But
in a letter
Tuesday to members of the CNAS board of directors, Flournoy said she
would
remain in her post at the think tank and asked Obama to take her out of
consideration to be the next secretary of defense. Flournoy told the
board
members that family health considerations helped drive her decision and
the fact that two of her children are leaving for college in the next
two years.
"Last night I spoke with President Obama and removed myself from
consideration due to family concerns," reads the letter. "After much
agonizing, we decided that now was not the right time for me to reenter
government. The good news is that you all are stuck with me for the
indefinite future!"
The move means that only
one of the three names rumored for the post remains under consideration: Ashton
Carter, the former deputy secretary of defense. When Hagel was ousted Monday,
speculation had immediately turned to Flournoy, Carter, and Democratic
Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, a former Army Ranger. But Reed took himself out
of the running almost immediately after Hagel announced his resignation.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on Monday suggested Hagel had vented “frustration” to him over his treatment by the White House.
The
steady stream of stories in recent weeks that suggested Hagel was
having a difficult time penetrating the president’s inner circle carried
echoes of Robert Gates and Leon Panetta, two past Defense secretaries
who went on to write tell-all books critical of the president’s handling
of defense policy.
Former Democratic aide Brent Budowsky said
Democrats across the Capitol saw Hagel’s ouster as the latest example of
“unprecedented” drama created by “too tight and too controlling of an
inner circle.”
He noted that not only had each of the president’s
previous Defense secretaries voiced concern over his Syria policy, so
had former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
“This is going to
precipitate a very visible battle beginning today and going through the
confirmation of his successor about what the policy should be, and
highlight the long-term and chronic internal disagreement,” said
Budowsky, who is a columnist for The Hill.
Other defense experts say Hagel was not particularly close with the president or members of his national security team.
"He
had no relationships that were already established within this
administration," said a retired military officer with current policy
experience in Washington, who wanted to speak on background.
The
retired officer noted that Hagel is also older than the president's
closest advisers, such as Rice and chief of staff Denis McDonough.
"The generational difference was a really difficult thing," he said.
Hagel takes the fall for Obama's failed Iran policy? Forced out as US Defense Secretary
Chuck Hagel has been forced out as US Secretary of Defense.
Let's go to the videotape.
The irony is that after we here in Israel were very much opposed to Hagel's nomination, he actually got along with Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon (unlike Obama and Kerry), and seemed to be following Hippocrates' rule of first doing no harm with respect to our country.
Administration officials said that Mr. Obama
made the decision to remove Mr. Hagel, the sole Republican on his
national security team, last Friday after a series of meetings between
the two men over the past two weeks.
The
officials characterized the decision as a recognition that the threat
from the militant group Islamic State will require different skills from
those that Mr. Hagel, who often struggled to articulate a clear
viewpoint and was widely viewed as a passive defense secretary, was
brought in to employ.
Mr. Hagel, a combat
veteran who was skeptical about the Iraq war, came in to manage the
Afghanistan combat withdrawal and the shrinking Pentagon budget in the
era of budget sequestrations.
...
“The next couple of years will demand a
different kind of focus,” one administration official said, speaking on
the condition of anonymity. He insisted that Mr. Hagel was not fired,
saying that the defense secretary initiated discussions about his future
two weeks ago with the president, and that the two men mutually agreed
that it was time for him to leave.
But Mr.
Hagel’s aides had maintained in recent weeks that he expected to serve
the full four years as defense secretary. His removal appears to be an
effort by the White House to show that it is sensitive to critics who
have pointed to stumbles in the government’s early response to several
national security issues, including the Ebola crisis and the threat
posed by the Islamic State.
Evidence from a variety of sources, including the International Atomic Energy Agency,
suggests that as Iran produced more uranium enriched to near 20 percent
purity, a process that takes it most of the way to bomb-grade fuel, it
began diverting some into an oxide powder that could be used in a small
research reactor in Tehran. That diversion is believed to have begun in
August.
Iran had been complaining for years that the research reactor, which was
supplied by the United States during the rule of Shah Mohammed Reza
Pahlavi to produce isotopes for medical purposes, was running out of
fuel, and that the West refused to sell it more. So it decided to make
the fuel itself. Now, even though it has enough fuel to keep the reactor
running for at least a decade, it may be making more, several sources
indicate.
The statistics released in quarterly reports by the atomic energy agency
show that if Iran had not diverted fuel to that project, it would have
enough medium-enriched fuel for one bomb and would be on its way to
enough for a second. Instead, as of the agency’s last report, in
November, Iran had enriched 232 kilograms (about 511 pounds) of the
fuel, nearly enough to produce a weapon. But more than 96 kilograms
(almost 212 pounds) had been sent off for fabrication into fuel plates
for the reactor. Once turned to that purpose, the fuel is very difficult
to use in a bomb.
The Times goes on to quote intelligence analysts who believe that Iran is trying to signal willingness to reach a deal with the West, or at least to be seen as willing to reach such a deal.
The report came as an Iranian official said Thursday
that Tehran would let UN nuclear inspectors into a military base they
suspect was used for atomic weapons-related work, if threats against the
Islamic Republic are dropped.
The IAEA believes Iran conducted
explosives tests with possible nuclear applications at Parchin, a
sprawling military base southeast of Tehran, and has repeatedly asked to
inspect it.
Western diplomats say Iran has carried out extensive
work at Parchin over the past year to cleanse it of any evidence of
illicit activities but IAEA chief Yukiya Amano said earlier this month a
visit would still be "useful."
"If the trans-regional threats
(against Iran) dissipate, then they will find it possible to visit
Parchin," Deputy Foreign Minister Hassan Qashqavi was quoted by the
Iranian Labor News Agency as saying on Wednesday. The comments were also
published on Thursday by online magazine Iran Diplomacy.
Qashqavi
was most likely referring to Israel's threat of military strikes
against Iran and the possibility of further sanctions by the West.
Iran is playing games. It's seeking to get the sanctions removed without actually stopping the uranium production or allowing weapons inspectors in to report on a real-time basis. The only reason it's behaving this way is that it is feeling threatened, particularly by the prospect of the US joining with Israel in a strike. For example, from the reports in the media, it seems that Michele Flournoy is a lot more likely to advise President Obama to strike Iran than would Leon Panetta or Chuck Hagel. Flournoy currently seems to be the front runner for the Secretary of Defense position. Additionally, the prospect of Binyamin Netanyahu being reelected with everyone knowing that he wants to attack Iran cannot be comforting for the mullahs.
Michèle Flournoy would make a great secretary of defense.
I worked for her for more than two years at the beginning of the Obama administration's
first term, and seeing her in action convinced me of it.
Am I biased in her favor? You
bet. I've worked with and for many people over the years, and I've had
colleagues I wouldn't trust as secretary of the local dogcatchers' association.
But I'd trust Flournoy with any job in the nation. And, for the record, I don't
want another administration job. I already have a job
that I like, and tenure is a beautiful thing. But as a citizen, I'd sure like
to see Flournoy back at DoD.
Here are 10 reasons she'd be a
terrific choice for defense secretary:
Very little in that list has anything to do with policy. But this one was perhaps the most interesting.
10. She's not lobbying for the job.
Flournoy's got plenty of great alternatives: She can walk into any think tank job,
any defense industry job, and most academic jobs as it is. She's already an
enormous success, and odds are she'll be SecDef eventually. But right now, she
has three kids at home and she knows just how tough it is to balance family
life with an all-consuming job. If President Obama wants her as secretary of defense,
he may have to work to convince her to take the job this time around. That's a good
thing: The desperate make lousy public officials.
Want someone who will be a great secretary of defense? Find
someone who's not sure she really wants the job.
Would she return to the Pentagon so soon after leaving in order to focus on her family [in February 2012]?
Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian
and Pacific Affairs Kurt Campbell, a cofounder of CNAS with Flournoy and
a family friend, told Newsweek’s Eleanor Clift in late November that balancing work and family “is a real concern to her,” but Flournoy “believes deeply in public service and if the call comes she will serve.”
Supporters of Israel may view Flournoy more positively than Hagel.
Hagel’s critical views on Israel and reported
homophobia have made him somewhat radioactive as a candidate, but
Flournoy’s emergence has been welcomed by conservative and pro-Israel
groups, among others.
A senior Republican Senate aide told Politico
that Flournoy was well versed in Israel’s Iron Dome anti-missile system,
which is partially funded by the US, as well as regional arms sales and
the importance of Israel’s military edge over its neighbors.
On Iran, her views seemingly fall in line with
the pentagon’s official position, that a military strike against
Tehran’s nuclear facilities must be kept on the table, though the option
is not an effective one.
“It is something that would buy us time, but
it would not by itself solve the problem in any enduring way,” Flournoy
told a Tel Aviv conference in May.
...
With the idea of a Hagel appointment being
savaged by Republican senators, security hawks, gay advocacy groups,
mainstream newspapers including the Washington Post, advocates for
stronger sanctions on Iran and Cuba, and pro-Israel campaigners from
both sides of the aisle, Obama would have to be unusually committed to
Chuck Hagel’s nomination for it to go forward.
In case he is not – as the failure to announce
the nomination last week alongside that of Senator John Kerry for
secretary of state indicated – most observers agree that the president
could do far worse than the competent, learned hand of Flournoy in the
Pentagon.
It sounds like Flournoy may be the best alternative available.
Sources on Capitol Hill told the Free Beacon that opposition
to Hagel reaches all the way to the Embassy of Israel, which is said to
have quietly expressed concern about the former senator.
“Our office has talked with the Israel embassy who says their policy
is to support whatever the president wants in his cabinet and would not
provide further comment,” one Senate aide told the Free Beacon. “With a little prodding, our contact at the embassy did allude to their concern for Hagel’s nomination.”
An Israeli embassy spokesman declined comment.
Hagel has drawn additional heat from insiders who claim he lacks the
credentials needed to manage a department as large and essential as the
Pentagon.
“Yes, Hagel has crazy positions on several key issues. Yes, Hagel has
said things that are borderline anti-Semitism. Yes, Hagel wants to gut
the Pentagon’s budget. But above all, he’s not a nice person and he’s
bad to his staff,” said a senior Republican Senate aide who has close
ties to former Hagel staffers.
“Hagel was known for turning over staff every few weeks—within a
year’s time he could have an entirely new office because nobody wanted
to work for him,” said the source. “You have to wonder how a man who
couldn’t run a Senate office is going to be able to run an entire
bureaucracy.”
Others familiar with Hagel’s 12 year tenure in the Senate said he routinely intimidated staff and experienced frequent turnover.
“Chuck Hagel may have been collegial to his Senate colleagues but he
was the Cornhusker wears Prada to his staff, some of whom describe their
former boss as perhaps the most paranoid and abusive in the Senate, one
who would rifle through staffers desks and berate them for imagined
disloyalty,” said Michael Rubin, a former Pentagon adviser on Iran and
Iraq. “He might get away with that when it comes to staffers in their
20s, but that sort of personality is going to go over like a ton of
bricks at the Pentagon.”
Multiple sources corroborated this view of Hagel.
“As a manager, he was angry, accusatory, petulant,” said one source
familiar with his work on Capitol Hill. “He couldn’t keep his staff.”
“I remember him accusing one of his staffers of being ‘f—ing stupid’
to his face,” recalled the source who added that Hagel typically
surrounded himself with those “who basically hate Republicans.”
Sources expressed concern about such behavior should Hagel be
nominated for the defense post. With competing military and civilian
interests vying for supremacy, the department requires a skilled
manager, sources said.
“The Pentagon requires strong civilian control,” a senior aide to former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld told the Free Beacon.
“It’s already swung back in favor of the military over the past five
years. A new secretary of defense should push it back in its rightful
place, but it’s doubtful Hagel would be that guy.”
“It’s not clear that [Hagel] has the standing, the managerial prowess, or the willingness to gore some oxen,” said the source.
One senior Bush administration official warned that Hagel is ill informed about many critical foreign policy matters.
“He’s not someone who’s shown a lot of expertise on these issues,” said the source, referencing a recent Washington Post editorial excoriating Hagel’s record. “That [op-ed] was extraordinary.”
“Only in Washington,” the official added, “can someone like [Hagel]
be seen as a heavy weight. He’s not the sharpest knife in the drawer.”
Hagel is likely viewed positively by the administration mainly
because he is a Republican who often criticizes his own party, the
source said.
“He’ll dance to a tune played by the White House,” said the former official. “That I think is the real problem.”
Read the whole thing. Yes, there's much more. This guy was a disaster from the get-go. His only qualification is that he's a RINO. I wonder if he paid his taxes.....
I am an Orthodox Jew - some would even call me 'ultra-Orthodox.' Born in Boston, I was a corporate and securities attorney in New York City for seven years before making aliya to Israel in 1991 (I don't look it but I really am that old :-). I have been happily married to the same woman for thirty-five years, and we have eight children (bli ayin hara) ranging in age from 13 to 33 years and nine grandchildren. Four of our children are married! Before I started blogging I was a heavy contributor on a number of email lists and ran an email list called the Matzav from 2000-2004. You can contact me at: IsraelMatzav at gmail dot com
