Tulsi caps off a big day for ‘realism and restraint’ in foreign affairs

For the proponents of what they like to call realism and restraint in foreign affairs, it’s been a banner day. President Donald Trump has initiated peace talks with Russia by sidelining Ukraine. And Tulsi Gabbard has been confirmed to become director of national intelligence — overseeing eighteen agencies — on a 52-48 vote. At the White House, where she was sworn in by Attorney General Pam Bondi, Trump declared that Gabbard is “an American of extraordinary courage and exceptional patriotism.”  

The sole Republican to dissent from her nomination was Mitch McConnell who has vowed to uphold oldline Republican internationalism during what is more than likely his final term in the Senate. McConnell complained that the former Hawaii congresswoman and presidential candidate failed to appreciate the threats that China and Russia represent. He also asserted that she lacks the appropriate avidity for snooping on conversations by foreigners, including with Americans, that Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act authorizes. “The nation should not have to worry that the intelligence assessments the president received are tainted by a director of national intelligence with a history of alarming lapses in judgments,” he said. 

True enough. Gabbard’s record is eyebrow-raising, whether it’s her confabulation with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad or her sympathy for Putin as he invaded Ukraine.  

But there are several reasons to wonder whether McConnell’s reservations actually matter. One is that Gabbard suffered an acute case of what’s known in Washington as “confirmation conversion.” In essence, Gabbard jettisoned many of the views she once espoused. Her elastic views suggest that rather than being a water carrier for those opposed to the intelligence services, she is something else — a true denizen of the Beltway. 

Then there is the fact that the importance of the office that Gabbard will occupy is equivocal. There is no cogent reason to believe that she will be able to outmaneuver John Ratcliffe, the head of the CIA. Gabbard’s adversaries also warned that she would be briefing the president each morning. But once again, doubts intrude. The efficacy of those briefings is questionable. The notion that Trump would seek out new information that might up-end his preconceived notions defies credulity. Trump knows what he thinks. Any information that is furnished to him will solely be deployed by Trump to bolster the strategy or policy that he already intends to pursue. 

Take Ukraine. True to form, Trump announced that he intends to bypass Ukraine and negotiate directly with Russian president Vladimir Putin. For all we know, he has been doing just that over the past several months in the phone calls whose content he refuses to divulge. To borrow the phrase of George W. Bush, Trump is the Decider. None of the minions that he has surrounded himself with — not Marco Rubio, not Mike Waltz, not Tulsi Gabbard — is going to alter his fixed convictions.  

Gabbard’s real mission is domestic. It’s to end what Trump and co. like to refer to as the “weaponization” and “politicization” of the intelligence services. But the idea that they have been weaponized and politicized is a canard. If anything, it appears to be open season on the intelligence services as Trump unilaterally dismantles long-standing American defenses — and Gabbard is along for the ride.