As has been reported, there are some concerns about the likely nomination of General Michael Hayden to replace Porter Goss at the CIA.
For example, Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich) stated today (source: Key Republicans Wary on CIA Front-Runner on Fox News Sunday:
“We should not have a military person leading a civilian agency at this time.”
Of course, Hoekstra, being in the House, has no direct say in the matter. Nonetheless, he is of the President’s party and serves on a relevant committee, so there is political significance to his statement.
Still, the military angle, per se, is not a historical problem, as James Joyner notes. Still, there have been ongoing turf battles over the control of intelligence, including how much should be under the aegis of the DoD. As such, there is a cetain amount of symbolism, at least, that could be read into this potential nomination.
Indeed, the President does seem overly enamored of the general idea of the military, as evidenced by his post-Katrina statements about giving the military a greater role in future disaster relief. Further, it is clear that he has long preferred the DoD to the State Department. As such, concern over the placement of a military official in the CIA Director’s office is not wholly misplaced.
My reservations are less in that direction, than in the fact that Hayden was a key figure in the controversial NSA wiretapping program, a program, about which I have severe doubts in terms of its constitutionality. Further, I found Hayden somewhat non-responsive when he was interviewed on the subject (although I suppose that is what one should expect from someone in the spying business).
Interestingly, the nomination will create something of a confrontation with the Senate over the NSA program in question–and as was noted on ABC’s This Week it would seem that the administration thinks that there is a political hay to be made through such a confrontation. I question the validity of that line of reasoning, but the evolution of the situation is interesting.
Of course, if the goal is to paint the White House as tough on terrorism, it is unclear how that ultimately helps the President, as the point of contrast would be the Republican-controlled Senate. Even if the President’s approval numbers go up because he is seen as protecting the homeland by listening in on al Qaeda, surely any gain that damages GOP Senate chances in November would be empty.
At any rate, it seems rather likely that the NSA program will be of issue, as the NYT reports: Key Republican Airs Concerns on C.I.A. Pick
“With General Hayden up for confirmation, this will give us an opportunity to try to find out” more about that program, Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania and chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said on Fox-TV.“If the Senate has a mind to assert its constitutional prerogatives here, then we could use this for leverage to find out, and I think people do want to know what’s going on to protect civil liberties.”
Mr. Specter had said earlier that he might seek to hold up the confirmation if the administration did not provide more information on the eavesdropping program.
I would hope that this would be the case.
Sphere: Related Content
May 8th, 2006 at 9:23 am
[...]
Another Point on Hayden
By Dr. Steven Taylor @ 9:20 am
Carrying over from my post of last night, this morning’s WaPo’s piece on Hayden (In GOP, Doubts On Likely CIA Pick) b [...]