The future of the NIA
VUSI MAVIMBELA, the former African
National Congress combatant chosen by President Thabo Mbeki as
director-general of the National Intelligence Agency, faces a tough
task. The NIA, as the agency is widely known, has hardly distinguished
itself since its formation five years ago, as manifested by its recent
shamefaced - and belated - admission that it had mounted a spying
operation against the German Embassy in Pretoria.
Its surveillance of the German Embassy is instructive: it was
discovered last November, as much through lack of professional
expertise by the NIA as the vigilance of German counter-intelligence
operatives, largely because the wires running from the inexpertly
concealed video camera opposite the embassy to a rubbish bin on the
pavement were visible to the naked eye. Clumsy, inept and amateurish
are apposite adjectives to describe the exercise. The belated
acknowledgement of responsibility can hardly be regarded as a polished
exercise in damage limitation. The video camera was detected on
November 17 but Intelligence Minister Joe Nhlanhla only admitted NIA
culpability on February 7, a full two-and-half months after ordering an
investigation that gave the impression that he was not sure what was
going on in his own ministry.
One of the central problems confronting Mavimbela, who was trained by
the Stasi, the dreaded secret police who helped prolong communist rule
in the former German Democratic Republic, is that of establishing and
maintaining a high degree of professionalism in the NIA. His
predecessor, Sizakele Sigxahse, can hardly be said to have been an
exemplary intelligence commander. It is an open secret that he
embarrassed the NIA when, shortly after his appointment as
director-general in 1995, police were called to his home to intervene
in a family quarrel during which he had allegedly threatened to shoot
his wife, thrown a plate of food at her and injured himself and one of
his children in the process.
Speaking of the NIA and the challenges ahead, Mavimbela admits
frankly: "We need to look inward, we need to strengthen ourselves." He
refers specifically to deficiencies in "discipline and accountability"
in the NIA corporate culture, a phrase which might apply to delinquent
NIA agents facing a range of charges from theft to murder. An
intelligence advisor to Mbeki until his promotion to the top
administrative post in the NIA, Mavimbela's acknowledgement that there
is room for improvement does not imply a blanket condemnation of his
colleagues in the NIA.
His first major address to NIA staff as director-general is
instructive. It contains extracts from the Bible and from the writings
of Sun Tzu, a Chinese general and military strategist who lived in the
4th century BC. The biblical extract concerns a reconnaissance mission
sent into Canaan by Moses. The military allegory from Sun Tzu's The Art
of War relates to the deployment of a Chinese ruler's two favourite
concubines as company commanders in an army of women.
There is a common underlying message in the extracts: the importance
to intelligence operations - which may in some situations constitute a
form of war - of clear instructions from the commanding officer. Thus
Mavimbela commends Moses for his "precise instructions", noting: "One
cannot over-emphasise the need for intelligence officers to have a
clear understanding of the issues that relate to their core business."
The quotation from Sun Tzu has an additional, more chilling message:
failure to elicit obedience to clear, precise orders is punishable by
death.
Thus Tzu relates how the women soldiers responded to initial drill
orders with laughter and how, when the assembled soldiers greeted the
reaffirmed and repeated order with further laughter, the concubine
officers were executed. Mavimbela sums up the lesson of Tzu's tale: "If
the commands are clear but nonetheless the soldiers do not respond to
them properly, the fault lies with the officers." And he notes, too,
that the Chinese ruler pleaded in vain with Tzu Sun for the lives of
his favourite concubines. "It was the general's final responsibility to
make sure that the two companies responded properly to the
commands".
The lessons for the present are clear: "Instructions that define our
core business should be clear and precise so that all of us can march
in an organised file, with a common purpose and hence solidify the
corporate culture that defines each one of us, as well as all of us
collectively as the intelligence community". Mavimbela adds: "None of
us should be allowed to shirk responsibility. Those who shirk
responsibility, as the two wives of the rulers did, cause paralysis of
the entire institution."
In his heavy emphasis on the need for clear instructions Mavimbela
might be alluding to the failure of the men in charge of the NIA in the
past to give clear direction to the agency. These men include former
director-general Sigxashe and, beyond him, Dullah Omar, who served so
inconspicuously as minister of intelligence that very few South
Africans knew that the intelligence services fell under his aegis, and
Nhlanhla, who was deputy minister of intelligence in President
Mandela's administration.
The NIA traces its origins to the amalgamation in 1995 of the
intelligence departments of the ANC and the Pan Africanist Congress
with the former National Intelligence Service, previously known as the
Bureau for State Security, as well the intelligence units of the
supposedly independent "homelands". Tension between the disparate
components of the NIA remains a problem, judging by Mavimbela's
comments in a recent interview with the Financial Mail. He stresses the
need to move beyond concentration "on the techniques of spying" to the
building of a "common vision" of the future based on service to the
democratically elected government as the embodiment of the will of the
people.
Nhlanhla takes up the same point, stressing the need for accelerated
transformation of the NIA into an institution whose personnel reflect
the demographic profile of the country as a whole and who, by
implication, are united by a commitment to the new, non-racial South
Africa. Nhlanhla refers in a briefing paper to a campaign to attain
"full representivity" in gender, disability and race. He says that the
NIA has appointed a woman, Vi Pikoli, to the high-ranking position of
deputy director general.
Nhlanhla believes that the NIA has been unfairly treated by the media,
that its "mishaps" are publicised, often sensationally, and its
successes ignored. He believes that the NIA and its fraternal
intelligence service, the South African Secret Service (which falls
under his ministry) have served South Africa "quietly, secretly and
successfully". He cites as its successes in the past year the
violence-free general election on June 2 and the safe arrival and
departure of Commonwealth Heads of Government for their conference in
Durban in November.
But blaming the media does not explain away Mandela's pointed
criticism of the NIA in 1997 for its failure to secure its own
headquarters from theft. Mandela's exact words, delivered during a
visit to the NIA's new headquarters in the wake of the theft of ten
microbuses and expensive computer equipment, are worth recalling: "How
can you claim with any measure of integrity that you are competent to
protect the country if you cannot secure your own premises?" Nhlanhla's
response is similarly worth recording: "We will find those buses and
the equipment, wherever they are. The culprits should know that the law
has a long arm".
At the time of writing, nearly three years later, the thieves are
still at large. NIA liaison officer Helmut Schlenter provides "context"
to explain the breach in NIA security: the thefts took place during the
NIA's move from an array of offices in Pretoria to its new headquarters
and before the perimeters of the headquarters were secured against
thieves and enemies of the state. Whatever rationalisations are
proffered, the NIA has not made good Nhlanhla's boast that the culprits
would be traced and apprehended.
Another scandal has since overtaken the NIA: reports of
maladministration, incompetence and corruption in a special NIA unit
established, ironically, to track down the millions of rands reportedly
stashed away in overseas bank accounts in the 1980s, and even before,
by apartheid apparatchiks fearful of future developments. Two men
described as NIA special agents but disavowed by the NIA have appeared
in court in Johannesburg on theft charges totalling nearly
R100-million, involving in part the alleged sale of stolen share
certificates. Thabo Kubu, the head of the special unit, has been
suspended pending further investigations.
Kubu is not alone. Another high-ranking NIA operative, Sizwe Mthembu,
general manager of the NIA's surveillance unit, has been suspended. A
former commander of the dreaded Quatro camp in Angola, where ANC
dissidents were tortured in the 1980s, Mthembu is under investigation
for suspected complicity in skulduggery involving the diversion of
R3-million from a special account to pay for luxury cars, some of which
were registered in the name of a soccer administrator. Mthembu is named
as a man guilty of human rights abuses in the Motsuenyane Report which
was commissioned by the ANC to investigate allegations of torture in
ANC detention camps. Joe Seremane, former Land Claims Commissioner and
now a parliamentary representative for the Democratic Party, has
implicated him in the death of his brother, Timothy, at Quatro.
The NIA's tale of woe does not end with Mthembu. One of its men, Ayob
Mungalee, is a senior member of People Against Gangsterism and Drugs
(Pagad) and an awaiting trial prisoner following his arrest at a police
road block for allegedly transporting explosives to Cape Town last
year. Exposed as an "NIA agent" by the police - the NIA labelled him an
informer - Mungalee is at the centre of a controversy between the South
African Police Service (SAPS) and the NIA. The SAPS justify their
exposure by arguing that the NIA refused to discuss with them how they
planned to control Mungalee, thereby implying that Mungalee might have
been using the NIA rather than vice versa. The NIA complain that the
police have wilfully blown the cover of one their "moles" in Pagad,
which the authorities suspect of involvement in the series of bomb
explosions in Cape Town since 1998.
The Mungalee affair - which has not yet run its course - underlines
the as yet unresolved rivalry between the NIA and the SAPS. Episodes in
the contest include:
• NIA suspicions that police tipped off journalists about their
intervention in the Sigxashe family squabble;
• NIA allegations of wilful police negligence, or even of a cover-up,
in the investigation into the violent death of one of their agents,
Muziwendoda Mdluli, who was found dead in his car with a bullet wound
in his head on October 2, 1995; • police allegations that their
headquarters were bugged by the NIA.
In a recent interview, Nhlanhla insisted that the police had admitted
planting recording devices in their own offices for their own reasons
but that the media had failed to exonerate the NIA from blame.
Mavimbela, who believes that the rivalry might be fuelled by police
envy of the higher salaries earned by NIA men, regards the
inter-service enmity as mutually inimical. The appointment of a new
black police commissioner, Jackie Selebi, may help to end the
destructive discord.
But the police are understood to have cleared the NIA of suspicion of
electronic eavesdropping on the parliamentary office of the Democratic
Party's chief whip, Douglas Gibson, and on the room the DP uses for
caucus meetings. The device, which is said to have been used for
monitoring conversations, is a laser beam projected onto the windows of
the two rooms, allegedly from the NIA office in the building opposite.
A police report, now in the hands of the Western Cape's director of
prosecutions, Frank Kahn, is said to support Nhlanhla's strenuous
denials of NIA involvement. DP spokesman James Selfe does not challenge
but cannot confirm that the NIA has been exonerated from blame.
Nhlanhla has since confirmed that the intelligence services are
consolidating and boosting their capacity to intercept electronic
traffic and that they already have the capacity to intercept and record
cellphone conversations. But he hastily adds two assurances: first,
that these powers are only exercised within the law (ie, with the
permission of a judge) and, secondly, that the NIA is not interested in
using its power to record the "love affairs" of individuals or the
legitimate activities of opposition parties.
As if to challenge Nhlanhla's assurance that his ministry respects the
right of legally established political parties to operate without the
threat of electronic snooping, the Afrikaans newspaper Rapport has
since published a letter purportedly written to it by former SABC
journalist Cliff Saunders demanding R50,000 from the NIA for services
rendered. He is alleged to have rejected a settlement offer of R10,000,
allegedly made to him by two NIA agents at a meeting in a Gauteng
hotel. According to Rapport, Saunders, well-known as a propagandist for
the previous white minority government, used another right-wing
journalist, Jani Allen, on a spying mission against the Inkatha Freedom
Party and its leader, Mangosuthu Buthelezi. In a statement to Rapport,
Saunders has said: "I was not a spy. Work I did, for whomever was
designed to promote welfare, stability and security of the country and
further afield. No one can prove otherwise."
In his briefing paper on the intelligence service, Nhlanhla - who was
promoted to the rank of a full minister by Mbeki after he took over
from Mandela last June - states: "It is our strong view that
intelligence services that have no oversight mechanisms often lack
public confidence and a supportive working environment". As a
consequence, Nhlanhla reckons, the intelligence services are "treated
as a political football" and the quest for a national consensus on
intelligence matters impeded. But, he adds, in the case of the NIA and
the SASS that deficiency is about to be remedied. The passing of the
Intelligence Services Control Amendment Act last year has laid the
foundation for two delayed developments: the resurrection of the joint
parliamentary standing committee on intelligence and the appointment of
an inspector general of intelligence to exercise civilian oversight of
the intelligence services.
Reasons for the delays are first, the formula for the composition of
the parliamentary standing committee had to be changed because of the
number of opposition parties in Parliament increased from six to12
after last year's general election; and, secondly, the delay in the
appointment of an inspector general was caused by the acceptance and
then rejection of the post by Lewis Skweyiya, an ANC-supporting lawyer
who, on reflection, decided that the remuneration offered was too
low.
It is, however, debatable whether the impending changes will guarantee
public confidence in the NIA and the SASS. The same amendment Act
empowers Mbeki to veto the release to the public of information
garnered by the inspector general and even to promulgate regulations
restricting the right of the parliamentary committee to receive reports
on intelligence. This is despite the fact that the ANC has a
built-in-majority on the committee, that its members are subject to a
security check conducted by the NIA, and that they are constrained by a
solemn undertaking not to disclose confidential information entrusted
to them. These powers portray Mbeki as Big Brother breathing down the
neck of the inspector general. While some citizens may be reassured by
the thought of Big Brother supervising the supervisor, many will find
the image ominous and deny the NIA the trust that Nhlanhla believes it
deserves.
Focus 17, March
2000.
Patrick Laurence
is an assistant editor on the
Financial
Mail.