Is Tulsi Gabbard the Leader U.S. Intelligence Needs—or a Risk It Can’t Afford? |
Tulsi Gabbard’s nomination to head up the U.S. intelligence community has hit Washington like a thunderclap. People are talking, and not in a good way. A former congresswoman and Army National Guard vet, Gabbard has always been a lightning rod for controversy. But now? Now she’s at the center of a storm that’s got intelligence pros wondering whose side she’s really on, especially when you factor in her track record with Russia.
Here’s the thing about Gabbard: she’s made
a name for herself by calling out U.S. foreign interventions. That plays well
with a lot of folks who’ve had enough of endless wars. Fair enough. But dig a
little deeper, and her anti-war rhetoric starts to sound eerily like something
out of Moscow’s playbook.
Case in point: her approach to Syria. When
most of the West was condemning Bashar al-Assad for the atrocities his regime
was committing, Gabbard took a very different route. In 2017, she didn’t just
hold back criticism—she flew to Damascus and sat down with the man himself.
Bashar al-Assad, the dictator Russia has bent over backward to keep in power.
That meeting didn’t just raise eyebrows; it set off alarms. Her colleagues were stunned, and some were outright furious. To them, it looked like she was giving a brutal dictator exactly what he wanted: legitimacy. And it wasn’t just a momentary lapse in judgment. It made people ask the hard question: whose narrative was she really advancing? Because from where many were sitting, it didn’t look like America’s.
Coincidence? Not likely. Intelligence
experts saw it as part of a calculated move by Moscow to stoke divisions within
the U.S. Whether Gabbard intended it or not, her words became ammunition for a
foreign power eager to weaken American unity.
And it didn’t stop there. When Hillary
Clinton suggested Gabbard might be Russia’s favorite political player, it set
off a media firestorm. Sure, there’s no hard proof tying Gabbard directly to
Moscow, but the pattern is hard to ignore. Take her stance on Ukraine: she’s
been vocal about her skepticism toward U.S. military aid. At a time when
Ukraine is battling for survival against Russian aggression, that skepticism
lands squarely in Putin’s favor. To U.S. intelligence, this isn’t just another
policy debate—it’s a big, flashing red light.
Now, with Gabbard poised to lead the U.S.
intelligence community, those flashing lights have turned into blaring sirens.
The CIA and other agencies are on the front lines of countering adversaries
like Russia, and the idea of having someone in charge whose past rhetoric
aligns—intentionally or not—with Kremlin goals is unsettling, to say the least.
For intelligence officers who depend on trust and mission clarity, Gabbard’s
appointment raises a chilling question: will their efforts be supported or
undermined from the very top?
The stakes couldn’t be higher. This isn’t
just about Gabbard’s controversial past or her polarizing views. It’s about the
delicate balance of trust and leadership that keeps America’s intelligence
machinery running. And right now, with Gabbard stepping into this role, that
balance feels like it’s on shaky ground.
Robert Morton is a member of the Association of Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO) and the author of the "Corey Pearson- CIA Spymaster" spy thriller series. Check out his latest spy thriller, Misson of Vengeance.
No comments:
Post a Comment