Episode 52: Former CIA Officer Rob Richer on the Geopolitical Landscape, Leadership Lessons Learned, and Supporting Decision-makers

Informing your decisions with intelligence analysis and insight brought to you by the team@ooda.

Loop.Com hi, I'm Matt Devoe and you are watching the Oodacast and today I am joined by Rob Richer. Rob is a former Marine and intelligence officer with a great career who's also been a great friend and mentor to me over the years. So Rob, welcome and thanks for joining us.

It's good to be on. Thank you.

So let's start with your career progression. Can you step us through kind of, you know, where you started your career, including the military and kind of the trajectory up into the CIA and what you did after you left the intelligence service?

Sure. 1971 I enlisted in the Marine Corps. College was not on the agenda for me. One, I didn't have the grades and two, my family couldn't have afforded it. So I went in the Marine Corps as a private and after I got out of boot camp in 72 progressed through the ranks until I made sergeant in 1976 and was picked up for a program called MESEP in the Marine Corps which is the Marine Corps Enlisted Commissioning Program. And it takes NCOs, Non Commissioned Officers who the Marine Corps believe have potentials and officers send you to college while staying on active duty and to get your degree and your commission. It took me two years to get through college. I went to the Citadel in South Carolina as a Marine, not as a cadet, graduated in 78, was conditioned commissioned an officer of Marines, a second lieutenant and I went into the infantry where I stayed, progressed in the Marine Corps as an infantry platoon commander, infantry company XO and infantry company CO of a weapons company and then applied for and was recruited by the CIA in 1983. Went in the agency, went into the career training program of the agency which at that time was 18 months after which I was assigned overseas in the Middle East. I progressed from Middle eastern tours in 1985 through 1995 and then I came back from the Middle east and was assigned as chief of Russian operations at a time when we were dealing with the aftermath of the aims of the Russian penetrations of the CIA and mainly because I had no experience against Russians and was not thought to have been compromised. I was brought into running Russian operations, did that through 98, then went back overseas to the Middle east, returned in 2001, the summer August of 2001 took over human resources for the clandestine service to train, responsible for recruitment, training new officers, all career path, interest, promotions, all the things that an HR does for a service. That was my out of body experience did that for basically a year. And then with the Iraq war looming, I was asked to take over as chief of the Middle east division. Chief of near east division, which managed 20 plus stations in 20 plus countries throughout the Middle east from North Africa to the Levantine, all the way to South Asia. Then after that tour I was assigned as the. I was asked to be the associate deputy director of operations, which I took until I retired in 2005. After 2005, I took a job as a vice president of intelligence with Blackwater. That's where I met Matt. Him and I had a great time together, both with Blackwater and then moving on to total intel, which we ran together. I left Blackwater and over the years since then have been the COO of two different companies and I'm right now engaged with boards and advisory groups and continue to do Middle east travel. I did until Covid almost monthly. And continue to maintain relationships in that part of the world. So that's basically my career in a snapshot.

The very truncated version. Yeah. No, I love that. You know, given your past involvement and you know, current involvement in tracking what's happening in the Middle east, you know, how do you see things developing in that region over the next five years?

Well, look, I think the Middle east has learned anything over the last four years is that they have to go at it more alone or they have to develop new relationships because we basically walked away from a lot of relationships over the last four years. That's not a political statement. It's just what happened. We saw Russia expand its presence in Syria, but also its ties to Turkey. We saw Iran get financially and economically deeper ties to Turkey and more in depth in Syria. We've seen Islamic action groups, Muslim Brotherhood get re engaged, get restrong again in certain of these countries. So I think one of the things we can look forward to is that the US will not be the game changer anymore. We won't be, at least until this new administration gets in, let's say, focus differently than the last one. We will not be the voice that pushes people to certain there's been progress made on the peace process, which is always a key issue for any American administration that's moving along. And the last administration pushed that and did a good job with that. If Saudi joins in, that will be probably the last big issue to fix in terms of relationship with Israel. And then of course addressing the Palestinian issue there future, where do they go? Nationhood, two state solution, whatever that entails. But look, I think the critical things in the Middle east are going to be one. There's no longer one superpower that has influence. There is one superpower, but we no longer have that influence. I think that if Bill Burns is confirmed as CIA director and if Blinken gets in and I think that if Blinken gets in and we get new people in the NSC who understand the Middle East, I think what we're going to find is a stronger and a better administration that will work with them. But again, Matt, I think that domestically is going to be our focus for the first year of this administration. I think it's going to be probably the focus for us for the next two years. Covid is not going to go away anytime soon. We're going to have that probably through the fall, next year at a minimum. From what I understand, we've got the economic ramifications of what's happened from the pandemic and how it was handled. Of course, we've had the ramifications of an ultra right nationalist movement in the States, which is probably our biggest security concern. Long winded answer, but that's what I see. Matt.

Excellent. As it relates specifically to Covid, does the Middle east region lag behind with regards to planning for vaccines and how does the outlook look for them to be able to get on the other side of COVID through the vaccination program?

Well, if you look at Israel, I think Israel has got a pretty aggressive.

Vaccination, number one, right. I think in the world right now by way percentage of population.

But you know, that's a country where people mobilize in threats. You know, it's a country where they understand being under risk of life that they're, you know, they see, they feel that in many cases they're a day away from either attack from Iran or a terrorist attack. So when they call people to get together, they get together. But at the same time, they had their internal issues with people, the orthodox and others who didn't want to do the social distancing, didn't want to adhere to regulations, and that's why it took off there. But at the same time, they're handling it better than anyone else. I think it's a hodgepodge in the rest of the Middle East. The Saudis and the UAE and Qatar can afford to bring the vaccines in. The Chinese vaccine, which I'm not a doctor but I understand is about 85% reliable, is probably the closest, is the most widely used right now in those countries. But countries like Yemen, Lebanon, Lebanon, which is going in a total country shutdown for Quite a while. Yemen, which is a humanitarian disaster, can't eat, let alone get a vaccine. I think those countries are going to have a serious problem. And of course there are no fixed borders, so you can vaccinate your population, but the at risk population who aren't vaccinated can get it from people coming across borders. So I think the be honest with you, I think that 50% of the Middle East, Bahrain, UAE, Qatar, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Israel and now Jordan have done a great job in getting ahead, starting the vaccination program and doing it well, frankly much better than we're doing in the States right now.

Excellent. So you know, we call this session the OODA Cast, based off John Boyd's OODA Loop, which I know you're familiar. I know that Marines tend to have an affinity, despite the fact that he was an Air Force colonel, for decision making. And I know from experience that you have a very acute ability to make good decisions and provide good advice. So we'd love to get your perspective on over the course of your career, what were some lessons learned along the way that contributed to the way that you make decisions or kind of the perspective that you bring to the decision making process?

Well, I think that the greatest experience and lesson I heard in terms of decision making, good or bad, was being wrong and that wrong having ramifications or that wrong causing a loss to life, loss of a job. So making mistakes in many ways was probably the best educator I had in terms of good decision making. And what I learned in many cases because I had a tendency to leap to a decision and to want to move aggressively and not tolerate long discourse. And I had some great people work with me on that, whether it was as a captain in the Marine Corps, it was a more senior rank, whether it was a mid career officer in the CIA, people who said, look, you have potential, Rob, you're doing well, you have good intuition, take time and pause and think. And I think, one, I like to take, reflect on what you're going to say and what you're going to do. Two, don't believe you have all the answers. Three, listen to other people and you know, I become a firm believer in what General Mattis talked about being a servant leader. And he's talked about that since I knew him, gosh, 25, 30 years ago, which was that a servant leader serves the people he works with. Ultimately the leader is responsible for the decision. But if he's going to make a decision that's going to put people's lives, livelihoods, families at risk, you Listen to him. So after I got through the period of time where I thought I was the smartest and best looking case officer and spy ever, I got to the point where I understood that, you know what, I'm much better when I talk to other people. And I think the place where I learned that most was when I became chief of Russian operations. So Matt, I was pulled back from my assignment in Oman and brought in without. I just had a note saying please come back to Washington. Had no idea I was coming back to Washington, reported to Washington and I didn't go to. I wasn't sent to my off head office which was the Middle East. I was sent to the seventh floor, the office of the Deputy Director for Operations, now the director of the Clandestine Service who said to me, we want to consider you for a new job, but we need you to have an FBI polygraph first. And until that time all my polygraphs have been CIA because we do our own. So I was sent downstairs, I was polygraphed twice, had no issues and the focus was solely on my contacts with Russian or Soviets. Russians at that time I went back upstairs and I was offered the job to run Russian operations. And at a time when we were reeling from what Ames had done to us. And while I was in Russian operations we caught Nicholson NCIA officer who was a Far east officer who was spying for the Russians and a few others in the US government. But during that period of time I walked in as a Middle Eastern hand who had done pretty well in his career to an area with Russian experts thinking that what I learned in the Middle east translated to what I could do and understand Russia. And what I learned very quickly from some really good analysts and officers and admin people was I didn't know squad about Russians except what I had read maybe in a book. And what I learned was that everything I was saying that they're nodding yes to was they're walking out the door going, let's just try to fix it without him knowing it. So after just a. I had a great deputy who's still on service so I can't mention her name, but I had a great deputy. And that deputy came into me one day and said, hey boss, let me give you some thoughts on what we're doing together. She handled it very well. And I learned enough that when we started having meetings, talking about a Russian operation that was going to great risk in Moscow or an approach to someone or looking at a spy in our own building with the FBI, of course, that the team effort was a hell of a lot better than the Rob effort. So key to me as growth as a person was getting someone's feedback. And I think, Matt, you and I did that when we were looking at what we were going to do with Total Intel. It was a joint leadership role. I mean, you did day to day manage just about everybody. But the point was we talked through decisions. You were always great about coming in and saying, hey, Rob. But you're always good to say to me, hey, Rob, you know, I don't know if we should go this way or does this make better sense, particularly if it had to do with technology. And you're the one who taught me how to use a damn Apple computer. So my point is, greatest lesson for me is failing, combined with understanding that I don't have all the answers and three, then soliciting other people's input, but then still realizing ultimately the decision rests with you.

Excellent. You raised a question about the Russians. And my perspective, especially given my focus on the cyber domain, is that we're being outplayed by the Russians on the global stage. You mentioned that they, despite not really being a superpower, have this sphere of influence in the Middle East. What is your perspective on the power structure between the US And Russia right now?

You know, a lot of my colleagues will tell you that they have a hold on some aspect of this US Government. Look, the Russians play a long game, as the Chinese do. The Russians understand that actions that they can influence today may not be as good as getting ahead of the game, being able to influence actions down the road. We have not touched and addressed the Russian hacking of late 2020 in any way, except the intelligence community has delivered an assessment that it was the Russians. Experts in your field that, you know, well, Matt, have said it was the Russians and they've gotten away with it. You know, we've done some sanctions on people. We. But you know what? We haven't one turned loose what we a retaliatory cyber attack. Nor have we actually made them pay for what they did. And that flows through the last four years where Russia has basically had carte blanche in Syria in working against our Kurdish allies, in expanding its relationships in Turkey and with Saudi Arabia. I mean, the Russian intelligence, military intelligence and civilian intelligence, the FSB and the GRU are everywhere in the Middle east right now at the same time and basically trying to create partnerships with people we've traditionally worked with. So, look, I think we lost four years of confronting Russia and keeping them in their place. Look, we're all kept in place as countries Our place we let go away, whether it's in the Middle east, whether it's in the EU and whether it's major transnational and international issues that are critical for us. So ultimately, Matt, I think we've got catch up. We're going to be paying catch up. And it's going to be longer than just a couple of years. Because now that these relationships are established by the Russians with these key partners in the Middle east, they've proven what they can deliver. You have a leader in Russia, Putin, who is either going to be prime minister, president, back and forth for the rest of his life, and who aren't afraid to take out their dissidents, kind of like the Saudis were with Khashoggi. So he's going to stay in power. They're going to continue to play the soft power game against us because they're winning it. The new administration, from the people I know who are going in that, with some of the intelligence professionals, will move on to it. But I think that the domestic impact of what happened last week and we have to work, you and I have talked about it with proud boys and people like that. The conspiracy theorists are going to occupy us for such a long time that we may even get farther behind.

Yeah, I mean, it speaks directly to some of the writing that I've done, and I know you've seen it with regards to the cyber ops and the domestic unrest actually serve the Russian purpose of preventing us from stepping back into that void. And I shouldn't call it a void because we step back, they step in, and there is no stepping back in. You got to work your way back in. Right. It's a contested ground now at this point, and I do feel like part of Putin's long term strategy was to create as much societal unrest as possible in the United States, United States, to distract us from that overseas mission. So mission success in that regard. I think if I'm Putin and I'm keeping a checklist, I think he definitely won that battle with regards to distracting us, at least over the short term.

I think, Matt, you're exactly right. I think all of our enemies, Iran, China, Russia, all the people who, at least against what we're for, stand for, won with what happened the last couple of years. Excuse me. And by that, I mean the Russians and the Chinese, yeah, they played games with the election process if they could, with influence operations, but they really didn't have to do a whole lot except add to or push forward our own dialogues in this country. So, you know, one of the people I had, one of the types of persons we recruit in the agency are called agents of influence. And these are people who aren't people who know the secrets. They aren't the people who conceal code. There's someone that you stroke and get to where they'll actually do policy or other things on your behest or in the support of your policy, your own policy objectives. So in President Trump, and I don't believe President Trump works for anybody. I think he works for himself. So I don't think he's a Russian recruited agent of influence. I do believe, though, I could claim him as agents of influence because what he did actually played into what the Russians and the Chinese want, which is to diminish America's standings in the world and to humble us a bit. And we are humbled. When you look at our standing and you probably read the foreign press, as I do, I get a summary every morning. We're dismissed out of hand. We're not a laughingstock. Our military is still the best military in the world. But the people who have done our policies and the direction of this great country are directly impacted. And Russia could not have done this without us letting it happen and fueling it. So again, I take your point. I agree they played games, but they didn't have to play a whole lot of games. We did it to ourselves. When you shoot someone's self in the foot, you can't, you know, they may have given us the gun, but we put the bullet in it. We shot ourselves in the foot.

Yeah. No, I agree. We've referred to it. Or Neil Pollard, who I know you know, and I wrote about it years ago, as well as being the trust wars.

Right.

It's just a matter of diminishing trust in our institutions. Once that's gone, we'll fight amongst ourselves and you know, the election is just the perfect exemplar of that. I would love to get your perspective on leadership as well. You've worked with a lot of great leaders. Are there any, you know, stories that come to mind or leaders that you encountered that served as an example or mentor for you and kind of for your style?

Well, look, I can name a few. So for one, Bill Burns, who as you know, has been nominated to be CIA's record. So Bill was the ambassador in Oman when I was the chief of station. And for us, that's a pretty heady place. The Agency rep. Agency has a unique role in that part of the world. And him and I were together at a time when King Hussein was Passing. And there was an unsure line of succession in the initial months. So this would have been the end of 98, early 99. And him and I were both dealing with leadership circles or wannabe leaders in the country at the same time. We were both reporting back to Washington in our own channels, which are not the same. And I remember him reaching out to me and saying, Rob, I know you have your own relationships we need to coordinate and I will show you what I write if you'll show me what you write. And so him and I, almost every night there for about three months, we would meet at, we'd go out and do our round of meetings. And my meetings for what we do in the organization are generally at night, late at night. And we meet up at his official residence, his home, at 11:12, 1:00 in the morning, compare notes, then we send our stuff in and then be back in the office at seven in the morning. But he had the most patient leadership style I've ever seen. And watching him manage a country team during a time of transition, managing US Aid, Peace Corps uses information, US Information services, and then working with the huge US military relationship there and then hoping that the CIA guys weren't trying to do something behind his back, he was an unbelievable leader. So he's probably one of the first. He's a mid generation leader to me in terms of my career and in bringing me along. Another person for me was George Tennant. So when I came in to be chief of Russian operations, I was a relatively junior senior officer. I just made the senior ranks and he brought me in, told me, come in and brief me succinctly and I'm good at bullet point. Speak your truth to power. And he was great about that. Tell me what you think. Because I remember I sat in the first meeting with him and I was trying to hedge a problem and he looked at me and he said, Rob, just tell me good or bad, just give me the details. He taught me to talk to, you know, you don't have to fluff anything, that it's much easier to make a point and not worry about the politics. And George Tenet was great for that. Then over the course of my career there's some great Marines, General Mattis, General Conway, who I had in different roles a Sergeant Armel when I was a young PFC in the Marine Corps in 1972, who told me that I could do more with myself than I was trying to do. I remember him bringing me in the office one day, he said, look, you graduated from high school now, in 1972, it was minimal. Percentage of us graduated from high school met in the Marine Corps. He said it was the end of the, just at the end of the Vietnam War. And he goes, you graduated from high school and you had one quarter. I had one class at Oakland Community College in Michigan. And he goes, you've got one quarter. You have one class out of one quarter at one community college, which is probably more so than a lot of our officers have right now. He said, you aren't trying hard enough. He said, I'm a fat sergeant. He was, he wasn't fat. He was a Marine sergeant. Because I'm a fat sergeant and I'll always be a sergeant. He said, but I know my capabilities and I'm good at it. He said, you have yet to figure out your capabilities. Look at yourself and I'm going to challenge you. And he challenged me, challenged me every day. Challenged me on what I was doing, what I was doing in the field. Challenged me to go to promotion boards, get promoted meritoriously to corporal and sergeants by learning my job. So I was challenged to be a leader. I was developed as a leader and those people were critical to moving me on as a leader. Excellent.

Cool. That's great perspective and encouraging as well. With Burns nominated for dcia, we talked a little bit about the threats and some of the domestic issues. What would you highlight as our top national security threats that we face over the next coming years?

The number one national security threat I believe right now is domestic terrorism. Right wing nationalists, white supremacists, and the fact that those are probably going to be our priority concerns for the next year. There is a belief within tens of millions of people in the United States that there's a deep state, that there is a. There was a conspiracy to defraud, to steal this election. It was not stolen. Based on all the court cases and everything I read, however, it doesn't matter. What I think is that these tens of millions of people believe they've been disenfranchised and that's been fueled by leaders. And that's a problem. Those leaders will go away when this administrative goes away. But that impression and that conspiracy minded circulation of those words are going to continue, Matt. And in social media, it's just going to be fueled and fueled. People are at home, most people, many people are working from home. Many people live on their phone or on their laptop or on their computer because they aren't going out, they're not socializing, they're not interacting with a lot of people. And it's so easy when you live in that inclusive and exclusive world to get fueled. I mean, my gosh, whether it's the left or the right, you become marginalized and you can become polarized from the other side. So I think domestic terrorism, number two word is I'm worried about cyber attacks. Deeply worried. Look, they can seize control of our infrastructure. They've shown it. Thank goodness they've not yet tried to disrupt or take down things like our power bill. But you and I've talked about that and you know better than I, they can do it. So that's the number two threat I'm worried about. Number three threat is in terms of the international world. I don't see Russia as a military enemy. I don't see China as a military enemy. I don't see the future of a war with us, with them. What I do see is an economic and political war developing in two different ways. With Russia, it's influence. They are accelerating their influence in parts of Europe, in the stands and of course in the Middle East. And Putin is where he needs to be on that. He's pretty comfortable and it's going to be hard for us to wrestle that back. As you noted, where void is, it takes a long time to refill that void or push the void back. The Chinese over the last two years have just been building alliances with Vietnam, Japan, the Philippines, all throughout South Asia. This new economic and commercial association that was developed, just signed on last fall, we weren't part of that. We didn't want to be part of it. Well, China's going to eat our economic health. They own a lot of our debt. We can shut off some of their resources. But China's established stuff as a player in that part of the world because we pulled away from it again, we can't push that back easily. That's more my world is cyber, economic, commercial. I've not mentioned Iran. I think the potential for a confrontation with Iran will go down with the new administration. If you were to ask me how I saw it for the next six days, I'm concerned about that. We saw it with the attacks that Israel was given the green light with American intelligence to attack Syrian targets a couple days ago. Those are pretty comprehensive attacks. The Israeli government in the form of Netanyahu sees this is their last chance to do a, a strong, damaging blow against Iran. And the only person that would, that could, the person that would, could agree to that and could support it is the current administration. Just because of their rhetoric and how they see Iran. That Would not. That would be catastrophic, I think, in terms of a number of regional stability issues. And for the U.S. hezbollah, Iranian Revolutionary Guards have infrastructure throughout the United States and abroad. They're really good at having deep cover assets and people who will help them. We can't take out their nuclear facilities. Every assessment I've seen, and I was current up to a couple of years ago, says that we might get 50, 60%. But now what we're going to do is leave 50, 60% and they'll never, ever work with us again and we'll fuel terrorism around the world. And to be honest with you, we don't need a Shia Sunni war, which would be part of it. So my hope is that we get through the next six days with Iran and then we figure out a way to address Iran's nuclear capability. And probably getting to talk to them at the table, because if they're not at the table, how do you work with them? Unfortunately, the last year we've actually closed more doors and opened them.

I'll just note we tend to be a week or two behind on producing these because we put them in the queue. So this was recorded on January 14th. So when Rob's talking about the next six days, he's talking about the lead up to President Biden taking over on January 20th. Just want to qualify that. People don't see it two weeks from now. I would love to spin and talk about a couple of other type issues. The first one, a little bit more of a fun one. At your retirement at the CIA, Vince Flynn was there, the late author of the great thriller series with Mitch Rapp. And George Tennant stood up as he was talking about you and said that Vince was there because the lead character, Mitch Rapp, was based on you. I've never directly asked about it, so I guess I will now. How. How true is that statement and kind of, what was your influence on that character of Mitch Rapp with. With Vince.

So after Vince did his first book, which I did not have a Mitch rap character in it, he asked to come into the Agency through the Public affairs office and to talk to people who could tell him really what we did in the Director of Operations, I got called in to speak with him. I was Chief of the Middle east at the time. I got called in to speak with him and George Tennis said, hey, Rob, work with him. Don't give up. Don't give up all our secrets. So that was funny. But. So Vince and I sat for a couple hours and then we met that night in Georgetown for A few drinks and a dinner and we developed a friendship approved by the agency. And the object was, is to demystify what we did and to probably get some good PR out. So we talked pretty fulsome about how we run operations. I gave him some generalized versions of some of the operations I had personally been involved in and then some that the other agency had been involved in by other people. He did, of course he is a writer of fiction. He did kind of embellish the assassinations, the fights. But he was a good steward of the information we gave him and he protected it. And over the course of his books and his life and I was, I saw him when he was. His last days of cancer treatment. He was a great friend to me and the family. But he was a guy that every time he came out with a new book, he delivered me a box. He said, rob, send them to your officers overseas free. I mean every, every, every book came out. Every year he sent 20, 30, 50 books. And then I borrow him overseas. He was a good writer, but he did tell me Mitch Rap was based on me. And when I took issue with some of the descriptions of some of the stuff, we joked. He actually incorporated my secretary who was a long term. She was my secretary for multiple assignments in the agency. One of the best executive assistant secretaries ever. Penny. I won't give you her last name. And Penny's in the book as the secretary. So he was that kind of guy. But it was. He did base part of it on. In terms of attitude, background. And then he progressed it to me being the chief of the Middle east in a book. A former Marine who was a anal and fast talker and a pain in the ass because I took issue with the fact that I was killing so many people with my bare hands. It just didn't play well with my. But anyways, so it was. That's true. And he was a great friend to the US government, to the agency, but he was also a great friend to America. He did all he could for the troops, he did all he could for law enforcement. And he died way too young, in his 40s from cancer.

Was it prostate cancer?

Yes.

I'll ask you after we stop recording how Penny is, because I hadn't heard that name in a while, so it'd be great. So how do we recruit the next generation of folks into the intelligence community? Are you comfortable that we've got a good platform of folks that, you know, have interest in serving in the CIA and other intelligence agencies? Or is there more work that needs to be done there.

I think it's a combination, Matt, of both. I talk to a lot of groups and I recommend a lot of people. In fact, I've got two in the pipeline now that I ran into and talked to and I've got to put in their applications. So look, this generation that we have today does not aren't looking at a 20 or 30 year career. Like I, when I went in the military I was to be a marine for life. Then when I went to the agency, I was going to be a marine for life. I mean CIA officer life. We had pensions and we had a different mindset. The generation today is as patriotic as we are or were, but their goals are more short term. So we have a turnover of people that we didn't have 20 years ago where they come in for five, six, seven, eight years, then they go to do something else. So one is how do we keep them in when they're there, but to attract them, we're doing pretty well. The recruiting numbers are there, the people are interested, the mystique is there. I think has always been there. But more importantly, we've gotten better at our ads and how we solicit on the web and the web is great for that. We are trying to diversify and the diversification, from what I understand is doing better. Our language skills are better. The last couple years were hard because, you know, the intelligence community was a, it was a second class citizen in some ways. Based on what the administration, the way they treated the intelligence community. The FBI had the same problems. The good thing is people want to get the jobs and there's still a waiting list and there's still multiple applicants for every position. There's still. It was a morale issue for a while and it did slow down some hires because what was the future? If there have been four more years of this administration, would they still continue to be second class citizens? Would we have seen mid grade flights and senior officers retire? Would we have seen people not as willing to join when they realized they wouldn't have the impact they should? But I think now, I think it's a good news story. I think that it's a good news story that people are still coming into all the security services in this country and intelligence services? I think it's a good news story that there's still great leadership at the top. I think the hard part is the middle. How do you keep them in a generation that doesn't take a career for life? I mean, Matt, think how many jobs you've had.

Sure.

And you're significantly younger than I am. Think how many jobs some of the people you've hired at Fusion X and other places who came for a couple of years and just moved on because they got a better offer or they just dissatisfied or whatever reason. So they didn't come in expecting to work there for 20 years. They came in expecting to be there for a bubble or for a period of time and move on. So I think it's a. For me, the concern is not getting them in. It's going to happen. People want to serve. I don't think it's. I don't think it's the senior ranks they want to continue to influence and lead. It's amid people who, if they don't get the job satisfaction they want or they see that they're not as appreciated from the outside, sometimes I think they look at other opportunities.

Excellent. What did you. Speaking of recruiting and website, what did you think of the new logo?

Do you realize that's not the new.

That's just the new web design?

Yes. It's not the credit logo, but my gosh, that came out. I must have had 100 emails, comments, rebellion in the streets. The agency had to put out a notice saying that it wasn't the right one.

I did notice they put the actual logo next to it on the internal page now to highlight that. But without the copyright claim. You're not authorized to use this logo that we see for the space for that was interesting that the Space Force, when you view their logo on the website, they got a slash through it. You're not allowed to use this logo anywhere.

So don't forget though, it's Space Force. You and I are still talking about being space Marines. We may be a little old, though.

Yes, I think it's a possibility, you know, head towards Mars working for it.

I just saw where they're going to have a headquarters in Alabama, so I'm thinking about moving next week.

Nice. So you and I could chat all day. I know, because we have. But I want to be mindful of your time. So I would like to ask one question, which I ask everybody that interview and that is what are you reading right now?

Well, great. I have them right next to me, all three books. So I generally have two channels of reading, fun and escapism. And I'm a science fiction nut. And books written by people I know or have influence. So one book is called States of Mind. It's by Ralph Mowatt Larson, who I serve within the agency.

Excellent.

He's a great guy. It's a book about both, not only faith, but about his role in the Agency. It's a great book. Another book called A Quiet Cadence. It's about leadership. It's a novel, but it's a great book about leadership. Again, I'll show it to you. Leadership in the military during the Vietnam War. And finally, a book by Chris Whipple, which is a great book, which is the Stymasters and CIA directors. On the fiction side, I read anything that has to do with Marines in space, military, sci fi. I always have two or three of those on my Kindle just to read as I go. And then I keep one book with me at all times. It's by Nelson DeMille called Word of Honor. And I think you and I talked about this years ago. And basically what it talks about is integrity, loyalty after a war, and what do you owe people and how do you maintain your semblance of who you are? So it's gosh, it's 30 years old now, but I've read that book 20 times and I've given that book to heads of states overseas and every one of them walk away with things to think about. So it's called Word of honor by Nelson DeMille. It's probably my go to book. Excellent.

Yeah. Well, we'll link to all four of those down below in the show notes so people can click on them and check them out. So I read the Spy Masters as well. I thought that was well done. Good read. All right, well, thank you so much for joining. This was, as always, incredibly insightful. I appreciate you taking the time to chat with us and with the audience.

Well, anytime, anytime I can help, let me know.

All right, thanks.

Bye. Bye. Thanks for listening to this Ooda Loop production. For the latest analysis on cybersecurity technology and global risks, please visit www.ooda loop.com.