|
In response to
"with Comey gone, it looks like HR McMaster is next (or soonish)"
by
crash davis
|
rest of the article
|
Pushing back on the story, the White House provided a statement to Bloomberg attributed directly to the president.
“I couldn’t be happier with H.R.,” Trump said. “He’s doing a terrific job.”
And White House press secretary Sean Spicer told reporters Tuesday that Trump has an “excellent” relationship with McMaster.
However, two people close to Bannon insist that Trump’s frustration with McMaster is real.
“Trump has serious issues with his national security adviser,” a GOP operative with close ties to the White House said.
Bannon was immediately eyed by many in the media as the likely source of negative stories about McMaster.
Trump’s combative chief strategist was removed from the National Security Council Principals Committee after McMaster replaced Flynn.
Bannon’s allies feel that McMaster is freezing them out of the foreign policy sphere, pointing to his elevation of Dina Powell to deputy national security adviser and the reassignment of K.T. McFarland, a former Fox News analyst who will reportedly leave her post as deputy national security adviser for an ambassadorship.
They also allege that McMaster was behind several unflattering news stories about Sebastian Gorka, a White House national security adviser.
Several news outlets reported last week that Gorka was about to be fired or moved elsewhere in the administration after failing to secure a permanent security clearance. However, as with many stories about impending White House personnel changes, nothing has come of it.
Foreign policy experts say the infighting is indicative of a broader disagreement within the White House between anti-interventionists, led by Bannon, and an ascendant wing of hawkish generals who spearheaded the surprise missile strike on Syria.
On this front, McMaster is at odds with Trump on at least one issue.
He has reportedly expressed frustration with Trump’s use of the term “radical Islamic terrorism,” a phrase that has been the lynchpin of the administration’s war against political correctness and its tough rhetoric on combating terror.
And while Trump has given his generals and military advisers more autonomy, McMaster could have difficulty convincing the president to spring for more troops in Afghanistan.
Trump ran on an “America first” platform that is at odds with the U.S. becoming further embroiled in Afghanistan.
On this issue, Bannon, a favorite among Trump’s grassroots supporters, may have the advantage.
“I don’t think McMaster can survive fighting this out in the press,” said one former White House transition adviser. “He doesn’t represent a constituency the way Bannon does. McMaster represents the views of 1,000 people in Washington, D.C. There’s a shine to him now, but the minute he gets in the mud, he’ll be just as dirty as the rest of the pigs.”
By contrast, McMaster has the respect of foreign policy experts, who have been alarmed as the Afghanistan debate plays out through anonymous leaks in the press.
Dan Feldman, the State Department’s special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan during the Obama administration, said McMaster has done a fine job professionalizing the National Security Council and bringing about a “functioning and coordinated inter-agency decision-making process.”
“I would hope that after 16 years of U.S. engagement, thousands of Americans killed there, and hundreds of billions of dollars spent [in Afghanistan], that this isn’t minimized as -‘McMaster’s War,’ ” Feldman said.
|