In the process of trying to figure out who leaked the Eikenberry memos and why (her sources' best guess: the White House political operation which is trying to push back against a pushy Pentagon), Laura Rozen makes a point that hadn't occurred to me:
Obama may have additional leverage to assert his continued Afghanistan deliberations against a pushy Pentagon right now, another Democratic foreign policy hand suggested yesterday. That's because of Fort Hood, and the emergence of numerous accounts that suggest the military sat on serious concerns raised about Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan by several military colleagues.
"The Army [screwed] up here," he said. "The Army [screwed] up in such a monumental way. The Army generals are running for cover now."
There are a lot of ironies in those two paragraphs.
Intellectual rigor. Honest reporting. Influential analysis. Don't miss another issue of the magazine considered "required reading" by the world's top decision-makers. Subscribe today.
COMMENTS (2)
Indulge me in a little reverrrie. Every administration, Republican or Democratic, has leakers, who are pushing their agenda. Administrations almost never get to the bottom of these leaks, unless, like the last administration, a special prosecutor is forced upon them. The outcome of that episode should be fresh in mind. The prosecutor never laid a hand on the actual leaker. He also never laid a hand on the target the political opposition had in mind.
This president, so far not one of my favorites, used to look tough for his willingness to throw errant old pals "off the bus". Since his inauguration, he has looked weak due to his unwillingness or inability to crack the whip on his ostens ... view full comment
Indulge me in a little reverrrie. Every administration, Republican or Democratic, has leakers, who are pushing their agenda. Administrations almost never get to the bottom of these leaks, unless, like the last administration, a special prosecutor is forced upon them. The outcome of that episode should be fresh in mind. The prosecutor never laid a hand on the actual leaker. He also never laid a hand on the target the political opposition had in mind.
This president, so far not one of my favorites, used to look tough for his willingness to throw errant old pals "off the bus". Since his inauguration, he has looked weak due to his unwillingness or inability to crack the whip on his ostensible allies from his own party. An opportunity has been presented to show a pair of balls. He should pick a candidate among the small circle of those in his tent who knew enough to be a plausible source of the leak and tell that person they have been chosen to walk the plank. He can issue a statement regretting the chosen one's need to leave public service for personal reasons. The plank-walker can regret his personal need to leave, and reassure the nation that his or her absence from the public arena will be as brief as possible and we can expect Paul Revere to remount his or her horse at the earliest possible moment. The message will be firmly planted, upon the president's subordinates and their media acquaintances who pretend to fawn upon them.
The failure to do something like I have suggested drives one president after another, Democratic and Republican, to draw away from those who question their policies and draw closer to those who exhibit loyalty, and a tight mouth, even if they are as dumb as a post. Do it Barack! Harry Truman, a tough guy who was more in touch with the instinct of personal loyalty than you will ever be, will come in the middle of the night, when you are dead asleep, and plant a kiss on your cheek. Who knows, maybe George Marshall, who could be an opponent of presidential policy, but never a leaker, will come too.
Iser,
I'm not sure I follow your line of reasoning. Wouldn't jettisoning a leaker further drive the tendency of the President to rely on a loyal rather than insightful coterie?
I also would much rather that leaders of all kinds would show a little backbone rather than growing a pair of balls, or showing a pair...... Considering that all of our Presidents thus far have had balls, I'm not so sure they really help, but better posture (especially on issues) just might.
Iser,
I'm not sure I follow your line of reasoning. Wouldn't jettisoning a leaker further drive the tendency of the President to rely on a loyal rather than insightful coterie?
I also would much rather that leaders of all kinds would show a little backbone rather than growing a pair of balls, or showing a pair...... Considering that all of our Presidents thus far have had balls, I'm not so sure they really help, but better posture (especially on issues) just might.