Can Military Leaders Succeed in the Obama Administration?

Does the Obama White House have a problem with military leaders? That's the question Anne E. Kornblut and Scott Wilson implicitly raise in the Washington Post today.

In addition to the recently departed Director of National Intelligence Adm. Dennis C. Blair, the piece focuses on National Security Adviser James L. Jones, Ambassador to Afghanistan Karl W. Eikenberry, and Special Envoy to Sudan L. Scott Gration. All, the writers say, have had their performance called into question "both inside and outside the government."

The insinuation is that the problem may be a culture clash with un-hierarchical civilian leadership at the White House, where few staffers come from military backgrounds. But a few issues with that theory emerge in the piece itself:

• If culture clash with a civilian-oriented White House was an issue, one would expect it would involve ex-military officers taking a can-do, chain-of-command, hard-line approach. But Kornblut and Wilson acknowledge that the officers highlighted in the piece "have been accused, in some cases, of having too light a touch."
• Other than Blair, none of the officials have lost their jobs, and White House officials seemed to be satisfied with their performance.
• Each officer faces unique circumstances and challenges, making it difficult to conclude that issues with military-style leadership are a common thread.

What the piece does demonstrate conclusively is that in Washington, you're never far away from someone willing to dish some dirt to make you look bad. Witness the following passge about Jones, which seems like it could only have origniated from an insider:

Jones often found his direct line to Obama interrupted by advisers with closer personal ties to the president. And in a White House where 18-hour days are routine, Jones often left around 6 p.m. to ride his bike home. His absence sometimes meant a loss in clout and Oval Office meetings held without him.