BY MICHAEL S. JOHNSON
The leaks of classified information from the Obama Administration in recent weeks raise the specter of a Watergate scandal and lessons not learned.
There have been at least five different incidents in which it appears people in the White House or the Obama Administration, or people with their sanction, have leaked highly classified information to the media, presumably to make Obama look tough on terrorism.
Each incident has its own set of dubious circumstances. Each has its own disturbing story of compromised national security, the endangerment of professionals in clandestine services, the abuse and betrayal of our friends and allies, and the abuse of the White House and other government offices for partisan advantage.
The five latest incidents were:
1. The New York Times revelations on June 1, that the U.S. stepped up a program of implanting viruses in the central computer nervous system of nuclear centrifuges in Iran.
2. Another New York Times disclosure that the President was personally deciding who would or would not be a target on a kill list of international terrorists.
3. The identification by the Guardian and New York Times newspapers of a Pakistani physician who assisted the CIA in the location of Osama bin Laden.
4. The exposure in May of an undercover spy operating among Al Qaeda operatives in Yemen who helped foil another underwear bomber attack.
5. The leak of classified information to friendly moviemakers detailing the death of Osama bin Laden, including the exposure of at least one member of the Navy Seals team that performed the raid.
Every leak story deserves a disclaimer. Leaks are part of the natural conflicts between national security and freedom of speech and press. That debate will not end; nor should it, but when the country finds itself confronted with what seem to be egregious and inexcusable breaches of national security, such as these, that don’t serve any overriding public interest, then it’s time to put the debate on hold. It is time to act, whether it is new laws regulating classified materials, imposing tougher penalties on leakers, prosecuting more aggressively or the voters simply expressing their intolerance through the ballot box.
This is such a time, amply noted by the chorus of denunciations from both parties, from security experts, and both conservative and liberal media.
“This has to stop,” said Democratic Senate Intelligence Chairman Dianne Feinstein of California.
“This is one of the most serious beaches…that I have seen,” said the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Dutch Ruppersberger of Maryland.
“It puts us at risk. It puts lives at risk,” said House Intelligence Chairman Mike Rogers of Michigan.
“A Week ago Sunday, in the Situation Room, we all agreed that we would not release any operational details from the effort to take out bin Laden,” said Defense Secretary Robert Gates. “That all fell apart on Monday—the next day.” What else Gates was quoted as saying in a private confrontation with National Security Advisor Tom Donilon, was not repeatable.
Liberal columnist Richard Cohen said on June 11 that the New York Times story quoting three dozen current and former (Obama) advisers, suggests “the sort of mass lawbreaking not seen since Richard Nixon took out after commies, liberals, conservationists, antiwar protesters, Jews and, of course, leakers.”
Compounding the harm and endangerment is the reason for it all. The leaks taken together have a distinctive thematic, a President standing up to international thugs and terrorists, a strong President, a protective President. This of course is very convenient well into a re-election campaign in which his national security credentials and his reputation for strong leadership need some serious polishing. When he took office three years ago, Barack Obama couldn’t even bring himself to use the word “terror” in the same sentence with “war”. Since he took office he has not demonstrated great strength in anything from job creation to energy independence.
Presidents, members of Congress, governors, and elected officeholders from city clerks to road commissioners, at some time or another may well misuse the office he/she holds for partisan political advantage. It is political nature. But there are limits. There are degrees. There are standards of political behavior that most politicians, in fact, do not cross.
Not so for Barack Obama and his subordinates. They have gone well beyond anything you can wink at, brush off or excuse. The President has been campaigning from the White House on the public dime in unprecedented fashion for over a year. He has misused the office to what seems like a far greater degree than most, if not all, of his predecessors.
And now this. What a tragedy has befallen us when the President or his agents are so reckless with our national security, and for what? A partisan advantage? It may turn out to be a well-earned, well-deserved partisan disaster.
Editor’s Note: Mike Johnson is a former journalist, who worked on the Ford White House staff and served as press secretary and chief of staff to House Republican Leader Bob Michel, prior to entering the private sector. He is co-author of a book, Surviving Congress, a guide for congressional staff. He is currently a principal with the OB-C Group.