For Obama, Continuity Can Trump Change

Washington Post: Three Bush Appointees In Crucial Positions Are Likely To Remain In Place Under New President

(Washington Post)  This story was written by Alec MacGillis and Ann Scott Tyson.

---

As President-elect Barack Obama prepares to fill top positions for his incoming government, he faces a stubborn reality: Some of the key individuals he will rely upon to tackle the country's most serious challenges are holdovers from the current administration -- a trio of Bush appointees who will likely stay in place for at least the first year or two of Obama's presidency.

In confronting the financial crisis and weakening economy, Obama must turn to Ben S. Bernanke, a Republican and former chairman of President Bush's Council of Economic Advisers, who will lead the Federal Reserve for at least the first year of the new administration.

In assuming control of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Obama must work with Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who was appointed by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates for a two-year term that will end in late 2009 and, by tradition, can expect to be appointed for a second term as the president's top military adviser. Mullen shares Obama's belief in focusing more on Afghanistan but is wary of a timeline for withdrawing troops from Iraq.

And in guarding against terrorist attacks -- while correcting what he considers the Bush administration's excesses -- Obama will rely upon FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III, whose term expires in 2011.

Obama has made it a point of pride to seek consensus with those who do not fully agree with him, and he is even considering keeping Gates at the Pentagon to ensure a smooth transition. But the need to rely heavily on officials who served in the Bush administration -- an era from which he promises a sharp break -- underscores his constraints. His campaign's success was based partly on the selection of a team he personally trusted, but in his first years in the White House, he will not be able to rely solely on advisers of his choosing.

"It's a challenge," but not an insurmountable one, said William A. Galston, a domestic policy adviser to President Bill Clinton. Bernanke, Mullen and Mueller "appear to be genuinely public-spirited civil servants and not rabid partisans," he said, adding that "if you're thinking about how to deal with someone like J. Edgar Hoover, this is not what we're talking about."

And Obama might be uniquely suited to the task, said Galston, a governance expert at the Brookings Institution. "This is not someone who feels comfortable [only if] he has constructed his own cocoon around him. We've had presidents like that, but he's not one of them. His life has trained him to move through different environments and adjust accordingly."

The Fed's Consensus Builder

Few officials will be as pivotal in Obama's first years in office as Bernanke, a leading authority on the Great Depression who is helping lead the country through a likely recession.

Bernanke was appointed by Bush to a four-year term that began in early 2006, under a system designed to keep the Fed independent from political pressure. But the Fed chairman also serves as the economist in chief, routinely meeting with the president to offer advice and collaborating closely with the Treasury secretary.

Obama and Bernanke have spoken on the phone several times, and met in person once, at Obama's request. In that meeting, held in Bernanke's office, Obama stressed that he respects the independence of the Fed. That suggests he will follow the recent precedent, set by Clinton and Bush, of not jawboning the central bank toward his preferred monetary policy, as aides to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush did.

There is reason to think Obama and Bernanke will get along. Although Bernanke is a Republican, his response to the financial crisis has won him plaudits from congressional Democrats who view him as pragmatic and non-ideological. The former Princeton professor has a calm manner, a penchant for building consensus and unquestioned academic expertise, qualities valued by Obama.

Finally, the top candidates to be Treasury secretary have strong relationships with Bernanke. Lawrence H. Summers, who held the position for part of the Clinton administration, has known Bernanke for decades. And Timothy F. Geithner, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, has been among Bernanke's closest collaborators during the financial crisis; they speak by phone many times each day and more than a few times have spoken through the night.

Obama will have to decide by January 2010 whether to reappoint Bernanke. The decision could hinge on a number of factors, including how the economy does in the coming year, whether the two men develop a good rapport, Obama's view on whether Bernanke should have been more aggressive in preventing a crisis and how eager Obama is to put a Democrat in the job.

A Troop Withdrawal Debate

On Thursday, Mullen sent a note to his staff members, urging them to assist the Obama team. "Transitions of administrations have in the past proven challenging and even awkward," he wrote. "Our duty will be to remain apolitical."

As Obama's chief military adviser for at least the next year, Mullen will lay out options for Iraq and Afghanistan, define the global risks the military faces, weigh the strain on the force and advise on budget priorities. Mullen moved early to create a Joint Staff transition team for the handover period. "My goal is to be foundational -- and sort of a rock during that change," he said in October 2007.

On the two wars, Mullen's views align broadly with those of the president-elect: He sees an urgent need to devote more troops and resources to Afghanistan, and he supports continuing troop reductions from Iraq. But there are also important differences: Although Obama has long cast Afghanistan as the only legitimate war to pursue in response to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Mullen's priorities for that country are driven more by the escalating insurgency since 2006 than by any sense that Iraq is the wrong war for U.S. troops.

In Mullen's ranking of military priorities, Iraq takes precedence, then Afghanistan, followed by finding ways to reduce the overall strain on the nation's fighting forces. Unlike Obama, who pledges to withdraw U.S. combat brigades from Iraq by mid-2010, Mullen opposes any drawdown timeline there as "dangerous," saying reductions must depend on conditions on the ground.

Mullen's view coincides with that of Gen. David H. Petraeus, the former top U.S. commander in Iraq who now heads U.S. Central Command, with responsibility for operations in both war zones.

Obama's relationship with Mullen and other military advisers could prove smooth and productive if Obama takes the pragmatic approach that his advisers are indicating, allowing each side to adjust at the margins, defense experts said. But if Obama presses for the withdrawal of two brigades per month, conflict is inevitable, they warn.

"That would be hard for Mullen, exceedingly hard for Petraeus, and almost impossible for [Gen. Ray] Odierno," who replaced Petraeus as the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said Peter D. Feaver, a national security official in the Clinton and Bush administrations and professor at Duke University. "That would be a civil-military crisis."

[farouk7]

And I''m sure this is the kind of ''even handed'' response you''re hoping for from Obama.

Posted by likeitis5050 at 10:53 PM : Nov 10, 2008
_________________________

Your pro-Zionist bias has apparently blinded you from the ordinary meaning of ordinary words. I feel sorry for you and your kind.

[hypnotoad72]

It''s a wait-and-see approach, regardless.

[benobana]

The ones that needs to be wipe-off the face of the earth is the ones that beats woman.

[likeitis5050]

Time will tell, but the omens do not portend a hopeful future. Many Arabs like myself are looking for a more even-handed approach to the problems of the Mid-East. If the US continues in its pro-Israel posture in dealing with the problems in the region there will be no peace.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by farouk

If by even handed you mean wiping Jews off the face of the earth...no...you aren''t going to be satisfied. I haven''t heard of any thing less in any kind of compromise where Palestinians are concerned. And I''m sure this is the kind of ''even handed'' response you''re hoping for from Obama.

[farouk7]

Because Persians have a history of saying one thing, then doing another - in other words, they can''t be trusted.

Posted by CBSisPravda at 04:02 PM : Nov 10, 2008
__________________________

I think you must be referring to the Israelis. What did the Persians say, and then do the opposite? Or is that just what I think it is: nonsense.

[brianbwb-2009]

I think lots of people would, but rumor is that he doesn''''t want anything that high profile. Chuck Hagel would be good: moderate, great credentials, a reach across the aisle." Posted by hatesthecolt

Not only that, but Mr. Powell has some ''splainin'' to do to a war crimes court.

[farouk7]

Can''t tell you to expect much Change there... I know many Americans are sighing relief upon reading this development.

Posted by nubeginning at 02:14 PM : Nov 10, 2008
________________________

Those of us in Arab world do not expect dramatic changes in America''s policy in the Mid-East; but we do expect a more even-handed approach. Anything less would be unacceptable and will only serve to perpetuate and maybe further inflame the tension in the region. We all wonder why it is that the US assisted the Zionists in acquiring nuclear power for offensive weapons but oppose the Persians working toward obtaining nuclear power for peaceful purposes.

[nubeginning]

farouk: While he will curtail the angry rhetoric, President Obama will not hand over Israel in a silver platter. I know he meant well when he said he would meet with Ahmadinejad and even Osama, but he will be helped along in his decisions by, as you can see, folks from the outgoing regime. Can''t tell you to expect much Change there... I know many Americans are sighing relief upon reading this development.

[farouk7]

I think everyone needs to cool out until he actually does something besides appoint people, until he actually makes a policy decision. That won''t be until Jan. 20th.

Posted by hatesthecolt at 12:49 PM : Nov 10, 2008_
________________________

Time will tell, but the omens do not portend a hopeful future. Many Arabs like myself are looking for a more even-handed approach to the problems of the Mid-East. If the US continues in its pro-Israel posture in dealing with the problems in the region there will be no peace.

[hatesthecolt]

This man is so in love with Israel that it''''s hard to believe he''''s not a Sabra. Not urging that Lieberman immediately be sent packing is more evidence of his extreme pro-Israel stance.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by farouk7

This is completely inconsistent with all the Zionists who are screaming that Obama hates Israel. Did it ever occur to both sides that he might actually be in the middle, because there''s really no legitimate support for him being an extremist on either side of this issue. I think everyone needs to cool out until he actually does something besides appoint people, until he actually makes a policy decision. That won''t be until Jan. 20th.

[farouk7]

I hate to see that Obama is buttering up to the Zionists Jews. It was not enough that he selected Joe Biden, a notorious pro-Israeli proponent as his running mate. It is also the fact that he saw fit to name as his chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel. This man is so in love with Israel that it''s hard to believe he''s not a Sabra. Not urging that Lieberman immediately be sent packing is more evidence of his extreme pro-Israel stance.

[hatesthecolt]

When Gates''''s term is over, I would like to see Colin Powell appointed as Secretary of Defense.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by raflin100

I think lots of people would, but rumor is that he doesn''t want anything that high profile. Chuck Hagel would be good: moderate, great credentials, a reach across the aisle.

[hatesthecolt]

Already coming up with reason to tell the people he can''''f do what he said he would do. What don''''t he and the others around him just come out and say it. He LIED and so did the ones around him.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Hitoyou1

Could you redo that post in English please because that made no effing sense at all.

[hitoyou1]

Already coming up with reason to tell the people he can''f do what he said he would do. What don''t he and the others around him just come out and say it. He LIED and so did the ones around him.

[oldguy4truth]

I agree, Gates would be a good keep, but I can not think of one other that should stay. I am still hoping Powell may be offered, and except Sec. State.

[hatesthecolt]

Gates is a good guy and good SECDEF. He would not be a bad person to leave in place. There is so much turmoil in DoD during adminsitration changes because it is such a huge apparatus, that I think it would be good to leave him in.

That having been said, something HAS to be done about some of the lunatic Bush appointees down a the Assistant Secretary and Deputy Assistant Secretary level before they "burrow in." That''s where a lot of the work gets done and yet there''s less attention paid to them. Some are hard working conscientious people, but others are just plain nuts and were clearly installed as patronage jobs. They are messing up the cogs for the worker bees and they need to GO.