In a tense Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on worldwide threats, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard faced sharp questioning regarding the justification for recent U.S. missile strikes against Iran. Gabbard repeatedly dodged inquiries about whether Iran posed an "imminent" threat to the United States prior to the military action last month.
Gabbard Defers to Presidential Authority
"The only person who can determine what is and is not an imminent threat is the president," Gabbard asserted to lawmakers. She emphasized that it is not the intelligence community's role to make such determinations, stating, "It is not the intelligence community's responsibility to determine what is and is not an imminent threat."
Senator Ossoff Challenges the Stance
Senator Jon Ossoff, a Democrat from Georgia, strongly contested Gabbard's position, labeling it as "false." He argued, "It is precisely your responsibility to say what constitutes a threat to the United States. This is the worldwide threats hearing, where you present to Congress national intelligence — timely, objective and independent of political considerations." Ossoff accused Gabbard of evasion, suggesting her reluctance stemmed from a desire to avoid contradicting White House statements.
Gabbard's Past and Present Alignment
Gabbard, who previously sold "No War With Iran" merchandise and criticized foreign interventions while in Congress, has meticulously attributed the decision to engage militarily with Iran solely to President Donald Trump. In a social media post on Tuesday, she stated, "After carefully reviewing all the information before him, President Trump concluded that the terrorist Islamist regime in Iran posed an imminent threat and he took action based on that conclusion."
Internal Dissent and Resignation
This stance comes amid internal discord, highlighted by the resignation of National Counterterrorism Center Director Joe Kent. Kent stepped down this week over the U.S. war in Iran, asserting that Iran posed no imminent threat to the nation. In his resignation letter to Trump, Kent wrote, "I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran. Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby." This contradiction underscores the ongoing debate within the administration regarding the intelligence assessment of Iran's threat level.
The hearing revealed deep divisions over the role of intelligence in national security decisions, with Gabbard's responses drawing criticism for potentially politicizing intelligence matters. The exchange highlights the complex interplay between executive authority and independent intelligence analysis in shaping U.S. foreign policy.
