Serious Question

6 Comments

1. 

   robertdsc on May 18, 2009 at 10:59 pm

   Of all the power games in Washington, this one probably has the highest stakes. This is dangerous to the players and to the country.

   The national security adviser is the person who sees the president most often and has his ear. Each adviser has his or her own style. Jones is reserved, confident and low-key; this does not sit well with his detractors. Traditionally the job of the national security adviser is to synthesize information between the secretary of state and the secretary of defense. This person is meant to listen to all voices and then present them to the president along with his own advice. Success or failure depends on the adviser’s relationship with the president. Period. National security adviser is the most coveted job in foreign policy, even more so than secretary of state, under the thinking that while the secretary is traveling the globe, being America’s ambassador to the world and eating a lot of bad food at boring banquets, the adviser is in Washington making and overseeing policy.

   Heckuva job, Condi & Stephen Handley.

2. 

   KnightErrant on May 19, 2009 at 12:23 am

   Clearly Gen. Jones is a pleasant conversationalist and popular on the DC cocktail circuit. Either Sally is smitten or her sources are jealous. This is inside the Beltway crap of no importance in the real world.

   • 

     BooMan on May 19, 2009 at 1:07 am

     With Bibi in town, I wouldn’t be so sure that it is of no consequence.

3. 

   papicek on May 19, 2009 at 7:02 am

   Sally Quinn’s piece reads like a bad gossip column, nothing there but insinuation with a dose of sturm und drang.

4. 

   northcountry on May 19, 2009 at 7:25 am

   I read those articles Quinn refered to when they came out and my first reaction was WTF?  The guy has a totally different operating style than the typical political/policy type and seems very disciplined and focused.  I wpuld think that’s a good thing.

   Should he run on massive quantities of diet coke and 3 hours of sleep like Summers and Geithner and fall asleep in meetings?

   If it’s a question of policy then call him on it.  Don’t attack his operating style which has obviously served him well over his career.

5. 

   RustyPipes on May 19, 2009 at 2:33 pm

   The Israel Lobby opposed Jones’ appointment initially and having lost the first round, may have some players among those in the whispering campaign.  After all, the Lobby was successful in getting Freeman to drop out after he had been appointed and Obama was not willing to fight to keep him on (for more in depth coverage of the issues around the Freeman/Ross appointments, see MJ Rosenberg’s diaries over at TPM Cafe).  Previous objections about Jones by the Lobby have been particularly about the fact that he plays his cards close to his vest — they don’t like the idea that he gives out no hints about what kind of advice he is giving the President.  Quinn’s column hints that some of these same critiques are part of the whispering campaign:

   Today, the sniping is reportedly coming mostly from State Department officials and some staffers at the White House. Jones, not surprisingly, has a good relationship with the Pentagon. So who’s out to get him? Reporters across town are being called and spun. Jones is out of it, they are told, doesn’t show up; doesn’t speak up at meetings; works only a 12 1/2 -hour day; doesn’t stand next to the president in photographs; doesn’t like to give interviews. Funny, but those all sound like things the national security adviser should be doing. Reporters are protecting their sources, but Hillary Clinton is apparently not behind the stories. She likes her job, those who have been spun say, and gets along well with Jones.

   Meanwhile, the stakes are higher than ever: Iraq is not resolved. Iran could go nuclear at any moment. Pakistan, already a nuclear state, is chaotic. Afghanistan is hanging on by a thread. The Arab-Israeli peace talks have stalled. And that’s not to mention North Korea and other hot spots. If ever there was a time to work as a team, this is it. If the leaders of those hot spots think that the Americans are internally divided and do not respect each other or that President Obama is too weak to control the sniping around him, it could be harmful to our foreign policy.

   To be sure, Jones operates differently than many of those around him. His is a military staff style. Jones didn’t seek this job and doesn’t need it. He has no agenda except to serve the president. He is not interested in personal power. To some in Washington this is difficult to understand. After all, here is a man secure enough that he doesn’t need to drape himself around the president in photos, to dominate meetings with his views, to assert himself publicly. He has already proved himself. He could be out making a fortune and taking his family on boat rides.

   Obama has said many times that he wants to hear all voices. He famously assembled a team of rivals. And if those who are sniping think Jim Jones is not doing a good job, they should go directly to the president, not leak and spin to the press. That’s their duty. Obama is not afraid to cut his losses. He did that with Jim Johnson, one of the vice presidential vetters, when questions arose about his role in the Fannie Mae scandal. Tom Daschle and Bill Richardson were dropped from Cabinet appointments. Which is why Obama should put an end to this sniping. Either Jones is doing a good job or he is not. If he is not, the president should make a change. If the president continues to have confidence in Jones, those who are attacking him should beware. They are messing with the wrong dude. Those ribbons on his uniform were not awarded for nothing.

   Hardline supporters of Israel in the Whitehouse or State Department may be less than happy with the firm words Obama has been issuing to Israel.  Who knows whether some staff person (like Dennis Ross) has been complaining about the advice Obama is getting (or how they’d advise differently) in the wake of Netanyahu’s visit?