Top U.S. intelligence leaders tell Congress the prior conclusion downplaying foreign involvement should be reconsidered and likely withdrawn.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
Senior U.S. intelligence officials told lawmakers this week that a 2023 intelligence assessment dismissing foreign involvement in so-called Havana Syndrome incidents should be withdrawn, marking a significant shift in the government’s position on the unexplained health cases affecting U.S. personnel overseas.
During testimony before the House Intelligence Committee, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, FBI Director Kash Patel, NSA acting Director Lt. Gen. William Hartman, and Defense Intelligence Agency Director Lt. Gen. James Adams all agreed the earlier assessment should be pulled back. Their remarks were reported by Just the News and came during a public hearing on global threats.
The officials were responding to questions from House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Rick Crawford, who asked whether the intelligence community’s prior findings on anomalous health incidents—known as AHIs—should be retracted. Each of the four leaders answered, “Yes,” during the exchange documented in congressional testimony.
CIA Director John Ratcliffe said he would defer to Gabbard’s ongoing review, stating, “For the ICA, I understand that Director Gabbard is reviewing that, and I’ve deferred all AHI investigations to her review. So, if in her judgment that is something that should be retracted, then I would agree with that.”
The U.S. government has spent years investigating reports from diplomats, intelligence officers, and other personnel who experienced symptoms such as pressure sensations in the head, vertigo, hearing disturbances, headaches, and in some cases traumatic brain injuries. Early speculation raised the possibility of a foreign adversary using advanced technology, with Russia frequently cited as a potential source, along with China and Cuba.
However, a 2023 intelligence community assessment concluded it was “very unlikely” a foreign actor was responsible. That determination, detailed in an official report, has been the subject of ongoing criticism from lawmakers and investigators.
Crawford has repeatedly challenged the conclusions, arguing that the process used to reach them lacked integrity. In a separate committee referral, the House panel sent potential criminal findings to the Justice Department related to the handling of the investigation.
“The intelligence community assessment on AHIs was deeply flawed,” Crawford said during the hearing, adding that the report caused “real serious harm to some of our nation’s bravest.” He also alleged that elements within the intelligence community engaged in a cover-up and manipulated analytical processes to produce a predetermined outcome.
A prior House report found that the assessment was developed in a way that “lacked analytic integrity” and may have been rushed to establish consensus. The report further stated that it appeared “increasingly likely” that at least some cases could be attributed to a foreign adversary.
Additional findings released in late 2024 suggested internal disagreement within intelligence agencies. A follow-up assessment indicated that while most agencies still viewed foreign involvement as unlikely, at least one component assessed there was a “roughly even chance” a foreign actor had used or developed a device capable of causing such symptoms.
Scientific evaluations have also produced mixed conclusions. A panel referenced in a declassified document identified pulsed electromagnetic energy in the radiofrequency range as a plausible explanation in some cases, though uncertainties remain. Earlier research from the National Academies, available here, similarly pointed to directed energy as a possible cause, while other scientists have disputed that theory.
Meanwhile, studies conducted by the National Institutes of Health in 2024 reported no detectable brain injuries among affected individuals, according to findings released. Those studies were later halted after concerns were raised about participant consent, as detailed in reporting by MedPage Today.
Crawford’s investigation has also focused on the treatment of affected personnel, with lawmakers criticizing what they described as inadequate care and delayed responses. The House Oversight Committee opened an inquiry into the issue in 2025, as outlined in a committee announcement.
During her Senate confirmation hearing, Gabbard said she intended to pursue a comprehensive review of the incidents, stating in testimony that the intelligence community had “failed to identify the source and the cause” of the condition.
Ratcliffe emphasized that disagreement remains across agencies, noting during a separate Senate hearing that “there are disparate opinions across the IC about what the cause of these AHIs may or may not be.”
As the review moves forward, officials indicated that additional information could be declassified and shared publicly. Gabbard said the process would be comprehensive, while lawmakers have called for full transparency regarding both the original assessment and any revised conclusions.
The potential withdrawal of the 2023 assessment would mark a major shift in the government’s handling of Havana Syndrome, reopening questions about the origin of the incidents and the adequacy of earlier intelligence findings.
Original article
Comments