Trump Administration Jeopardizes U.S. Intelligence

Politicization and loyalty tests risk repeating authoritarian failures.

The integrity of U.S. intelligence is at risk because of politicization, echoing the vulnerabilities seen in authoritarian regimes. By prioritizing loyalty over expertise, the **Trump** administration is creating conditions ripe for intelligence failures that could threaten national security.

Echoes of Autocracy

During a security council meeting before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, President **Vladimir Putin** pressured his foreign intelligence chief, **Sergei Naryshkin**, who hesitated to endorse recognizing separatist regions. **Putin**’s demand for conformity over accurate intelligence led to a miscalculation about Ukraine’s resistance.

Good intelligence challenges assumptions. Intelligence officers should adapt to leaders’ priorities, but their greatest service is correcting strongly held, yet false, ideas. However, the **Trump** administration increasingly mirrors authoritarian systems.

Disregarding Expertise

The U.S. intelligence community is usually the envy of the world. Yet, under President **Donald Trump**, the U.S. system is showing similar vulnerabilities. For example, in June, **Trump** reportedly dismissed Director of National Intelligence **Tulsi Gabbard**’s assessment that Iran was not close to developing a nuclear weapon, directly contradicting his own claims.

Later, Secretary of Defense **Pete Hegseth** supported **Trump**’s hyperbolic claims of obliterating Iranian nuclear sites, disregarding his own agency’s more measured report. Subsequently, **Gabbard** and **John Ratcliffe**, director of the Central Intelligence Agency, claimed to find “new intelligence” to support **Trump**’s view but did not share it publicly.

Agencies are becoming overly politicized, justifying policy decisions rather than informing them. Meanwhile, national security threats are increasing, including potential retaliation from Iranian-backed groups. Intelligence failures could trigger terrorist attacks, cyberattacks, or foreign policy miscalculations. As of 2023, the United States faced 138 unique terrorist threats, highlighting the gravity of the situation (DHS.gov).

Loyalty Above All

According to reports, the most important qualification to serve **Trump** is personal loyalty, not competence. Professionals have been asked about their voting history, creating a loyalty test. Loyal officials may then tailor their agencies’ activities to align with what the leader wants to hear, misdirecting resources away from actual threats.

For instance, as FBI director, **Kash Patel** reportedly shifted agents toward immigration enforcement, potentially under-resourcing counterterrorism and cybercrime investigations. In early May, **Gabbard** allegedly directed agencies to gather intelligence in Greenland to support **Trump**’s proposal to annex the island.

Lessons Ignored

Politicians often overstate confidence levels, as **Trump** did by dismissing the DIA report on the Iranian nuclear program as “inconclusive.” President **Lyndon Johnson** favored the Pentagon’s optimistic views on the Vietnam War. Similarly, in 2002, Secretary of Defense **Donald Rumsfeld** established an office to link Iraq and al-Qaeda, despite the CIA’s doubts, to justify the Iraq invasion.

In May, **Gabbard** reportedly fired the acting chair of the National Intelligence Council and his deputy for assessing that the Tren de Aragua group was not controlled by the Venezuelan government, contrary to the administration’s claims. **Gabbard**’s chief of staff allegedly asked them to “relook” at the evidence to avoid it being “used against” **Gabbard** or **Trump**.

Such actions could drive self-censorship and groupthink. Analysts may hesitate to provide unwelcome intelligence, trapping the president in an echo chamber. The politicization of intelligence undermines credibility, potentially causing allies to share less information.

Systemic Corrosion

The **Trump** administration is accused of politicizing intelligence by pressuring agencies to produce favorable assessments, dismissing dissenting views, purging disloyal staff, and conducting random polygraph tests. Morale has suffered due to administrative chaos and rescinded job offers.

In March, **Trump**’s advisor **Elon Musk** visited CIA and NSA headquarters, followed by job cuts. Many senior officers resigned, depriving the administration of expertise. The **Trump** administration is seemingly repelling talent by devaluing diverse perspectives. Diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives have been shut down, sending a message of ideological conformity.

Conspiracy Theories

The **Trump** administration’s association with conspiracy theories further damages intelligence legitimacy. **Laura Loomer**, who met with **Trump**, has promoted conspiracy theories, including the claim that the 9/11 attacks were an “inside job.” Demonizing intelligence agencies undermines public support, crucial for effective law enforcement.

The administration’s management of the U.S. intelligence system increases the risk of failure. **Trump** ignored warnings about COVID-19 and dismissed security risks before January 6th. Dismissing warnings could lead to officials self-censoring or avoiding assessments that may provoke a backlash. An intelligence failure will not be a surprise but a choice, as former CIA analyst **Brian O’Neill** suggested.

If a major intelligence failure occurs, **Trump** may blame the agencies or falsely claim they were against him. Any reforms would likely further politicize the intelligence community and weaken its independence. Protecting American security depends on the good stewardship of this national treasure.