Obama stumbles defending security programs

Question of the Day

Is it still considered bad form to talk politics during a social gathering?

View results

President Obama has had difficulty finding his footing and has been late to the game in defending federal intelligence surveillance programs as a valuable weapon for thwarting terrorist plots, national security analysts say.

When Mr. Obama appeared on TV with PBS interviewer Charlie Rose Monday night, it was his first high-profile comment on the secret phone and Internet surveillance since the story broke on June 5, nearly two weeks earlier. And even then, the president’s remarks were seen even by supporters of the programs as muddled.


SEE ALSO: NSA director says a few phone checks helped foil many terrorist plots


For example, the president told Mr. Rose that the surveillance programs run by the National Security Agency (NSA) were “transparent” because they are overseen by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court. But the court itself is secret, with the public barred from learning any details of its operation, its location, or the orders issued by its judges.

“The Charlie Rose show was a good tactical choice in terms of setting, but the case made so far doesn’t seem to be persuading folks,” said Peter Singer, a national security specialist at the left-leaning Brookings Institution. “What he is battling is not just a facts-based argument but a lost-trust issue that is far harder to turn around.”

As Mr. Obama himself said on the show, “This debate has gotten cloudy very quickly.”

Some lawmakers, especially those on the House and Senate intelligence committees, have been adamant about the value of the surveillance programs in foiling terrorist plots. Speaker John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican, criticized Mr. Obama on Thursday for not emphasizing the worth of the programs.

“I’m a little surprised that the White House hasn’t stood up and made clear on an ongoing basis over this last week just how important these programs are,” he said. “For those of us who have been briefed on these programs, we’re aware how much safety they’ve brought us. And we’re also aware of many examples where they’ve helped us eliminate terrorist threats.”

More often, Mr. Obama, a former lecturer on constitutional law, has spoken about oversight of the programs and of striking the right “balance” between security and privacy.

It was only in response to Mr. Rose’s 13th question about the NSA and anti-terrorism tactics, when the interviewer compared Mr. Obama’s policies with those of the Bush-Cheney administration, that the president defended the surveillance as helping to protect Americans and rejected comparisons to former Vice President Dick Cheney.

“The one thing people should understand about all these programs though is they have disrupted plots,” Mr. Obama said. “Not just here in the United States but overseas as well.”

Then he added that the surveillance has helped “at the margins” to protect the U.S.

Muted reaction

When the story about widespread NSA surveillance leaked out on June 5, the White House’s reaction was muted. The administration’s first official to comment on the record came from deputy White House press secretary Joshua Earnest, who said a day later that the surveillance was “a critical tool in protecting the nation from terror threats.”

On June 7, Mr. Obama addressed the revelations for the first time at an impromptu morning press conference in California, saying the programs “help us prevent terrorist attacks.”

“They make a difference in our capacity to anticipate and prevent possible terrorist activity,” he said.

Story Continues →

View Entire Story

© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Comments
blog comments powered by Disqus
TWT Video Picks