The 20th anniversary of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s founding is fast approaching and will commemorate the U.S. intelligence community’s reorganization resulting from the 9/11 Commission Report in 2004. President-elect Donald Trump on Nov. 14 this year announced his early birthday gift to that office, and the 18 intelligence agencies that it oversees, by nominating Hawaii’s own American-Samoan darling, Tulsi Gabbard, to be its new director. Chee hoo!
So, why are Republican and Democrat congressional representatives’ reactions ranging from eye-rolling to rolling on the House chamber floor in laughter? Why are career intelligence professionals emerging from the shadows to ring alarm bells over this “national security risk?” Why are adversarial nations’ spymasters sniggering while allies’ intelligence chiefs stand speechless over the announcement?
To start, you may notice a difference in qualifications between Gabbard and incumbent Avril Haines — a former CIA deputy director, deputy national security advisor, and deputy counsel to the president for national security affairs. Gabbard lacks a background in an intelligence discipline — human, signals, geospatial, or any other.
In Congress, she was not a member of the committee that oversees national espionage programs. She has not served in a role that would provide deep understanding of intelligence issues at a policy level.
Then there are the incidents over the past few years that raised concern about Gabbard’s standing with a top counterintelligence threat to our nation: Russia. Kremlin-controlled media praised her open support for Moscow’s justifications for invading Ukraine. Both sides of the aisle rebuked her for amplifying Kremlin agitprop and referred to her by monikers like “Putin’s parrot,” what Russian propagandists’ call a “useful idiot.”
Gabbard in 2020 worked to drop espionage charges against former CIA and NSA employee Edward Snowden, who in 2022 was rewarded with Russian citizenship by former KGB officer Vladimir Putin for passing to Russian intelligence more than one million highly classified documents, most of which focused on U.S. national defense issues unrelated to Snowden’s stated concern about intercepts of U.S citizens’ communications. Failing that, she pushed for a presidential pardon.
Observers also question Gabbard’s judgement, particularly regarding actions that seem aimed at self-promotion. Recall her secret solo “fact-finding” mission to Syria in 2017 as a Democrat congresswoman; she returned a vocal apologist for dictator Bashar al-Assad. Her party defection in 2022 raised eyebrows for similar reasons.
Further tarnishing her appointment is her nominator and potential boss, who has a track record of disparaging intel professionals, compromising U.S. and allies’ state secrets while in office, mishandling highly classified material after leaving office, and infamously in 2018 siding with a seasoned former KGB officer (Putin) rather than accept the raw intelligence and assessments of his own spy agencies regarding Russian covert influence operations targeting U.S. elections.
“What to make of this?” I’m no menehune oracle, but here are a few thoughts.
Trump’s stated intent to overhaul U.S. intelligence would be easier to realize with a sycophant heading that community, and he clearly is selecting nominees based on subservience while working to bypass the safety check of Senate confirmations to install them.
That said, Trump and Gabbard are odd bedfellows. He, when politically convenient, projects affiliation with a brand of Ameri-Christianity that ranges from vanilla patriarchal conservatism to ultra-nationalism (including the whites-only variety), and he bemoans the evils of leftist ideology.
So why hand the keys to the kingdom’s secrets to a female Pacific Islander who brags about being Congress’ first practicing Hindu, has been a member and supporter of a New Age cult described as a Hari-Krishna offshoot, and supported avowed socialist Bernie Sanders in the 2016 Democrat primary?
Just another example of compromising principles for political expediency? Or, is the self-acclaimed deal-maker running a play? Did the nomination check a box (meeting terms of some backroom deal) while allowing for the confirmation process to scrub Tulsi and open a path for a lackey with better qualifications and better fitting the MAGA religio-political mold? Time will tell.
One thing seems clearer: Trump’s state-secret-handling habits are expected to chill career U.S. intelligence professionals’ and allies’ willingness to share secrets with our commander in chief. Gabbard’s appointment as top spook could push that chill towards a freeze.
J.P. Atwell is a former senior CIA operations officer. His two-decade career began as an intelligence analyst and took him to every continent, save Antarctica. He now calls Hawaii Island home. He welcomes your comments at island.intelligencer@gmail.com.
