Effort Launched to Oust CIA Chief : Intelligence Veterans Call Webster Too Cautious on Covert Operations

A campaign to dump William H. Webster as CIA director has been launched by veterans of the intelligence community who contend that he has been too cautious about launching clandestine operations and too vigorous in disciplining agency personnel linked to the Iran-Contra scandal.

A key participant in the drive, according to knowledgeable sources, is Donald P. Gregg, national security adviser to President-elect George Bush, who served as a link between Bush’s office and Oliver L. North while North was running his secret airlift of supplies to Nicaragua’s Contras.

Gregg, a former CIA official, has denied knowledge of North’s role in the Iran-Contra scandal. He declined to discuss the Webster matter when a reporter telephoned his office for comment.

One of Webster’s critics, a former high CIA official who spoke on condition that he not be identified, said: “He has not been aggressive and dynamic. He was envisioned as a caretaker, and he’s done a good job as a caretaker. . . . “

Has Had Strong Backing

Webster, who was appointed by President Reagan to bring stability to the embattled agency in the aftermath of the Iran-Contra scandal, generally has enjoyed strong support in Congress and in the White House.

But his insistence on strict procedures and close congressional oversight for clandestine operations apparently has angered some intelligence veterans, who favor more aggressive use of covert tactics, and some political conservatives.

“My sense is that the effort to push him out is orchestrated by retired and some active people out of the clandestine service,” said a former high-level CIA official with close ties to the intelligence community. “They generally portray him as a dilettante who doesn’t work hard or have control.”

A former CIA official with ties to Bush said he realizes that there is dissatisfaction with Webster among some of the old CIA hands but said that he resents their efforts to remove the director. And a longtime Bush adviser said that the dump-Webster movement is “a disservice to the President.”

Bush has always believed that the CIA should not be “a political football,” he said. “And I don’t think he will move Webster out, assuming he believes Webster is doing a good job. He won’t move him just to have a change in the Administration.”

Another close Bush associate said that the President-elect would be reluctant to “dump” Webster because “he considers him a good friend,” though the new President might eventually want his own man to head the sensitive agency. When Webster’s wife, Dru, died in 1984, the Bushes offered their Kennebunkport, Me., home as a retreat--an offer that the bereaved Webster, then head of the FBI, accepted.

Bush apparently has not yet focused on how he will deal with the CIA matter, and it is unclear how he might react to the criticisms being leveled at Webster.

On the one hand, Bush--himself a former CIA director--has a record of support for covert operations in general. On the other hand, in his book, “Looking Forward,” Bush expressed the “view that the CIA director should go out of his way to avoid even the appearance of getting involved in policy-making. The agency’s sole duty, outlined in its 1947 charter, is to furnish intelligence data to the President and other policy-makers.”

Familiar Charge

The charge against Webster at the CIA, that he has been too reluctant to use covert tactics, has been leveled at other CIA officials who had not served in the clandestine services, one veteran of the intelligence community noted. “If there’s a common thread, that’s their attitude for everybody (picked to lead the CIA) if it didn’t happen to be one of them,” he said.

“They were not reluctant to get their knives in on Gates when he was up for director,” he added, referring to similar criticism of Deputy CIA Director Robert M. Gates, when he was nominated for the top job in 1987 before Webster was appointed.

Gates, who was chosen by Reagan after the death of William J. Casey, withdrew from consideration when a controversy developed over how he had dealt with the Iran-Contra affair while serving as deputy director.

On Wednesday, Gates defended Webster’s performance as intelligence chief.

“All of us understand that we serve at the pleasure of the President and he has the freedom to appoint somebody that he wants,” Gates said. “At the same time, the sense of the senior managers at the CIA is that Webster’s done a fine job. He took over the agency at a time of real trouble and by virtue of his own integrity and character has helped restore public confidence and relationships with Congress.”

Webster, who declined to comment on the effort to remove him, reportedly was mystified by reports that some of the impetus for the drive came from within the CIA.

Only two weeks ago, Webster and Gates received a standing ovation from 75 of the CIA’s most senior officials after reviewing the agency’s activities.

William Baker, Webster’s chief spokesman, said that the officials’ response reflected genuine regard for the director’s performance. “I don’t think I was misled by the unanimity of it, and I don’t think it was lip service,” he said.

Baker, who moved with Webster from the FBI to the CIA, disputed the characterization of him as a caretaker who provided no direction to the agency, which was under fire at the time for the part some of its officials had played in the Iran-Contra scandal and the effort to conceal it from Congress.

Webster guided the agency through a troubled period, had restored relations with oversight committees and had promulgated guidelines to prevent a recurrence of agency officials misleading Congress, Baker said.

Last December, acting on an internal investigation he had ordered, he fired two Central America undercover officers for the agency and demoted or reprimanded five other agency employees in connection with the Iran-Contra scandal.

He ordered the dismissal of the CIA’s former Costa Rica station chief, Joe Fernandez, and the chief of paramilitary operations in Tegucigalpa, Honduras, after concluding that the two had improperly aided North’s secret program to supply the Contras inside Nicaragua.

Overreaction Cited

Although some agency critics complained that Webster had not gone far enough, some CIA hands no longer with the agency contended that he had overreacted and punished officials who believed they were carrying out covert national policy.

One former CIA official said that James R. Lilley, U.S. ambassador to South Korea and a former CIA station chief in Beijing, tops a list of several potential CIA directors if Bush fails to reappoint Webster.

Others on the list, he suggested, include Gregg; retired Admiral Bobby Inman, a former deputy director of the CIA, and retired Lt. Gen. Brent Scowcroft, former national security adviser.

If Webster is not retained, Lilley is considered by some Bush advisers to be the leading candidate. Bush and the ambassador have been friends since the vice president served as envoy to the Peoples Republic of China while Lilley was CIA station chief in Beijing.

One source said he understood that some Bush advisers had been developing a plan for Webster to serve for a transitional period of six months to a year but Webster’s critics were demanding his immediate removal.

“I thought things were pretty well set for the judge to be asked to stay on for six or eight months,” the source said.

Bush’s press secretary, Sheila Tate, said: “This is the season when there’s all kinds of speculation about every political position in Washington. We’re not going to exacerbate that problem by commenting.”

Bush served as CIA director during another troubled period for the agency and has maintained contacts with some officials there and some who have retired, along with Gregg.

Webster, 64, has submitted his resignation to President-elect Bush, as have other presidential appointees.

He is said by associates to be irked by reports that he is campaigning to hold onto the powerful post, contending that he is more interested in helping effect a smooth transition, if Bush does not ask him to stay on.

From the time he moved to the CIA, Webster has made clear that he thought the CIA director should not play a role in setting foreign policy, believing instead that he should manage a system dedicated to providing crucial intelligence data and analysis unfettered by policy views. He drove this point home by announcing immediately after his appointment that he did not wish to serve in the Cabinet as his predecessor had.

Staff writers James Gerstenzang, David Lauter and Doyle McManus contributed to this story.