 |
|
I think Daniel Pipes gets this wrong, but he's asking an interesting set of questions.
The Iranian government learned recently that American intelligence has deciphered its codes and can read its mail...Who is to blame for this development?...
[Perhaps] Chalabi did tell them that Washington had cracked the code. In which case:
· Perhaps he made this up and just happened to be right. (Plausible: Chalabi reportedly took steps in 1995 to trick the Iranians.)
· Or he thought he was providing disinformation but actually was telling the truth. (Unlikely: Too convoluted.)
· Or he knowingly divulged classified information. (Unlikely: Why should the Americans give Chalabi, a British subject known to be in close contact with the Iranian regime, a crown jewel of U.S. state secrets?)
Perhaps the question to ask is not, "Why should the Americans give Chalabi...a crown jewel of US state secrets?" as if it were a deliberate policy. But rather, how did one American without, presumably, authorized access, learn this information? Is what existed not a conspiracy, but more of an accident, born of a chaotic atmosphere that lacked the discipline of the home office? Of course, this theory would only explain how Chalabi allegedly might have learned the news, not why he allegedly passed it to the Iranians.