Panetta as CIA Director

[Cavguy]

Sorry, Mr. Panetta may be a fine public servant in other capacities, but he is not what I'd prefer to see in the CIA director. Go find Sec Gate's clone - he or she is out there somewhere. If we can't get them to serve, then we should ask ourselves why that is.

Best, Rob

Keep in mind that Gates had no apparent special capacity for running DoD when appointed - he was a politically connected spook who became president of Texas A&M. Like Panetta, a fine resume, but not especially well grounded in DoD.

That one worked out well, and remember everyone considered him a "lame duck" appointment filling in until the end of Bush's turn. Boy were we surprised.

[Rob Thornton]

Keep in mind that Gates had no apparent special capacity for running DoD when appointed - he was a politically connected spook who became president of Texas A&M. Like Panetta, a fine resume, but not especially well grounded in DoD.

That one worked out well, and remember everyone considered him a "lame duck" appointment filling in until the end of Bush's turn. Boy were we surprised.

Could be - but he also worked himself all the way up on merit to head the CIA. In my estimate the two men are of very different qualities as are the requirements for the leadership of those institutions. DoD has a history (not always a pretty one) of civilian leadership in its secretaries (deputies, etc.) with a complimentary military component in the JCS, the GCCs, etc. to foster that unequal dialogue. There are official and unofficial checks and balances in the various committees, etc. CIA (and other USG agencies) strike me as a different animal.

This seems more akin to say, taking a former White House CoS who left the service as a CPT and making him the CENTCOM CDR.

In any event I wish Mr. Panetta (and CIA) the very best of luck.

Best, Rob

[John T. Fishel]

should have been reversed. I have been a believer that the head of the intel community should be an intel consumer, never a producer. With the creation of DNI, the DCIA is the head of a single agency responsible for collection, analysis, and some execution. Therefore, the DCIA should be an intel (or related - eg Blair) professional. By contrast, the DNI should be a consumer like Negroponte, Jane Harmon, or Blair.

Is Panetta the best we can do? Probably not. But he has some very limited military intel experience, was a consumer as WH COS, and as a member of the Iraq Study Group. Wish him the best, expect less, hope I'm wrong (even though "hope is not a method."

Cheers

JohnT

[wm]

Points to ponder, some drawn from San Jose Magazine article. Draw suitable conclusions.

--Panetta, a Monterey native, finished his 2-year Army "career" (after a 3 year deferment from his ROTC obligation to attend law school) as an intelligence officer at Fort Ord, which was then a BCT/Infantry AIT post.
--Panetta got intros from Joe Califano around DC in the process of becoming a Congressional staffer. (excerpt from Wikipedia article on Califano follows as backgrounder):

In 1964, Califano became a special assistant to the United States Secretary of Defense, and deputy secretary. He was appointed to several committees by President of the United States Lyndon Johnson. In July 1965, he became a special assistant to the president, and served as President Johnson's senior domestic policy aide. He was called "The Deputy President for Domestic Affairs" by The New York Times. He served in that post for the remainder of Johnson's term.

--Dir CIA nominee (Panetta), Former Clinton Presidency OMB Director/ Chief of Staff and SecState nominee is former Clinton Presidency First Lady.

[J Wolfsberger]

In spades. The CIA still hasn't recovered from the damage caused by Stansfield Turner. I fear/suspect that Mr. Panetta's appointment is intended to be the killing stroke.

[Entropy]

As an intel guy myself, I'm not particularly concerned about the lack of intel experience as long as he's willing to listen to adivice from those in the community. Leadership and management ability is more important, IMO, and based on my limited knowledge of Mr. Panetta, he seems to have some skill there. But as I said before, it's a bit of a gamble.

The biggest worry I have is politicization of intelligence and I will second Ken's cynicism to a certain extent.

[John T. Fishel]

the chief of your intel collection and analysis organization to be a fighter pilot (or ship driver, or engineer battalion commander)? That's how I see the nomination of Panetta for DCIA. Actually, I think he'd be a pretty good nominee for DNI but not to this job.That's why, in my previous post, I suggested a reversal of nominations would be better. But, then, P-E Obama is not consulting with me - a former intel guy.

Cheers

JohnT

[Ken White]

but it's all one can have at this point...

I just have visions of Schlesinger, Turner -- not politicians but both sent in with a 'disable that monster' mission by a President -- Deutch, Tenet and Goss.

Particularly the last three, politicians all and not particularly bright ones at that...

[Entropy]

John,

I agree that Panetta in the DNI position would make more sense. There are probably better candidates, but "better" all depends on one's criteria, which is highly subjective. We don't know the criteria, but I suspect we'll learn something from the confirmation process.

My personal opinion is that technical experience is an overrated quality for leadership positions. And it's not like Panetta is completely ignorant about intelligence (especially the relationship between intel and policy) issues given his experience as the White House COS. Understanding that intel-policy relationship and the ability to manage a large organization is more important IMO than direct experience in doing intelligence for that position. Panetta's budget experience is also very helpful.

My concern is that Panetta may be another Doug Feith and try to do his own intelligence analysis to fit the intel to the policy. That is a question regarding his character and leadership, which I can't speak to. Hence the reason I said the appointment is a gamble

[wm]

would you really want the chief of your intel collection and analysis organization to be a fighter pilot (or ship driver, or engineer battalion commander)? That's how I see the nomination of Panetta for DCIA. Actually, I think he'd be a pretty good nominee for DNI but not to this job.That's why, in my previous post, I suggested a reversal of nominations would be better. But, then, P-E Obama is not consulting with me - a former intel guy.

Sure seemed to work for Army intel when the upshot of IOSS was to ensure MI LTs be poor copies of combat arms platoon leaders rather than fight big Army and note that officers who were intel experts might actually have a function in the Army.

(BTW, I too am a former chief of intel collection and analysis organizations, albeit not quite on the size and scale of the little company headquartered in Langley.)

I concur that Panetta might be a better DNI, but If Ken is right about his mission, he may well move on to be DNI after deactivating CIA.

If CIA were to be "removed," it would a great moment in the history of Federal bureaucracies. When else have we seen the death of a Federal agency?