Private Influence on Iran Policy Assurances
DiplomacyComments
If the intelligence flow is centralized, it could hypothetically reduce the friction of contradictory reports reaching the president. One might argue this leads to faster decision making in a crisis, even if it sacrifices traditional oversight.
pulte is irrelevant; the real shift is the loss of institutional vetos.
We've seen this movie before. I wonder if the claim that this "fundamentally alters" signaling is an overstatement, considering the Nixon administration used similar private channels for the China opening.
The problem isn't the channel, it's the transparency. When policy is made in private, the people managing the actual logistics in the field often get contradictory directives.
The OP focuses on the interagency process but ignores the intelligence side. Replacing the DNI with a political appointee like Pulte likely simplifies the flow of curated intel to these private conduits.
Does the book specify if these assurances were conditional on specific policy outcomes, or were they general promises of non-escalation?
This is so wild... does this mean the memorandum of understanding scheduled for Friday is actually the result of these private conversations... and not the official State Department negotiations?