Tulsi Gabbard, the former Democratic candidate and representative from Hawaii, may be in for a bumpy ride during her confirmation hearing as Trump’s controversial nominee for the director of national intelligence. Critics are alarmed by her sympathetic disposition towards Russia and her harsh critique of pivotal foreign surveillance programs.
The intelligence role she’s nominated for was established in the wake of the September 11 attacks and has a duty to oversee the functioning of more than a dozen US intelligence agencies. However, Gabbard’s past track record has generated concern among national security and intelligence officials.
In 2017, she undertook an unsanctioned trip to Syria to have an audience with then-President Bashar Assad, an action deemed unacceptable by many from both leading parties. Her critics argued that her move played into the hands of Assad, a suspected war criminal, and allies of Russia and Iran, consequently legitimizing their actions.
Gabbard defended her decision, asserting that she was fostering dialogue and peace by conversing with opposition parties. But her naive belief and actions raised serious doubts regarding her diplomatic strategies and allegiances.
She voiced skepticism over the allegations that Assad’s government had used prohibitively chemical weapons against its own people. This lacks credibility as established facts from the U.S. authorities, and independent analysts, determined otherwise showing a clear support for the rogue state.
Furthermore, Gabbard expressed a dismissive outlook regarding the threat posed by Syria to the US. Her viewpoints run contrary to those held by a majority and have a striking similarity to those put forward by Russia.
Gabbard’s justifications for Russia’s military aggression in Ukraine are disturbing parallels with Kremlin talking points, indicating a potential lack of understanding of democratic norms. Endorsing Russia’s actions in Ukraine implies support for a breach of international law.
In addition, she echoed conspiracies disseminated by Russian state media linking the US and Ukraine to hazardous biological research. This perpetuation of disinformation authors a new chapter in international relations marked by mistrust and suspicion.
She leveraged blame against the Ukrainian government, branding it as a ‘corrupt autocracy.’ To observers, Gabbard’s sympathy for Russia’s position on Ukraine’s NATO aspirations presents yet another maneuver aligned with Russian propaganda.
Gabbard, during her congressional tenure, took a strong stance against a surveillance program crucial for international security. Her flip-flops raise doubts over her ability to consistently support national security programs.
Although she now claims to endorse the surveillance program, her prior efforts to repeal the program have stirred concerns among bipartisan lawmakers. They apprehend that her criticisms could jeopardize her nomination and subsequently, the country’s security.
Gabbard’s political career has been punctuated by profound ideological shifts, as evidenced by her endorsement of Trump after having been an avowed critic and endorsee of Biden. Her fluctuating political stance is, in fact, emblematic of inconsistent allegiance.
Having begun as a Democrat, she later disassociated herself from the party, branding it as a hub of ‘elite warmongers’ and ‘woke ideologues.’ Her transition from being an ardent critic of Trump to a vocal supporter raises challenging questions about her political convictions.