During the Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute War Czar hearing(Video now up on C-Span's website, TPM has clips) Jack Reed (D-RI) and Carl Levin (D-MI) have just called for Bush to fire National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley.
Here's how it went down:
Reed: I'm going to support you but I don't think I'm doing you any favors. My sense is that your appointment is a devestating indicment of the nation security apparatus of the White House. What you're being asked to do is what Mr. Hadley and Dr. Rice have supposed to been doing the last few years. Identify problems, coordinate resources, bring it to the attention of the President, get presidential direction, and that has been abyismal. I'm afraid your position will be someone there to take the blame, but to not really have the kind of acess to the President to get the resources you need to do the job. I presume you'll be reporting to Mr. Hadley?
Lute: No, sir. I'll reporting to the President and coordinating with Mr Hadley.
Reed: And Mr Hadley will be reporting to the President independently?
Lute: On matters outside Iraq and Afghanistan. Yes sir.
Reed: That I find interesting, Frankly Iraq, Afghanistan, and related to that Iran are the most critical foriegn policy issues we face and the National Security Advisor of United States has taken his hands of that and given it.. to you. Is that your understanding?
Lute:Sir, that's the design.
Reed:Well, then he should be fired. Because..frankly If he's not capable of being the individual responsible for handling those duties and passes it on to someone else. I think if the President's serious he should fire Mr. Hadley and replace him with a civilian not a military officer, and also if he didn't do that replace General Pace with you.
After Reed finished his line of questioning Levin, the chairman of Armed Services, came back and called for Hadley's firing as well.
UPDATE: Seems before the committee recessed for the first time, Senator Warner (R-VA) had Lute backtrack on his characterization of the position relating to cutting the NSA out of the process re: Iraq, Afghanistan. Lieberman was the first Senator to question Lute after the recess and predictably spoke out in defense of Hadley. Big Surprise. Here's the exchange:
Lieberman: Very briefly, I understand this is an usual position you’ve been appointed to, contrary to my friend Senator Reed I don’t think your appointment suggests that Steve Hadley should go. I think this is a recognition and a kind of exercise of sound management that the advice to the President on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, are so substantial that one person the National Security Advisor can’t do it all. The NSA is going to spend all of his time, too much of it on Iraq and Afghanistan and ignore the rest of the world in his advice to the President or he’s going to do the opposite. Either one is not a good idea. And I note that your title that you’ve been nominated to is "Deputy National Security Advisor for Iraq and Afghanistan" and "Assistant to the President". And why, "Assistant to the President"? Because history tells us that nations do better when the Commander in Chief is directly involved in the day to day operations of management of a war, you’re going to be his conduit to do that. So I just wonder if I’ve got it right and I guess the other point is, (and this is real inside baseball), you will chair the so-called deputies committee when it comes to Iraq but obviously Mr. Hadley will continue to Chair and be involved in the National Security Council overall, the principles.
Lute: Right. Let me be very clear about this because I don’t want to leave any doubt from the earlier session, Steve Hadley remains in all of his capacity the National Security Advisor, so he’s responsible for his National Security affairs across the global spectrum. His role is not diminished by this appointment or this design position. If confirmed I’ll join him as a teammate and I’ll augment him by providing him and the President 24/7 dedicated coverage of policy execution and policy development for Iraq and Afghanistan. If I was confusing earlier, I’d like to set that straight. To your specific point, I will be, if confirmed, I will chair deputy level sessions within the National Security Council process and Steve and I will seated together at the principles level.
Leiberman: For me, that clarifies it. And the creation of the position, your appointment, is going to move us towards better management for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and the rest of our foreign policy. It's going to require, a real sense of mutual respect and team spirit among you and Mr. Hadley and that’s were the problems can occure. I know both of you and I think I know your skill and personalities and commitment to the higher national purpose that the two of you will make it work.
Lute: Thank you, sir.
Leiberman: Thank you for clarifying that.
This exchange goes directly to two things. First to Lieberman's monumental ignorance. Hadley should not be overwhelmed by Iraq and Afghanistan. The National Security Council has a huge staff. He shouldn't need someone to take the burden off because he can just add as much staff as he needs. If you read David Rothkopf's book about the NSC, "Running the World", he documents how NSCs start small then grow into behemoths over the course of an administration. And besides, ever heard of delegating?
Secondly, this sheds light directly on how undefined the War Czar position is. The fact that Lute had to clarify his statement to Reed shows he's clearly confused about what exactly he's going to be doing over at the NSC. The duties of the War Czar conflict with the duties of the NSA and the rest of NSC staff. And/Or the War Czar conflicts and overlapes with The Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, Peter Pace. Is it a cabinet level position or not? If he's just "Deputy National Security Advisor for Iraq and Afghanistan" and "Assistant to the President" then why is he having to go in front of committee for confirmation. The president and NSA can add anyone they want to the NSC staff? Here's a link to Lute's answers to the committee's advanced questions. Tell me if you think Lute's answers to Reed's questions and his written responses jive.