| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Gen. Jones USMC. This certainly didn't take long. |
| 2009-05-19 |
| Gen. Jones and the Anonymous Long Knives The knives are out. The tom-toms are beating. And by Washington standards it's soon. Usually the trashing of the national security adviser takes longer. In recent days articles have appeared in The Post and the New York Times questioning the abilities of retired four-star Gen. Jim Jones, the former commandant of the Marine Corps and former NATO commander. Of all the power games in Washington, this one probably has the highest stakes. This is dangerous to the players and to the country. The national security adviser is the person who sees the president most often and has his ear. Each adviser has his or her own style. Jones is reserved, confident and low-key; this does not sit well with his detractors. Traditionally the job of the national security adviser is to synthesize information between the secretary of state and the secretary of defense. This person is meant to listen to all voices and then present them to the president along with his own advice. Success or failure depends on the adviser's relationship with the president. Period. National security adviser is the most coveted job in foreign policy, even more so than secretary of state, under the thinking that while the secretary is traveling the globe, being America's ambassador to the world and eating a lot of bad food at boring banquets, the adviser is in Washington making and overseeing policy. There is always pushback, sometimes from State, sometimes from the Pentagon. In the Bush administration, Condoleezza Rice could not control Defense Secretary Don Rumsfeld or his mentor, Vice President Dick Cheney, who tried to marginalize Colin Powell at State. In her case the knives were out from both sides. The knives are always anonymous. Today, the sniping is reportedly coming mostly from State Department officials and some staffers at the White House. Jones, not surprisingly, has a good relationship with the Pentagon. So who's out to get him? Reporters across town are being called and spun. Jones is out of it, they are told, doesn't show up; doesn't speak up at meetings; works only a 12 1/2 -hour day; doesn't stand next to the president in photographs; doesn't like to give interviews. Funny, but those all sound like things the national security adviser should be doing. Reporters are protecting their sources, but Hillary Clinton is apparently not behind the stories. She likes her job, those who have been spun say, and gets along well with Jones. Meanwhile, the stakes are higher than ever: Iraq is not resolved. Iran could go nuclear at any moment. Pakistan, already a nuclear state, is chaotic. Afghanistan is hanging on by a thread. The Arab-Israeli peace talks have stalled. And that's not to mention North Korea and other hot spots. If ever there was a time to work as a team, this is it. If the leaders of those hot spots think that the Americans are internally divided and do not respect each other or that President Obama is too weak to control the sniping around him, it could be harmful to our foreign policy. To be sure, Jones operates differently than many of those around him. His is a military staff style. Jones didn't seek this job and doesn't need it. He has no agenda except to serve the president. He is not interested in personal power. To some in Washington this is difficult to understand. After all, here is a man secure enough that he doesn't need to drape himself around the president in photos, to dominate meetings with his views, to assert himself publicly. He has already proved himself. He could be out making a fortune and taking his family on boat rides. Obama has said many times that he wants to hear all voices. He famously assembled a team of rivals. And if those who are sniping think Jim Jones is not doing a good job, they should go directly to the president, not leak and spin to the press. That's their duty. Obama is not afraid to cut his losses. He did that with Jim Johnson, one of the vice presidential vetters, when questions arose about his role in the Fannie Mae scandal. Tom Daschle and Bill Richardson were dropped from Cabinet appointments. Which is why Obama should put an end to this sniping. Either Jones is doing a good job or he is not. If he is not, the president should make a change. If the president continues to have confidence in Jones, those who are attacking him should beware. They are messing with the wrong dude. Those ribbons on his uniform were not awarded for nothing. |
| Posted by:Besoeker |
| #14 that would be "she" as in Sally Quinn. Erstwhile CBS reporter of non-good-repute. Married Ben Bradlee of WaPo Editor "fame". |
| Posted by: Frank G 2009-05-19 23:36 |
| #13 I commend the author for stretching 2 paragraphs as far as he did. |
| Posted by: Mike N. 2009-05-19 23:25 |
| #12 "Long Knives" is a misnomer. The negative quotes in the articles in the WaPo and NYTimes are pinpricks. |
| Posted by: lord garth 2009-05-19 13:32 |
| #11 Ramsey Clark was a Marine. |
| Posted by: tu3031 2009-05-19 13:20 |
| #10 Until a Marine proves he's a 'Murtha' he's still a Marine. And fortunately the 'Murthas' are extremely rare. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2009-05-19 13:18 |
| #9 I'm sure that is the case Lagom. But I'm equally as certain there were many good men in the Wehrmacht attempting to do the right thing as well. In he end however, their efforts were in vain. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2009-05-19 11:19 |
| #8 Besoeker: If you read things correctly, Gen Jones is working for love of country. Perhaps an alien concept? |
| Posted by: Lagom 2009-05-19 11:07 |
| #7 Begs the obvious question Jack. Why did he go to werk for........"some pansy Chicago politician with dead fish as gifts"...in the first place? |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2009-05-19 10:45 |
| #6 I happen to know a little bit about Jones from a source closer than "a working associate". He is a very independent, loyal marine warrior who can work the organization and the Machivellian traps that the eastern establishment egalitarians think all knuckle dragging military types will fall for. He took on Bush, Rummy and Cheney over a number of policies while he was SHAFE Commander and NATO numero uno. He is the antithesis of Clark - a cool customer who is in this position for only one reason - the POTUS asked him (regardless of who the POTUS is) - a true country first guy. If someone or some group of insider type pols are going to screw him (and why?) then he'll just get up out of his chair and quit. He is not one to take BS and let it not bother him. He is a lifer Marine, for God's sake not some pansy Chicago politician with dead fish as gifts. |
| Posted by: Jack is Back! 2009-05-19 10:16 |
| #5 Anyone who thinks that there are any innocents, ever, in Washington, should watch the movie Elizabeth, especially the role of Sir Francis Walsingham. He is "the bloodthirsty villain, on our side", a Machiavellian committed to his country. He is the good guy. But the other characters are just as Washingtonian. Every foreigner is an enemy, even allies. The place is rife with factions. The idealistic, naive and weak are pawns. This is how things are, and have always been, in the corridors of power, back to the ancient Egyptians, and likely before. W. Bush was unusual, because he had found a passable discriminator, to avoid recruiting some of the worst of the bad lot to be in his inner circle. When he was interviewing, if anyone dared "self promote", that was the end of the interview, services not required. Ironically, everyone knew this ahead of time. But those who self promoted could not control themselves, and would do it during the interview, anyway. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2009-05-19 10:14 |
| #4 I like your 'nalysis, Jumbo. I don't have any answers, but you ask good questions. Mebbe O knows he's gonna have to do some fighting so he's trying to head off the peace processors at State... |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2009-05-19 10:09 |
| #3 Condoleezza Rice could not control Defense Secretary Don Rumsfeld or his mentor, Vice President Dick Cheney, who tried to marginalize Colin Powell at State Given this article is in the WaPo, we know it has a purpose. So exactly what stage backdrop is our little reporter minion busily trying to paint? It is obviously a puff piece for Jim Jones as well as Obama. Obama is being portrayed as the wise one who listens to all counsel. I'd like to believe that is true, but it makes little sense given what we know about him. And I don't know enough about Jim Jones to know if he is another Weasel Clark type guy. Is Obama too sensitive of the left's critisism of his choice of Jim Jones and is trying to get out in front of it? Enquiring minds want to know why the WaPo handlers feel the need to spin this story in this light. |
| Posted by: Jumbo Slinerong5015 2009-05-19 09:21 |
| #2 ahh the same smart Sally Quinn that was creaming over M'chelle? "All the famous people at fabulous cocktail parties say..." Jones couldn't pick a better vacuous opponent than Ben Bradlee's whore. |
| Posted by: Frank G 2009-05-19 08:43 |
| #1 What decade will the knives come out for the morons at State? |
| Posted by: 3dc 2009-05-19 08:42 |