All of this chatter about Jim Jones' adaptation to the role of National Security Advisor is, as Mike Crowley notes, a little premature. Jones' comments about getting adjusted to his new colleagues reflect a healthy introspection more than they suggest he is in over his head; his success finessing some recent diplomatic disagreements, particularly regarding the new head of NATO, should reinforce that point.
Beside the fact that national security policy making seems to be working fine thus far into Obama's term, it's also worth noting that Jones' goals for the National Security Council could help make what has been historically a strange and often not-very-well functioning bureaucracy more efficient. Consider:
Jones has launched an ambitious restructuring of the White House national security apparatus so it can focus on modern issues such as energy and climate change. He has emphasized the "bottom up" approach to decision-making that both he and Obama favor, Jones said, in which issues are first discussed in working groups, then brought to the "deputies committee" of representatives from Cabinet departments.
... If he can reform the NSC's structure and process, he said, "then everybody can go home and have dinner with their families. Because they'll have enough depth and robustness so that we can tee up issues -- not constantly in a crisis mode."
That seems like a very useful goal; why it would be a good thing for the president's top national security adviser to be dealing with every issue on the table, all the time, escapes me. Despite the huge foreign policy challenges we currently face, systematizing our policy processes is important. In fact, that's why Obama picked Jones. During last winter's transition process, I wrote a piece that examined what the president might expect of Jones:
This formula sheds light on why the Obama team has tapped Jones. The national security adviser coordinates all the major agencies interested in foreign policy and must walk the fine line between producing coherent policy and allowing free and open debate among principals. Jones' reputation as something of an organization man and a methodical, deliberate administrator seem suited to the job. Given the stature of the other appointees, it's no small task for the former Marine.
The other thing to keep in mind about the Obama administration is that there are a lot of cooks in the kitchen, and all of them are big personalities. Hillary Clinton, Richard Holbrooke, Robert Gates, and Joe Biden all participate in the inter-agency dialogue that Jones facilitates, and we would do well to remember that Obama has an interest and confidence in foreign policy that sharply diverges from the apathy and lack of knowledge that characterized the previous two presidents at the beginning of their time in office. Having Jones keep a low profile might not be bad at all.
And now, criticism: This may be a bit of realpolitik from Jones trying to avoid an early term, Clinton-style confrontation with the joint chiefs, but his weighing in against eliminating Don't Ask, Don't Tell, at least for now, is unfortunate.
-- Tim Fernholz
