Washington Extra – Changing hats
The national security musical chairs was made official today by President Barack Obama.
On stage was a daisy-chain of Washington insiders who have worn many hats over the years and criss-crossed different administrations. They all report to Commander-in-Chief Obama, who by comparison appeared a relative newcomer.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a former senator and first lady, was there to welcome back into the fold Ryan Crocker, who was chosen to be ambassador to Afghanistan.
Crocker, a former ambassador to Iraq, had worked closely with General David Petraeus, who was nominated to be CIA director to replace Leon Panetta.
Panetta — a former congressman, White House chief of staff, and director of the Office of Management and Budget — was chosen for Secretary of Defense to replace Robert Gates, a former CIA director.
“Given the pivotal period that we’re entering, I felt that it was absolutely critical that we had this team in place,” Obama said.
If everyone remembers which building to go to on the first day of work, it’ll be a good start.
Could Petraeus be too shiny for the CIA?
An agency all about cloak-and-dagger tends to be wary of the limelight.
So President Barack Obama’s choice of General David Petraeus for CIA director has raised some questions in intelligence and military circles.
How will a four-star general who has repeatedly been the subject of speculation as a possible future presidential candidate, and who doesn’t shy from the media spotlight, run an agency that prefers to stick to the shadows?
Will his boss, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, a retired three-star general, be uncomfortable with a subordinate who has a much higher public profile that threatens to outshine him?
Will Petraeus secretly harbor resentment at not getting the “ultimate job” for a military officer – Joint Chiefs chairman? Admiral Mike Mullen is expected to retire later this year and there had been some speculation about Petraeus being a contender to replace him.
“Is this a consolation prize?” one former U.S. official said.
Petraeus is not likely to make too many friends at CIA if he comes in with a restructure and fix-it mentality. “They’ve got a little fix-it fatigue,” a former U.S. intelligence official said.
Petraeus is a brilliant and thoughtful man with strong leadership ability. He will undoubtedly flourish at the CIA. My only concern is that this appointment is meant to shelve Petraeus as a candidate for 2012. All of the characteristics that make Petraeus a good commander and will make him a good CIA director would also make him a great president.
http://americansforpetraeus2012.org
Holbrooke hits the airwaves in new push
When President Barack Obama snuck into Afghanistan unannounced last month, a notable omission on Air Force One was his special representative for the region, veteran diplomat Richard Holbrooke.
Leaving out the Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan on Obama’s very first trip to Kabul as president raised a few eyebrows.
Was Holbrooke’s star fading? Were frictions between his office at the State Department and the White House coming to a head? Would tensions with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, who has made a string of anti-Western comments over recent weeks, cause further problems for the Obama administration as it seeks to turn around the 8-year war?
But several U.S. officials say it is premature to write off Holbrooke’s fortunes.
In fact, the veteran diplomat’s profile has been raised in recent days, including his own trip to Kabul last weekend with U.S. General David Petraeus when they met up with Karzai.
Holbrooke appeared on MSNBC on Wednesday, declaring that tensions with the Afghan leader were over and that reports of friction were overblown.
In the coming days, Holbrooke will appear on several other news outlets. On Friday night, Holbrooke is giving an hour-long interview with broadcaster Charlie Rose on whose show he has appeared at least three times over the past year.
The First Draft: Afghanistan inspires Freudian slips about that other battlefield – Iraq
President Barack Obama may have invoked Vietnam to banish that ugly specter of defeat from his shiny new Afghan strategy. But a day later, Iraq seems to be the wartime nightmare dogging two congressional veterans of the Bush wars.
Vice President Joe Biden, who was a Democratic senator from Delaware during Rummy’s “Shock and Awe” bombardment of Baghdad, let the musings of his unconscious psyche slip out Freudian style in an interview with ABC’s Good Morning America.
While refuting worries among critics that the Afghan strategy’s 18-month timeline might embolden the Taliban, Biden said: “How are they emboldened knowing that by the time we train up the Afghanis, we’re going to be gradually handing off beginning in 2003?”
2003 was the year of the Iraq invasion. The big year for the Obama plan is 2011.
Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona, long a forceful voice on military policy, proved a bolder Freudian by actually mentioning that other battlefield by name.
“I support the president’s decision to have a properly resourced counterinsurgency strategy with the addition of 30,000 troops, plus additional commitments from our allies, and I’m confident that we can succeed in Iraq and come home.”
…confident that we can succeed in Iraq…
Ironically, the Obama strategy in Afghanistan is identical to the Bush Iraq strategy in 2006: troop surge, improve security, enhance native forces, and clear/hold territory. The exact same strategy that Sen. Obama detested is the one he took 3 months to ponder and came to. Now the question is, will he be steadfast until victory is achieved?http://neoavatara.com/blog/?p=9 017
With this game of musical chairs this is just another example of that change we were supposed to believe in.