອນ​ປີນີ້ ປະ​ທາ​ນາ​ທິ​ບໍ​ດີ​ທ​ຣຳ​ແມ່ນໄດ້​ກະ​ທັງ​ຕ້ອງ​ຕິ​ທ່ານ​ໂຄ​ທ​ສ໌ແລະ​ເຈົ້າ​ໜ້າ​ທີ່​ສືບ​ລັບ​ອື່ນໆ ຜ່ານ​ທາງ​ທວີດເຕີ້ ໂດຍ​ຂຽນ​ວ່າ “ບາງ​ທີ ພວກ​ສືບ​ລັບ​ຄວນ​ຈະ​ກັບ​ຄືນ​ໄປ​ໂຮງ​ຮຽນ​ໃໝ່.”

The new, top-ranking U.S. intelligence official is promising the country's intelligence agencies will be undeterred in their work, a day after his predecessor and his predecessor's top deputy were ushered out of government.

"The Office of the Director of National Intelligence remains focused on leading the Intelligence Community (IC) and providing critical information in support of our nation's security," acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire said in a statement issued Friday.

Maguire, a former Navy SEAL who until Thursday had been serving as director of the National Counterterrorism Center, also said he was "humbled to follow in the footsteps" of former National Intelligence Director Dan Coats, who along with Deputy Director Sue Gordon, "led the IC [Intelligence Community] through some of the most dynamic global challenges our nation has faced."

A number of current and former intelligence officials see Maguire, who had a distinguished career in the Navy before moving into counterterrorism, as a steady handsomeone with the leadership skills and gravitasto make sure U.S. intelligence agencies continue to provide policy makers with honest, candid assessments.

That willingness to "speak truth to power," as intelligence officials often put it, is what endeared both Coats and Gordon to many in the intelligence community and across the U.S. government.

It is also the trait that likely helped lead to their departures.

On several occasions, Coats sparked the outrage of President Donald Trump, publicly contradicting him on decisions to meet with Russian officials, alone, in the Oval Office, or disagreement with the president's assessments of North Korea, Iran and the Islamic State terror group.
[[ https://www.voanews.com/usa/us-politics/us-intel-chiefs-warn-washington-risks-losing-friends-influence ]]

After one hearing this past January, Trump even lashed out at Coats and other intelligence officials on Twitter, writing, "Perhaps Intelligence should go back to school!"

[[ https://twitter.com/jseldin/status/1090608986259419136?s=20 ]]

But with Coats and Gordon gone, and with the nation's top spymaster, Central Intelligence Agency Director Gina Haspel, having chosen to largely stay out of the public eye, some wonder whether politics will increasingly creep into the intelligence community's assessments.

"The departure of Coats and Gordon is most unfortunate—for the country and for a healthy intelligence-policy relationship--because their departure appears to be all about Trump's unwillingness to hear anything from the intelligence community that doesn't suit him politically," said Paul Pillar, a former senior CIA officer now with Georgetown University.

"That is a corruption of the intelligence community's mission," he told VOA.

Those concerns were heightened late last month, when Trump initially announced he was going to nominate Republican Congressman John Ratcliffe, one of the newer members of the House Intelligence Committee, to be his new, top intelligence official.

Ratcliffe ultimately withdrew from consideration following questions about his credentials and experience. The fact that Trump's first move, however, was to pick someone who was viewed primarily as a political ally sounded an alarm for some former officials.

"Obviously, the president wants someone in this position whose first priority is loyalty to him," James Clapper, who served as director of national intelligence under former President Barack Obama, said at the time.

"I worry about people in the Intelligence Community, and the impact of potentially being directed to produce intelligence analyses that comport with the president's worldview, and not their best judgement as to the facts," he added.

President Trump's supporters, though, dismiss such concerns as overblown.

"I think there's been a lot of partisan rhetoric, which is unfortunate," said Fred Fletiz, a former CIA analyst who now heads the Center for Security Policy.

"The job of the ODNI [Office of the Director of National Intelligence] is to provide to the president the most accurate, objective and non-political intelligence possible," he said. "The president's committed to that."

Fleitz, who said he has talked to the administration about the position, likewise believes whoever comes in as the next permanent leader of the U.S. intelligence community will keep many of the current efforts to stay ahead of Russia and China, and to secure the upcoming presidential elections in 2020, in place.

But he also sees the need for some changes, citing what he describes as the misuse of foreign intelligence during the 2016 presidential election.

"Intelligence officials have to admit that intelligence was weaponized in the 2016 election to defeat Donald Trump. It was abused," Fleitz said.

Fleitz, and others, allege former President Barack Obama wanted fellow Democrat Hillary Clinton to win that presidential election so badly that he and his allies came up with a plan to discredit Trump using a counterintelligence investigation in the unlikely event that Trump would win.

"We all know that this happened," Fleitz told VOA. "What's important is that intelligence officials have to admit that this happened and put in place steps to make sure that it never happens again."

Other former officials view such claims, aimed at discrediting the Russian election interference investigation, with suspicion, seeing them more as an excuse to ensure that the next director of national intelligence meets Trump's political litmus test, rather than to correct any problem within U.S. intelligence.

"It's a little bit of crazy talk," said Larry Pfeiffer, a former CIA chief of staff and former senior director of the White House Situation Room. "Nobody in the United States intelligence community, down to its lowest level worker was weaponizing intelligence to try to defeat Donald Trump in the 2016 election."

"If there really had been an effort to weaponize' intelligence for anti-Trump purposes, then there would have been all sorts of leaks, before the election, of intelligence about the Russians helping Trump, but there were no such leaks," added Pillar.

"Straightforward collection and analysis about something as important to the national interest as a foreign government's interference in U.S. elections isn't weaponization; it is doing the intelligence agencies' proper job," he said.

ທ່ານອາດຈະມັກເລື້ອງນີ້ຄືກັນ

XS
SM
MD
LG