When you're the Defense dept., every problem has a military solution.
Is it really surprising with Rumsfeld's Dept. of Defense taking over more and more of other agencies turf that the US has become more militarily aggressive? Pre-Iraq, the State Dept was sidelined and removed from it's traditional role in foreign policy development. Plans and policies came mostly out of the Dept. of Defense spearheaded by the Vice President's office. The State Dept is yet to reclaim its traditional role.
Since the intelligence restructuring, a process very similar has been going on between the DoD and the CIA. When Negroponte took the job coordinating and overseeing all intelligence matters, budgetary matters for the Pentagon's massive intel arm were left outside his umbrella offering no practical way for him to exert control.
Then we had reports of the Defense Dept. placing military spec ops troops in US embassies working independently from the CIA personnel, forming plans, making contacts, executing operations all within what has traditionally been the CIA's domain. In this WaPo article tomorrow, it becomes apparent that the same spec ops teams can now act independently of the local ambassadors making the State Dept's top reps in country absolutely meaningless as well.
My point in all this is to show the massive shift of power that has taken place from the traditional diplomatic and spy agencies to the DoD which is having real consequences on policy.
For example, if the State Dept was running Iran policy right now, we would probably be pursuing significant efforts at a negotiated solution. If the CIA were put in charge of Iran policy, their solution would probably be operations targeting the scientists and support staff to compromise them and sabotage the program.
But, instead, the Department of Defense, again in conjunction with the VP's office, appears to be playing the majority role in setting Iran policy. So, should we be surprised that the main proposed solution appears to be no negotiations followed by military strikes?
This usurpation of more and more power by the DoD from other executive branches is a significant story that has serious impacts. In many ways it mirrors the claims of extraordinary executive powers made by the president and the effect is similar. And, I would assume this claim of power is planned to last throughout the duration of this "generational war."
I'm tired. I hope that made sense.
(UPDATE: The DoD is gutting the CIA's role while Porter Goss's main priority is plugging leaks.)
Since the intelligence restructuring, a process very similar has been going on between the DoD and the CIA. When Negroponte took the job coordinating and overseeing all intelligence matters, budgetary matters for the Pentagon's massive intel arm were left outside his umbrella offering no practical way for him to exert control.
Then we had reports of the Defense Dept. placing military spec ops troops in US embassies working independently from the CIA personnel, forming plans, making contacts, executing operations all within what has traditionally been the CIA's domain. In this WaPo article tomorrow, it becomes apparent that the same spec ops teams can now act independently of the local ambassadors making the State Dept's top reps in country absolutely meaningless as well.
My point in all this is to show the massive shift of power that has taken place from the traditional diplomatic and spy agencies to the DoD which is having real consequences on policy.
For example, if the State Dept was running Iran policy right now, we would probably be pursuing significant efforts at a negotiated solution. If the CIA were put in charge of Iran policy, their solution would probably be operations targeting the scientists and support staff to compromise them and sabotage the program.
But, instead, the Department of Defense, again in conjunction with the VP's office, appears to be playing the majority role in setting Iran policy. So, should we be surprised that the main proposed solution appears to be no negotiations followed by military strikes?
And in a subtle but important shift contained in a classified order last year, the Pentagon gained the leeway to inform -- rather than gain the approval of -- the U.S. ambassador before conducting military operations in a foreign country, according to several administration officials. "We do not need ambassador-level approval," said one defense official familiar with the order....
"SOCOM is, in fact, in charge of the global war on terror," Brown said in testimony before the House last month. In this role, SOCOM directs and coordinates actions by the military's regional combatant commands. SOCOM, if directed, can also command its own counterterrorist operations....
But SOCOM's more robust role -- while adding manpower, specialized skills and organization to the fight against terrorism -- has also led to some bureaucratic tensions, both inside the military with the joint staff and regional commands, as well as with the CIA and State Department. Such tensions are one reason SOCOM's plan took years.
This usurpation of more and more power by the DoD from other executive branches is a significant story that has serious impacts. In many ways it mirrors the claims of extraordinary executive powers made by the president and the effect is similar. And, I would assume this claim of power is planned to last throughout the duration of this "generational war."
I'm tired. I hope that made sense.
(UPDATE: The DoD is gutting the CIA's role while Porter Goss's main priority is plugging leaks.)
6 Comments:
Why do you think Condi got the SecState job?
She's the good little woman who will allow herself to be run-over. She ineffectual, unassertive and a terrible manager. Her placement was a guarantee of impotence in the state dept.
By Greyhair, at 11:03 AM
Yep. After fighting with Colin Powell, Cheney/Rumsfeld recommended Condi as a patsy.
That's also why Porter Goss who had virtually no cred at the CIA was put there.
This is a strategy. Claim all the power possible to the president, and all the power to the Pentagon.(that's where the NSA is)
Mike
By mikevotes, at 4:34 PM
Just what Eisenhower warned about. We now have a more and more militarized regime. If they can just root out the consciousness of having sworn to uphold the Constitution from the officer corps, they are home free.
By janinsanfran, at 5:18 PM
boston celtics jersey
falcons jersey
adidas superstar
cleveland cavaliers jerseys
coach factory outlet
nike outlet
oakley sunglasses
cheap ray ban sunglasses
ray ban sunglasses outlet
kate spade sale
By raybanoutlet001, at 8:53 PM
qzz0613
cheap jordans
jordan shoes
burberry outlet
cheap jordans
oakley sunglasses
canada goose coats
air force 1
true religion jeans
prada sunglasses
oakley sunglasses
By Unknown, at 9:15 PM
mbt shoes sale
nike hyperdunk
golden goose sneakers
cheap jordans
adidas tubular x
kyrie 3
golden goose outlet
hermes belts
off-white
kyrie irving shoes
By zzyytt, at 1:37 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home