Brett McGurkVerified account

8. Thus, focus on slowing down, buy time, empower our ambassador. 9. Worth reviewing objectives of Iran policy and what is truly achievable. 10. The National Security Strategy (“China, China, China”) and maximalist Iran policy may be irreconcilable. To be continued ...

4. If the U.S. leaves Iraq, it means NATO, 20 western partners also leave. 5. Iran consolidates, ISIS resurges, Russia fills in behind us. 6. We can avoid such an irretrievable setback by slowing down. 7. 2014 exchange of diplomatic notes has a 1-year cancellation clause.

Some points I made on @Morning_Joe earlier this morning: 1. It’s not over. Iran will now return to cutouts and proxies. 2. Main goal for Khamenei is regime survival and consolidation inside Iran. 3. Second goal is to see us leave Iraq entirely to consolidate its hold there.

I’ll be on @NBCNews with @LesterHoltNBC for special coverage of the presidents remarks on Iran in the 1100 EST hour. This pivotal moment calls for measured remarks expressing support for Americans in harm’s way, our allies, and signaling a new pathway for diplomacy. We’ll see.

Emerging reports of no American or Iraqi casualties in the Iranian missile attack bring welcome news. We cannot presume this is a one-time event given Iran’s history. It’s a moment to slow down, buy time, and be deliberative on next steps. Perhaps something we can all agree on.https://twitter.com/cnnpolitics/status/1214764188339449857…

We’re moving rapidly up an escalatory ladder with no offramp, strategy, or achievable objective when it comes to Iran. My thoughts are with the American military and diplomatic personnel in Iraq. Take cover. Be safe.https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1214694774797672448?s=20…

America must somehow return to basics in foreign affairs: achievable objectives; alignment of ends/means; allies. Pursuing maximalist ends can paradoxically cede initiative to more patient adversaries and gravely set back US interests—as we may now be seeing in the Middle East.

The policy failed to align ends, ways, means. It was based on a false assumption that Iran would not fight back against economic strangulation. It brought no allies with us. And it failed to adapt after an action-reaction cycle began in May, indicating changed circumstances.

This demonstrates a policy that is now flailing for justifications as another 10,000 troops move into the Middle East and Esper says “we are prepared to FINISH” a war with Iran — a country 4x larger than Iraq with 3x the population. What does that mean? How? With what allies?

Citing Iran’s support for the Taliban as a justification for killing Soleimani is bizarre. The Taliban continues to kill Americans—took credit for attacks just last month—yet Trump invited its leaders to Camp David and Khalilzad is reportedly in talks with them this week.https://twitter.com/secpompeo/status/1214626468891938816…

This is separate from the Soleimani strike itself which, whether wise or not, seems consistent with Article II precedent. The issue is going forward and where this situation may now be heading whether we like it or not. It’s heading outside an Article II zone. 4/4

War with another country—albeit an outlaw one—with tens of thousands of Americans in harm’s way would seem to require some/some colorable congressional authorization if the Article I war power (power vested in Congress) is to retain any meaning whatsoever. 3/4

As someone who’s served in the executive branch under three presidents handling matters of war & peace, I’ve supported an expansive view of Art. II Commander-in-Chief authority given necessity & precedent. This Iran situation seems to be moving outside even that elastic zone. 1/4

The news out of Iraq is a measure of justice done but with unknowable consequences. We need to protect our people throughout the Middle East and presume a war posture. We must also reinforce our position in Iraq and maintain our coalition presence. Mitigate boomerang risks.

Merry Christmas to all of America’s public servants and military personnel serving overseas and away from family this holiday season, particularly those now in harm’s way on our behalf.We’re all thinking about you.

Grateful for the awesome team here @FSIStanford. If you want to study foreign policy, no better place. Small sample: @McFaul @CondoleezzaRice @ColinKahl @FukuyamaFrancis @AmyZegart @LarryDiamond @HerbLinCyber @steven_pifer @htrinkunas @alexstamos @meganjpalmer @kath_stoner

I’ll be working on a book over the coming year incorporating some of these themes based on hard lessons learned over two decades. Nominally titled “Three Presidents, Three Wars,” it should be published by Crown in early 2021. More to follow on that ...

America finds itself in trouble when it fails to define articulable objectives, rests foreign policy on best-case assumptions, and avoids rigorous reassessments essential for effective adaptation. In matters of war and peace, presidents must also be fully engaged in process.