PDA

View Full Version : Obama decides to keep on Defense Secretary Gates for at least a year



Ashliana
11-26-2008, 11:47 AM
Obama Plans to Retain Gates at Defense Department
By PETER BAKER and THOM SHANKER

WASHINGTON — President-elect Barack Obama has decided to keep Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates in his post, a show of bipartisan continuity in a time of war that will be the first time a Pentagon chief has been carried over from a president of a different party, Democrats close to the transition said Tuesday.

Mr. Obama’s advisers were nearing a formal agreement with Mr. Gates to stay on for perhaps a year, the Democrats said, and they expected to announce the decision as early as next week, along with other choices for the national security team. The two sides have been working out details on how Mr. Gates would wield authority in a new administration.

The move will give the new president a defense secretary with support on both sides of the aisle in Congress, as well as experience with foreign leaders around the world and respect among the senior military officer corps. But two years after President Bush picked him to lead the armed forces, Mr. Gates will now have to pivot from serving the commander in chief who started the Iraq war to serving one who has promised to end it.

In deciding to ask Mr. Gates to stay, Mr. Obama put aside concerns that he would send a jarring signal after a political campaign in which he made opposition to the war his signature issue in the early days. Some Democrats who have advised his campaign quietly complained that he was undercutting his own message and risked alienating war critics who formed his initial base of support, especially after tapping his primary rival, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, for secretary of state.

But advisers argued that Mr. Gates was a practical public servant who was also interested in drawing down troops in Iraq when conditions allow.

“From our point of view, it looks pretty damn good because of continuity and stability,” said an Obama adviser, who insisted on anonymity to discuss confidential deliberations. “And I don’t think there are any ideological problems.”

Associates said Mr. Gates was torn between a desire to retire to a home in Washington State and a sense of duty as the military faces the daunting challenges of reducing forces in Iraq and increasing them in Afghanistan.

As Mr. Obama moved closer to assembling his national security team Tuesday, he lost a top candidate for director of the Central Intelligence Agency. John O. Brennan, an agency veteran who was widely seen as the front-runner, withdrew from consideration amid concerns that he was linked to controversial intelligence programs authorized by Mr. Bush.

In a letter to Mr. Obama, Mr. Brennan said he did not want those concerns to be a “distraction” for the incoming administration. At the same time, he vigorously defended his record and called himself a “strong opponent” of the harsh interrogation methods the agency used in recent years, including waterboarding, the practice of making a suspect experience the sensation of drowning.

The developments came as Mr. Obama prepared to begin unveiling his national security team after the long Thanksgiving weekend. Besides formally announcing his nomination of Mrs. Clinton as secretary of state, Mr. Obama was expected to appoint Gen. James L. Jones, a retired Marine commandant and NATO supreme commander, as his national security adviser.

Other front-runners have emerged in recent days, including Adm. Dennis Blair, retired from the Navy, for director of national intelligence; Susan E. Rice, a former assistant secretary of state, for ambassador to the United Nations; James B. Steinberg, a former deputy national security adviser, for deputy secretary of state; and Thomas E. Donilon, a former chief of staff at the State Department, for deputy national security adviser.

The team is shaping up as one of experience more than change, figures with long résumés but at times conflicting backgrounds. Nothing reflects that more than keeping a Republican-appointed defense secretary. Although Presidents Lyndon B. Johnson and Gerald R. Ford made no change at the top of the Pentagon when they took office, no president has kept a defense secretary from a predecessor in another party, Donald Ritchie, a Senate historian, said.

Mr. Gates, who served as C.I.A. director under the first President Bush, would not have to be reconfirmed by the Senate. The prospect of retaining him generated praise from the military establishment and Capitol Hill, where he is viewed as a pragmatist who turned the Pentagon around after the tumultuous tenure of Donald H. Rumsfeld.

But it also stirred a debate inside Mr. Obama’s circles, where some advisers worried that the decision to turn to a Republican appointee — something President Bill Clinton did in naming William S. Cohen to the defense post in 1997 — would reinforce the notion that Democrats could not manage the military. “It makes them look like they’re too wimpy to be trusted to run the building,” said one adviser who asked not to be named.

Keeping Mr. Gates after a polarizing campaign on the war also seemed incongruous to some. “I really can’t begin to understand from a political point of view how Barack Obama, a person who got the nomination because he ran against the Iraq war, can keep around the guy who’s been in charge of it for the last two years,” said Loren B. Thompson, head of the Lexington Institute, a research organization.

Mr. Gates talked with Mr. Obama’s team about how to make the arrangement work. One adviser familiar with the discussions said the final issue was the choice of senior Pentagon personnel and whether a small circle of Gates advisers would remain.

Obama advisers have talked about Richard J. Danzig, a former Navy secretary, as a possible deputy and heir apparent to Mr. Gates, but some acknowledged that the prospect could raise concerns. If Mr. Danzig is sitting down the hall from the secretary’s office and seen as Mr. Obama’s real choice, some said, then his presence could undercut Mr. Gates’s authority.

But Mr. Gates has shown an ability to manage the Pentagon even with a small inner circle. When he took over from Mr. Rumsfeld after the 2006 midterm elections, Mr. Gates did not bring a single new aide. And the senior military officer corps will remain unchanged at the start of the administration, including Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Admiral Mullen made an unannounced trip to Chicago on Friday for a 45-minute meeting with Mr. Obama on a wide range of national security issues, Pentagon officials said. Before going, Admiral Mullen received approval from both Mr. Gates and Mr. Bush, the officials said.

The decision by Mr. Brennan to pull out of consideration for a senior intelligence job surprised specialists and lawmakers, some of whom questioned whether he had been forced by Mr. Obama’s team to withdraw. Mr. Obama’s office denied pushing Mr. Brennan aside.

The episode underscored how the C.I.A.’s secret detention program remained an incendiary issue. Mr. Brennan, who will continue to work on Mr. Obama’s transition team, was a senior adviser during the campaign and said an Obama administration would ban coercive interrogation.

Yet a group of psychologists posted a letter on the Internet last weekend calling for Mr. Obama to pass over Mr. Brennan, quoting a 2006 interview in which he seemed to defend C.I.A. operations after the Sept. 11 attacks.

Stephanie Cutter, an Obama spokeswoman, said, “John Brennan has served our nation with honor and is a man of talent and integrity,” adding that Mr. Obama “is grateful for John’s continuing assistance as a valuable member of our transition team.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/26/us/politics/26gates.html?_r=1&bl=&ei=5087&en=5a50becfbe5bac73&ex=1227848400&pagewanted=print


================================================== ====

I think it's a good decision--less bumps in the road of changing our strategy. Keeping Bush's cabinet members does slightly fly in the face of the Obama campaign's cries that McCain, if elected, would signal 4 more years of the same, and that we couldn't afford that, but it's not a permanent appointment.

Gates has been a fairly popular replacement for the much vilified Donald Rumsfeld. Obama's choices have been pretty varied; he picked several liberals to some criticism and a number of centrist economists that brought bipartisan praise. Any thoughts on Gates?

crb
11-26-2008, 12:17 PM
Its funny because its "4 more years of Bush" from Obama. But it is a good move. I've got no problems with any of Obama's cabinet appointments so far, they're as good as you can ask for from a Democrat.

We'll see who gets energy. See if his appointee is practical and for more domestic drilling and nuclear power.

Kembal
11-26-2008, 12:36 PM
It really isn't 4 more years. Appointing Rumsfeld would've been 4 more years. Gates provided a markedly different change to the Pentagon after his appointment.

Of course, nice backhanded compliment there. To be expected, I suppose.

crb
11-26-2008, 01:01 PM
It really isn't 4 more years. Appointing Rumsfeld would've been 4 more years. Gates provided a markedly different change to the Pentagon after his appointment.

Of course, nice backhanded compliment there. To be expected, I suppose.
So even 4 more years of Bush wouldn't have been 4 more years of Bush?

Gan
11-26-2008, 01:08 PM
Gates is a good man for that position.

I have no problem with him staying on.

Seizer
11-29-2008, 10:26 AM
So essentially instead of the man of change we are getting the man of the same ole game?

We get a little bit of Clinton and we get a little bit of Bush? I guess for a man who really couldn't take one side or the other, we shouldn't expect more of him.

I wonder if the anti-Bush demicans, are furious with his choice to keep Gates on?

Daniel
11-29-2008, 01:58 PM
Not really. Gates, like Gen P, were both good guys in a sea of incompetence. I'm highly critical of the way the war's in Iraq and Afghanistan have been administered but I don't really have a problem with this.

The questions becomes does Obama give Gates the things he says he needs to win, which the Bush administration hasn't really done.

Stanley Burrell
11-29-2008, 03:24 PM
No problem with Gates here, either. At this rate, maybe Valerie Plame can be a part of the team again too, so long as she does a better job at finding those nuke-u-lar enrichment dossiers in the middle of Giraffe-fuck, Africa. In the name of National Defense.

<<I wonder if the anti-Bush demicans, are furious with his choice to keep Gates on?>>

At first, a little bit. And then, whatever. Like these cards weren't on the frickin' table already.

There are a lot more single elements of this administration that need switching over than a secretary. My pretending to know how little Gates does as an individual has as much bearing on someone pretending to know how much Gates does (with exception to all of the covert operatives on hiatus to express their savvy intellect about Gates' potential on the GemStone IV Players' Corner Forum. [I'm in the know-how: I have black neighbors, live five blocks away from an abortion clinic, decided religion was stupid, watch a news channel and was in a fistfight at some point in my life.])

Mighty Nikkisaurus
11-29-2008, 04:26 PM
Its funny because its "4 more years of Bush" from Obama. But it is a good move. I've got no problems with any of Obama's cabinet appointments so far, they're as good as you can ask for from a Democrat.

We'll see who gets energy. See if his appointee is practical and for more domestic drilling and nuclear power.

This is actually way more like the "Use a scalpel rather than an ax" line of thinking than "4 more years". I agree with Daniel-- good guys in a sea of incompetence. So cut out the incompetence, keep the good guys.