Obama Pick To Head National Intelligence Council Got The Surge Wrong And Wants To Talk To Hamas

Arutz Sheva is reporting:

A flurry of reports over the weekend said that the former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia, considered a sharp critic of Israel, is to be named to a top intelligence post in the administration of President Barack Obama. Chas W. Freeman Jr., who was U.S. ambassador to Riyadh from 1989-1992, is set to be named chairman of the National Intelligence Council, which has a strong influence on the content of the intelligence briefings presented to the President (and puts together the National Intelligence Estimate, or NIE, which in 2007 dissuaded the Bush regime from attacking Iran). The Council chairman is also often called on to give direct briefings to the President.

Freeman has expressed concern about how the rest of the world judges the US because of Iraq.

In September 2007 on the surge (PDF):

And now I understand that weʹre hanging around there and shooting the place up in the hope that something positive will turn out and happen. But I donʹt see it happening.

...And, finally, I think we have to take account of the fact that this war has taken a huge toll on American prestige and leadership internationally.

When we call, no one answers anymore. The costs of this adventure go well beyond the Middle East.

In October 2007

By invading Iraq, we transformed an intervention in Afghanistan most Muslims had supported into what looks to them like a wider war against Islam. We destroyed the Iraqi state and catalyzed anarchy, sectarian violence, terrorism, and civil war in that country.

Freeman was wrong about the surge--of course he is not the only one; Obama was wrong too. But more than that, we have clearly seen that the US did not destroy the Iraqi state--nor have we "catalyzed anarchy, sectarian violence, terrorism, and civil war in that country." The rash words of Chas Freeman do not bear even a passing resemblance to what exists in that country today.

Freeman is equally wary of what the world will think of the US because of Israel:

Arab identification with Palestinian suffering, once variable in its intensity, is now total. American identification with Israeli policy has also become total. Those in the region and beyond it who detest Israeli behavior, which is to say almost everyone, now naturally extend their loathing to Americans. This has had the effect of universalizing anti-Americanism, legitimizing radical Islamism, and gaining Iran a foothold among Sunni as well as Shiite Arabs. For its part, Israel no longer even pretends to seek peace with the Palestinians; it strives instead to pacify them. Palestinian retaliation against this policy is as likely to be directed against Israel's American backers as against Israel itself. Under the circumstances, such retaliation – whatever form it takes – will have the support or at least the sympathy of most people in the region and many outside it. This makes the long-term escalation of terrorism against the United States a certainty, not a matter of conjecture. [emphasis added]

Before Freeman goes around blaming Israel for terrorist attacks, does he blame Israel for the over 30,000 murdered and injured around the world by Islamist terrorists in 41 countries?

Country	Killed	Injured
Afghanistan	1265	1479
Algeria	210	270
Angola	1	40
Azerbaijan	2	8
Bangladesh	2	15
Chechnya	48	46
China	34	49
Dagestan	24	21
Denmark	0	2
Dubai	1	1
Egypt	1	3
Ethiopia	3	7
France	0	1
Gaza	5	2
Germany	2	0
India	547	1445
Indonesia	3	277
Ingushetia	30	26
Iran	41	160
Iraq	4453	7829
Israel	28	151
Jordan	8	0
Kenya	0	10
Kosovo	2	130
Lebanon	74	302
Mauritania	24	7
Nigeria	12	20
Pakistan	2133	3499
Palestinian Authority	14	35
Philippines	151	315
Russia	13	42
Saudi Arabia	1	0
Somalia	921	1237
Sudan	322	253
Sweden	1	0
Syria	17	14
Thailand	317	405
Turkey	8	0
UK	1	2
USA	3	0
Yemen	63	132
Totals	10785	18235

Something is clearly going on--but this is global terrorism, and it is past time to direct our anger against the perpetrators and not on the country that takes the battle to them.

Unfortunately, Freeman is likely to fit right in as an adviser to Obama, who wants to talk to Iran--Freeman wants to go a step further, urging that the US talk with Hamas too:

we must talk with all parties, whatever we think of them or their means of struggle. Refusal to reason with those whose actions threaten injury to oneself, one's friends, and one's interests is foolish, feckless, and self-defeating.

So just why is Obama picking Freeman?

Based on his past experience as ambassador to Saudi Arabia, it is because of Freeman's expertise in the Middle East.

And based Freeman's incorrect analysis of Iraq and his willingness--if not eagerness--to talk to Hamas, we have here another appointment by Obama that is less than reassuring.

Technorati Tag: Obama and Chas Freeman