Obama's security team dilemma

So far, President-elect Obama’s appointments to his new administration have received widespread plaudits but he is running into serious trouble finding the right people for his national security team.

He ran his election campaign, in part, on a series of promises to break firmly with the Bush administration. US troops would be out of Iraq in 16 months; there would be no more illegal wiretapping of Americans, no kidnapping and certainly no torture. But since the election there has been a series of reality check admissions: Yes, there will be withdrawal from Iraq but troops will likely stay for a long time, torture is bad but then there might be some circumstances where it could be excused and as for wiretaps, well, it’s a very difficult problem that will certainly bear much study.

All this has infuriated the left who are feeling betrayed. It may have been okay to keep Bob Gates on as Defense Secretary, even though back in the Cold War when he was at the CIA, he was supposed to have doctored intelligence to pander to the hard liners in Washington. But the idea that Jim Brennan, who is running the intelligence transition team, could be appointed to run CIA was a bridge too far.

The leftist blogs tarnished Brennan with being involved in torture, assassination and kidnapping although the facts are that he was gone before most of that took place. Wounded by the criticism, Brennan has taken himself out of the running and cast a chill over other potential candidates.

There are very few intelligence professionals who are not in some way tarnished by the Bush years and the list of available and qualified people is slim. The current front runner to replace Director of National Intelligence Admiral Mike McConnell is another Admiral, Denny Blair. He is famous for trying to water ski behind his destroyer when he was skipper but such a jape disguises a cerebral man who speaks fluent Russian and favours much greater engagement with Asia.

However, there are some in the intelligence community who oppose his appointment, arguing that when he was the military liaison at the CIA he was ineffective.

Meanwhile, over at CIA, General Michael Hayden is fighting a fierce rearguard action to keep his job as head of the Agency. He is unlikely to be successful for two reasons. First, Senator Obama opposed his appointment, recognizing that Hayden had been a failure as a manager in his previous job as head of the National Security Agency. Second, in the week following 9.11, Vice-President Dick Cheney asked Hayden what new powers the NSA would like to make his team of eavesdroppers more effective. Hayden came up with a laundry list among which was the ability to spy on Americans in America and around the world.

No name has yet surfaced to replace Hayden. However, there is talk of appointing Maureen Baginski, who used to run the eavesdropping branch of NSA, to become the first woman and the first civilian torun NSA. She is untainted by any of the Bush scandals and such an appointment would be popular with the left and would send a clear signal to the military that there would be no more business as usual.