Bush Nominates Gen. Hayden

Posted on May 8, 2006

President Bush on Monday chose Air Force Gen. Michael Hayden to lead the embattled Central Intelligence Agency, re-igniting a debate over the domestic surveillance program that the onetime head of the National Security Agency once ran.

Republican and Democratic critics also questioned the wisdom of putting a military officer in charge of the civilian spy agency.

“Mike Hayden is supremely qualified for this position,” Bush said in the Oval Office, with Hayden at his side. Without mentioning Hayden’s critics or their objections, the president said: “He knows the intelligence community from the ground up.”

If confirmed, Hayden would replace Porter Goss, who resigned under pressure Friday.

He said that Hayden “has been a provider and consumer of intelligence.”

To balance the CIA between military and civilian leadership, the White House plans to move aside the agency’s No. 2 official, Vice Admiral Albert Calland III, who took over as deputy director less than a year ago, two senior administration officials said. Other personnel changes also are likely, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the changes are not ready to announce.

Talk of Hayden’s nomination rekindled debate over the administration’s domestic surveillance program, which Hayden used to oversee as the former head of the National Security Agency.

“There’s probably no post more important in preserving our security and our values as people than the CIA,” Hayden said.

Here is the text.
Allah has bad feeling about this.
I, however, don’t understand what the big deal is. Perhaps someone can explain to me what the problem is? Otherwise, I’m more apt to agree with John Hinderaker.

This seems a little odd to me. When Gen. Colin Powell was named Secretary of State, did anyone say that the State Department was being put “under Pentagon control,” or had been “gobbled up” by the Defense Department? Not that I recall.

I’m glad to hear that there is tension between the Defense Department and the CIA. Given the performance of the CIA in recent years, there should be. The agency badly needs to be cleaned up, and I can’t see any reason why a general isn’t as good a person as any for the job.

Part time Pundit makes an excellent argument in favor of Gen. Hayden.

This change is a good thing, as it will help both Defense and State to moderate the poles that have been generated from the rivalry. This appointment is a good thing at a great time that will help both agencies to understand the values each provide and help them learn to work together in the future. The military will learn the value of diplomacy and information and the CIA will learn the value of action. Our national defense will be the clear winner.

Kim Priestap says: General Hayden is a superb choice for several reasons: See her list, and links.

Read the whole thing. So far, the arguments in favor are more convincing to me. I haven’t really heard a well thought out argument on why this is a bad pick.

» Filed Under News, War On Terror