US president-elect Donald Trump’s choice of former US representative Tulsi Gabbard as US director of national intelligence has sent shock waves through the national security establishment, adding to concerns that the sprawling intelligence community would become increasingly politicized.
Trump’s nomination of Gabbard, a former Democrat who lacks deep intelligence experience and is seen as soft on Russia and Syria, is among several high-level picks that suggest the incoming president might be prioritizing personal allegiance over competence as he assembles his second-term team.
Among the risks are that top advisers could feed the incoming Republican president a distorted view of global threats based on what they believe would please him and that foreign allies might be reluctant to share vital information, current and former intelligence officials and independent experts said.
Randal Phillips, a former CIA operations directorate official who worked as the agency’s top representative in China, said that with Trump loyalists in top government posts, “this could become the avenue of choice for some really questionable actions” by the leadership of the intelligence community.
A Western security source said there could be an initial slowdown in intelligence sharing when Trump takes office in January that could potentially affect the “Five Eyes,” an intelligence alliance comprising the US, the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
The worry from US allies is that Trump’s appointments all lean in the “wrong direction,” the source said.
Trump’s presidential transition team did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Inside and outside the US intelligence network, much of the anxiety focuses on Trump’s choice of Gabbard, 43, as director of national intelligence, especially given her views seen as sympathetic to Russia in its war against Ukraine.
While Trump has made some conventional personnel decisions such as that of US Senator Marco Rubio for secretary of state, last week’s announcement of Gabbard, an officer in the US Army Reserve, surprised even some Republican insiders. She is likely to face tough questioning in her US Senate confirmation hearings.
Gabbard, who left the Democratic Party in 2022, has stirred controversy over her criticism of US President Joe Biden’s support for Ukraine, which has prompted some critics to accuse her of parroting Kremlin propaganda.
She also spoke out against US military intervention in the civil war in Syria under former US president Barack Obama and met in 2017 with Moscow-backed Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, with whom Washington severed all diplomatic ties in 2012.
The selection of Gabbard has raised alarm in the ranks of intelligence officers unsure of how tightly she holds some of her geopolitical views, whether she is misinformed or simply echoing Trump’s “Make America Great Again” followers, one intelligence official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
“Of course there’s going to be resistance to change from the ‘swamp’ in Washington,” Gabbard said in a Fox News interview on Wednesday night last week.
She said that voters had given Trump “an incredible mandate” to move away from Biden’s agenda, but offered no policy specifics.
A senior European intelligence official said agencies in EU countries “will be pragmatic and ready to adapt to the changes.”
“No panic in the air for now,” the official added.
A European defense official described Gabbard as “firmly” in the Russia camp.
“But we have to deal with what we have. We will be attentive,” the official said.
A British government official said they would be watching to see whether Gabbard’s nomination was confirmed.
Philip Ingram, a former intelligence officer in the British military, said Gabbard’s past comments about Russia “will set alarm bells ringing around the world” and her appointment could affect how intelligence is shared between allies.
Intelligence officials could be “more selective in the level of detail they are willing to pass on,” including in how they protect sources and phrase information, he said.
Some analysts said that concerns about Gabbard could be tempered by Trump’s choice to head the CIA: John Ratcliffe, a former US representative who served as director of national intelligence at the end of Trump’s first term.
Although close to Trump and expected to offer little pushback against his policies, Ratcliffe is not seen as an incendiary figure and could act as a counterbalance to Gabbard in his post atop the No. 1 spy agency among the 18 that she would oversee.
Some analysts said that by attempting to install Gabbard with other controversial loyalists — including former US representative Matt Gaetz for attorney general, who resigned his elected post after the announcement, and Fox commentator and military veteran Pete Hegseth for defense secretary — Trump is showing he wants no guardrails to his efforts to remake federal institutions.
Democratic critics were quick to pounce not only on Gabbard’s views, but what they see as her lack of qualifications and the potential the new administration could deploy intelligence for political ends.
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence was created after the Sept 11, 2001, attacks to fix what was seen as a lack of coordination between those organizations.
“She isn’t being put in this job to do the job or to be good at it. She’s being put there to serve Donald Trump’s interests,” US Representative Adam Smith, the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, told CNN on Thursday last week.
After leaving the Democratic Party, Gabbard became increasingly critical of Biden and grew popular among conservatives, often appearing on far-right TV and radio shows, where she became known for supporting isolationist policies and showing disdain for “wokeness.”
Shortly after Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Gabbard wrote about it on social media.
“This war and suffering could have easily been avoided if Biden admin/NATO had simply acknowledged Russia’s legitimate security concerns regarding Ukraine’s becoming a member of NATO,” she said.
Rubio, a former Trump rival turned supporter, defended Gabbard’s nomination, describing her as a “revolutionary pick that has a chance to really make a positive change.”
Some Republicans were more noncommittal.
Asked about Gabbard’s qualifications, US Senator John Cornyn, a member of the US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, said that “we’re going to do our job, vet the nominees and make a decision. That’s a constitutional responsibility of the Senate.”
To become director of national intelligence, Gabbard must first be confirmed by a majority of the 100-member US Senate, where she could face headwinds.
Trump’s fellow Republicans would have at least a 52-48 seat majority in the chamber starting in January next year, and have in the past been eager to back the party leader, increasing the likelihood that she would secure the post.
“Our friends are watching as closely as our foes, and they are asking what this all means for the pre-eminent player in global intelligence collection and analysis,” said one former US intelligence officer who worked in some of the world’s hot spots.
As Taiwan’s domestic political crisis deepens, the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) have proposed gutting the country’s national spending, with steep cuts to the critical foreign and defense ministries. While the blue-white coalition alleges that it is merely responding to voters’ concerns about corruption and mismanagement, of which there certainly has been plenty under Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and KMT-led governments, the rationales for their proposed spending cuts lay bare the incoherent foreign policy of the KMT-led coalition. Introduced on the eve of US President Donald Trump’s inauguration, the KMT’s proposed budget is a terrible opening
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS