Interview of GENERAL JAMES L. JONES, USMC - The Stimson Center

More documents

Recommendations

Info

JONES: Well, that may be one of the effects, but it’s not the prime reason that you’d go about this. I think the prime reason that you’d go about this is because it has to be done. The good news is there’s really an abundance of energy. I don’t know of any country that has more diversity and potential for diversity in its energy portfolio than the United States. And as we get into this issue of oil sands and oil shale, you really do have a potential escape valve here where it could dramatically change things if we do it correctly: if we do adopt an energy strategy that is good, that we empower the Department of Energy and specifically the Secretary of Energy to be the go‐to guy on all of energy, not just nuclear energy, which has been the past. But I think we know when the President turns to the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of State on matters of energy he should have a single point of reference that we haven’t had for a long time. BLOOMFIELD: But the Defense Department, I believe, uses something like 11% of the nation’s energy. And you began this today by saying an order, at least in the military, starts the negotiation. Would an order be productive in the defense side … and, to be fair there’s a lot that’s starting to happen on the defense side in both facilities and operational energy … but would a more concerted mandate that this will happen, we will do this, let’s move, and put the resources behind it [be productive]? JONES: Well, when you have an energy portfolio that’s as diverse as ours is— scattered over nine major departments and agencies, maybe more, which spawns thirty to thirty‐two oversight committees and subcommittees on Capitol Hill—how do you get coherence? The Secretary of Defense goes to see the two Appropriations Committees and two Armed Services Committees. The Secretary of State has a limited appearance schedule. The Secretary of Energy could be actually … that’s all he’d be doing, is going to these different Oversight Committees. I use this as an example of something that, I think, is really simple to understand and really needs to be fixed. It’s hard to understand why we don’t do it. BLOOMFIELD: Well let’s pivot from that, and suggest that maybe that is symptomatic of the way a lot of things work inside the government. I’m cheating a little bit, and correct me if I’m wrong, but I would guess you came into government from the perspective of someone who sat at a combatant command, at alliance headquarters, with regional briefings on a daily basis, wondering why the diplomats didn’t have anybody regionally based. They’re either in a capitol working one country, or they’re in Washington, catching all the meetings and phone calls, and running the bureaucracy. I guess my question—because I want to talk about the interagency players bit by bit—but structurally, what did you want to see happen, coming in, and what
would you still like to see happen? Is this the right way to organize … let’s go back to the ‘47 National Security Act, but looking at how we do diplomacy, media, all the competencies … and now you have Homeland Security, which could probably outdo anybody on the number of oversight hearings they have to go to… what’s the right way to do this, that is more efficient, and has a better use of people’s time, and gets more output for input? JONES: Well, with regard to the National Security Council itself, with how it’s organized, every President has the option of doing it anyway they want. I think that’s a good thing, to be honest with you. I happen to believe that the organization that serves this President has the right focus; it reflects his analytical desire, his desire for debate, his desire for different views to be aired all the way up until the time that he makes a decision. I can say without any fear of exaggeration that he does get that. Through the review of the Afghan strategy, for example, the media liked to call it “dithering.” Well, I’ll tell you, it was pretty intensive dithering. If that’s what dithering is, then I’m for it, because it really brought a lot of different views together, there was a lot of passion, a lot of discussion, there were people who felt very strongly about certain things, we all got to know each other a little bit better as a result of that length, and when the President made his decision, everybody saluted smartly, which is kind of the way it’s supposed to work. So, I think that for this President, the organization is sound. I would like to see some of the support mechanisms for the NSC more formalized instead of a little bit too ad hoc in terms of funding, in terms of hiring, in terms of some of the support mechanisms that you have to have. But the organization, I felt very good about, in terms of how the President was being informed as to the key issues that he had to decide on. BLOOMFIELD: But let me go back to something that you said when you were in NATO. You visited Afghanistan … JONES: I didn’t mean it. [Laughter.] BLOOMFIELD: I hope you did. Because I think you said, years ago, something that both General McChrystal and Petraeus embraced, which is: “We’re not going to succeed in this mission by military force alone.” That’s what you said, if I’m correct. JONES: That’s correct. BLOOMFIELD: So that sort of points to: What are the nonmilitary tools in the kit? And I take your point about President Obama’s deliberative process, but you’ve got seventeen intelligence agencies, you’ve got a State Department that has just had
Page 1 and 2: Interview of GENERAL JAMES L. JONES
Page 3 and 4: BLOOMFIELD: It has changed in size,
Page 5: I don’t think, given the pace and
Page 9 and 10: I think Egypt is extremely importan
Page 11 and 12: We have to analyze our own situatio
Page 13 and 14: JONES: Well, there’s no doubt in
Page 15 and 16: eing in these rather long engagemen
Page 17 and 18: BLOOMFIELD: Leaders get bloodier an
Page 19 and 20: ATTENDEE (Gareth Porter): You were

Interview of GENERAL JAMES L. JONES, USMC - The Stimson Center

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?