The National Security Advisor and Staff: Transition Challenges

The assistant to the president for national security affairs--as the job has been officially titled since the early 1970s, but informally termed National Security Council (NSC) advisor--and the staff serving under that person make up one of the most important White House offices in its impact on policy. In some administrations, that impact is so strong that foreign and national security policy making are essentially centralized in the hands of the NSC advisor, with minimal input from cabinet-level departments such as State or Defense. Few today--or even back then--could identify President Richard M. Nixon's first secretary of state, even though he had been Dwight D. Eisenhower's second attorney general (William Rogers, by the way). By contrast, Nixon's NSC advisor, Henry Kissinger, was a household name and a recognizable media figure. Indeed, such was the power of the position that, when Nixon eventually appointed Kissinger as secretary of state in 1973, he retained his job as NSC advisor, relinquishing it in May 1975, only at President Gerald R. Ford's insistence. In other administrations, NSC advisor and departmental input in the policy process were more balanced. Such was the case, for example, during General Brent Scowcroft's tenure in the job under President George H. W. Bush. In still other administrations, the policy roles of the NSC advisor and staff have been more attenuated. The latter has been rarer since the 1960s. But there have been cases, such as during Alexander Haig's tenure as secretary of state, when departmental dominance was asserted, although in Haig's case, not successfully or for very long. As with many of the units and offices within the White House staff, there is little statutory or legal constraint (beyond budgetary limits) in how the role of NSC advisor is defined or how the NSC staff is organized and operates. Much is the result of tradition, presidential inclination, and the personalities, prior experiences, and interpersonal dynamics among the "principals"--the president's key advisors, the NSC advisor included. Indeed, matters are so fluid that there is no common agreement on whether the informal title is NSC "adviser" or "advisor" (I will follow the preference of recent administrations and use the latter). For presidential transitions, the role of NSC advisor and the organization of the NSC staff must clearly be of special attention and concern. Not only have they become the president's most important source of policy advice on foreign and national security policy, the NSC advisor-designate almost always plays a major role in how national security policy making will be organized and in filling NSC staff positions. Plus, in the short run of a new presidency's early--and critical--days and months, they are readily available sources of information and counsel: They are nonconfirmable positions that can be filled more quickly than is the case for the subcabinet. Historical Development The evolution of the role of the NSC advisor and staff has been significant. Their precise time of origin as key players in the process, particularly the NSC advisor, is subject to some debate. But the history is instructive. Foundation: The Truman Years At least organizationally, a plausible case can be made tracing at least some impact back to the National Security Act of 1947, which first statutorily established the NSC as an advisory body to the president. (1) As part of the act, the position of NSC "executive secretary" and an NSC staff were created to facilitate the council in its work. The White House successfully maneuvered to place both under direct presidential control rather than lodging them in the Pentagon, as then-navy secretary and later first defense secretary James Forrestal had strenuously lobbied in favor of. Harry S. Truman further curbed Forrestal's efforts at control by having the secretary of state rather than defense preside over NSC meetings in his absence. …