Talk:United States National Security Council/Archive 1

Copying?
I just noticed that the paragraph about membership for the NSC is copied word for word from the White House page on the NSC. Is this allowed? -Krawnight 18:01, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Can anyone say? -Krawnight 23:24, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Generally U.S. Government publications are in the public domain, so its unlikely to be a copyright violation, at least. It might be a violation of Wikipedia rules, I'm not current on the matter. 0x69494411 04:55, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * This is what the Wiki page says:


 * This is taken from the official White House page (http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/)


 * The National Security Council is the President's principal forum for considering national security and foreign policy matters with his senior national security advisors and cabinet officials. Since its inception under President Truman, the function of the Council has been to advise and assist the President on national security and foreign policies. The Council also serves as the President's principal arm for coordinating these policies among various government agencies. -Krawnight 19:43, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Who cares? It's out tax money, we have the right to do with that text what we like. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.38.52 (talk) 11:37; 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * The seal is for OMB, not NSC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.137.218.32 (talk) 18:14, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I've noticed from the cited, recent Executive Order that the director of national intelligence and the joint chiefs have actually been removed from the 'Principles Committee', rather the NSC itself. Not sure what that means, the article seems to be surprisingly shallow and doesn't provide context that would clarify the distinction.  0x69494411 04:55, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Reports
Where can i find all the reports of the NSC to the President (for example NSC-68) on the web? There must be a government website where these declassified documents are now available.--Arado (talk) 12:33, 26 December 2007 (UTC)


 * There is a *NSC-68* article; check its *External links* section.

White House
Is there a role for this in the first paragraph? It doesn't seem to be part of the council's title. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.140.57.113 (talk) 15:09, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Name Change
The National Security Council was renamed the National Security Staff (NSS) in 2010 (Source: http://www.politico.com/blogs/laurarozen/0110/Introducing_the_National_Security_Staff.html) Shouldn't this page be updated to reflect this change? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ejcallen (talk • contribs) 14:14, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Director for Counterterrorism for the National Security Council
Audrey Tomason is listed as Director for Counterterrorism for the National Security Council on the The Situation Room (photograph). Could there, or should there, be a mention of her here? RP Eddy is also listed as having had this title on his page and Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon are similarly mentiond here:Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda link allegations. (Msrasnw (talk) 13:33, 25 May 2011 (UTC)) PS: Also "Roger Cressey, National Security Council senior director for counterterrorism from 1999-2001" - Richard Cañas - Director for Counterterrorism and Counternarcotics -  four years (two Administrations). Paul Kurtz was a director for counterterrorism in the NSC's Office of Transnational Threats from 1999-2001.

Statutory Members Discrepancy
The White House page (http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/nsc) on the National Security Council doesn't mention anything about the Secretary of Energy being a statutory member of the council. It seems to me that the White House page is more recent than the 2009 memorandum.

I'd suggest further investigation at the least and possibly a removal of the Secretary of Energy as a statutory member of the NSC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.221.22.211 (talk) 18:50, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Susan Rice
Near the end of the article, Susan Rice is mentioned as having been part of the creation of the 'disposition matrix.' Is there any evidence out there to support this? The source attributed to that section of the article makes no mention of Susan Rice: http://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/the-efficacy-and-ethics-us-counterterrorism-strategy Yadojado (talk) 20:40, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Jan 2017 edits
There is a too much editoralization in the History section now, people from both sides add tidbits of facts to bolster their opinion on Trump's changes to the council. In paragraph 3 of the History section (below), I think we should strike everything but the first sentence. Bannon's bio isn't relevant.

"On January 29, 2017, President Donald Trump offered a permanent seat to Steve Bannon, White House Chief Strategist, while at the same time withdrawing the permanent appointments of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Director of National Intelligence.[4]The move has been described as 'unprecedented', in part because Bannon has been elevated to a position higher than that occupied by the Director of National Intelligence and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. Bannon was a Surface Warfare Officer in the United States Navy serving in the Pacific Fleet and later became a special assistant to the Chief of Naval Operations at The Pentagon.[5]" Dckx (talk) 21:05, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure the placement of Bannon on the Council went into effect. I heard on the news that any additional members the President wants to place on the NSC must be approved by the Senate. And that the two figures that Trump removed are actually designated by law as members of the NSC, so Trump doesn't have the authority to remove them. This would imply that President Trump's changes didn't go into effect.—MiguelMunoz (talk) 16:24, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

National Security Counsel VS Presidents Principles Committee clarification
I originally thought that the Presidents principles committee was a subgroup of the NSC, who's attendance was "required" for it to be an official NSC meeting. After I typed much of this, I'm now starting to think that the principles committee is separate, with some of it's members not being automatically invited/included to a NSC meeting. The principles committee may need it's own separate page if it's too far off topic from the NSC.

If I'm way off base please disregard this. I still think some things may need to be included/changed so that others are not confused by these same things (especially since this article may be getting much more attention).

There is a clear distinction between statutory members, but it's not easy to tell which positions are on the Presidents principles committee and which are "frequent" or "situational" attendees. I'd propose possibly adding a column that would classify the positions as:
 * Statutory
 * Principles (those named on the presidents principles committee, or instead possibly instead named as "regular" attendees?)
 * Subject Matter? (those who are "automatically" named as a regular attendee based on subject matter)
 * 'Blanket' Invitees (those specifically named as being INVITED to any NSC meeting. Not sure if blanket is the best description of this, but I feel they should be differentiated from the principles committee or those who are specifically named as "regular" attendees.)
 * Situational (those frequently but not automatically invited, like the existing "additional participants" group)

Here my interpretation of the (current) members from my reading of https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3436428/NSC-Order.pdf

NSC Statutory Members:
 * President
 * Vice President
 * Secretary of State
 * Secretary of Defense
 * Secretary of Energy

NSC Regular Members:
 * National Security Advisor (principle committee chair)
 * Homeland Security Advisor (principle committee chair)
 * Secretary of the Treasury
 * Attorney General
 * Secretary of Homeland Security
 * Representative of the United States to the United Nations.

NSC Subject Matter:
 * International Economic Issues = Secretary of Commerce, United States Trade Representative, Assistant to the President for Economic Policy.

NSC 'Blanket' Invitees:
 * Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff
 * Assistant to the President and Chief Strategist
 * Counsel to the President
 * Deputy Counsel to the President for National Security Affairs
 * Director of the Office of Management and Budget

Yes this is related to the recent controversial change, but I'm having difficulty interpreting this line: "The Director of National Intelligence and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as statutory advisers to the NSC, shall also attend NSC meetings". My only thought is that the DNI and Chairman of Joint Chiefs are statutorily on the NSC (so they can't be excluded by law), but NOT statutorily on the principles committee?

But they are NOT statutory advisers unless I'm overlooking something. I also wouldn't take it to mean they have a blanket invitation either, because the next line specifically lists those who DO have a permanent invitation:

"The Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff, the Assistant to the President and Chief Strategist, the Counsel to the President, the Deputy Counsel to the President for National Security Affairs, and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget are invited as attendees to any NSC meeting."

The Presidents Principles Committee (PC) consists of:

PC Regular Attendees:
 * National Security Advisor (chair)
 * Homeland Security Advisor (chair)
 * Secretary of State
 * Secretary of the Treasury
 * Secretary of Defense
 * Attorney General
 * Secretary of Homeland Security
 * Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff
 * Assistant to the President and Chief Strategist

PC Subject Matter:
 * "Issues pertaining to their responsibilities and expertise are to be discussed" = Director of National Intelligence, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
 * International Economic Issues = Secretary of Commerce, United States Trade Representative, Assistant to the President for Economic Policy.
 * "Where appropriate" = Representative of the United States to the United Nations, Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental and Technology Initiatives

PC 'Blanket' Invitees:
 * Counsel to the President
 * Deputy Counsel to the President for National Security Affairs
 * Director of the Office of Management and Budget
 * Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor, aka Deputy National Security Advisor? (required attendance)
 * Deputy Assistant to the President and National Security Advisor to the Vice President (required attendance)
 * Executive Secretary (required attendance).

While we're at it, here are the Deputy committee members but I'm not certain where it comes into things or the differences between it and the other groups.

Deputies Committee (DC):

Deputies Committee Regular Members:
 * Deputy National Security Advisor OR Deputy Assistant National Security Advisor (chair)
 * Deputy Homeland Security Advisor OR Deputy Assistant Homeland Security Advisor (chair)
 * Deputy Secretary of State
 * Deputy Secretary of Defense
 * Deputy Attorney General
 * Deputy Director of the Office of Management and Budget
 * Deputy Director of National Intelligence
 * Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
 * Deputy Assistant to the President and National Security Advisor to the Vice President
 * Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development

Deputies Committee Subject Matter:
 * "Relevant Deputy Assistant to the President for the specific regional and functional issue under consideration shall be invited to attend"
 * "When and where appropriate" = Deputy Assistant to the President for Strategic Planning, Deputy Assistant to the President for Strategic Communication, Deputy Assistant to the President for International Economic Affairs, the Deputy Assistant to the President for Transnational Issues, and the Deputy Representative of the United States to the United Nations, other senior officials"

Deputies Committee 'Blanket' Invitees:
 * Executive Secretary (required attendance)
 * Deputy Counsel to the President for National Security Affairs

Again the article probably should explain this and I can't look into it anymore now. I just wanted to try to summarize the information I've gleamed if anyone had any more insight on this.

BrianXVX (talk) 17:54, 30 January 2017 (UTC)BrianXVX


 * Just to clarify there is also the National Security Council Deputies Committee. This suggests to meet that it is a separate and distinct committee. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:20, 30 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Yea that's looks to be the Deputy committee I listed last. It looks exactly the same as the National Security council except with the second in commands. Goodearl just added "In regards to the Principles Committee, the Whitehouse Press Sec. said it is "the NSC minus the president"". This is the same conclusion I was starting to come to after reading Bill Clinton's executive order.


 * It says the NSC "shall be the principal forum for consideration of national security policy issues requiring Presidential determination". It then lists the Principals Committee as a subgroup of the National Security council (NSC/PC). It goes on to say that "The NSC/PC should be a flexible instrument -- a forum available for Cabinet-level officials to meet to discuss and resolve issues not requiring the President's participation".


 * I would think that the makeup of the NSC/PC shouldn't be different from the main NSC except for the president then. Comparing the "regular members" of the two though, I notice that the Secretary of Energy and Representative of the United States to the United nations is on the main NSC, but NOT the principles committee. The Secretary of Energy makes sense since it's statutorily required to be on the main NSC (and I assume the makeup of the NSC/PC is entirely up to the President). I can also understand why the UN representative may not be on the NSC/PC, since they would be important mainly for international/foreign relation issues which is one of the Presidents main jurisdictional areas (so he should probably be involved whenever the UN rep is).


 * The only other differences I can see is the Chief of Staff and the Chief Strategist being on the NSC/PC, but not on the main NSC itself. Since they have "blanket" invitations, it's a moot point and I'd figure its just for political perception/visibility reasons.


 * Attempting to approach this non-politically in the wake of the recent changes, this could also explain the part in Trump's executive order that I didn't understand where he says that the "The Director of National Intelligence and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as statutory advisers to the NSC, shall also attend NSC meetings". If the DNI/CJCS are on the main NSC by statute, I wouldn't think that Trump could remove them from it, although he could remove them from the NSC/PC, which I believe is what he did. I still can't see the purpose of removing them from NSC/PC and not the main NSC other than it wasn't possible due to statue, but again that starts getting close to politics.


 * Looking at 50:USC:3021 establishing the NSC here, it says:


 * (e) Participation of Chairman or Vice Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff
 * The Chairman (or in his absence the Vice Chairman) of the Joint Chiefs of Staff may, in his role as principal military adviser to the National Security Council and subject to the direction of the President, attend and participate in meetings of the National Security Council.


 * Which appears to be where the statute in question regarding the CJCS. Interestingly it says "subject to the DIRECTION of the President". At first I read this as discretion, meaning the President COULD remove them from the main NSC after all. I'm not familiar enough with the terminology/precedent to know what 'direction' implies, but I could see it go either way.


 * It goes on to say:


 * (h) Committee on Foreign Intelligence
 * (1) There is established within the National Security Council a committee to be known as the Committee on Foreign Intelligence (in this subsection referred to as the “Committee”).
 * (2) The Committee shall be composed of the following:
 * (A) The Director of National Intelligence.....


 * This looks to be where the DNI is appointed by statue. Contrary to the CJCS, this one says no such thing about the President, except that it may include "such other members as the President may designate".


 * Then it has to throw this wrench in the mix that repeats the "direction" phrase again.


 * (j) Participation of Director of National Intelligence
 * The Director of National Intelligence (or, in the Director’s absence, the Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence) may, in the performance of the Director’s duties under this chapter and subject to the direction of the President, attend and participate in meetings of the National Security Council.

(sorry if my format is bad, first time using the talk pages)


 * BrianXVX (talk) 20:31, 30 January 2017 (UTC)BrianXVX
 * This source appears to clarify. http://www.businessinsider.com/spicer-trump-national-security-council-2017-1 The principals committee is merely the NSC minus the president. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 23:03, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Here are some direct sources on membership of the psc under obama and bush https://fas.org/irp/offdocs/ppd/ppd-1.pdf https://fas.org/irp/offdocs/nspd/nspd-1.pdf Work permit (talk) 14:20, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Kushner
Is the Senior Advisor also an N.S.C. attendee, since Jared Kushner was at the table during the Syrian missile strike in April 2017? 98.10.165.90 (talk) 22:39, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on United States National Security Council. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110513085851/http://www.whitehouse.gov/assets/documents/July1Report-Draft12.pdf to http://www.whitehouse.gov/assets/documents/July1Report-Draft12.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on United States National Security Council. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070621151132/http://www.avsam.org/fpr/NSC-UGK.pdf to http://www.avsam.org/fpr/NSC-UGK.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070621151132/http://www.avsam.org/fpr/NSC-UGK.pdf to http://www.avsam.org/fpr/NSC-UGK.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090227042058/http://www.pnsr.org/data/images/the%20national%20security%20council.pdf to http://www.pnsr.org/data/images/the%20national%20security%20council.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:22, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of Names of Senior Directors
On 25 October 2017, User:Srich32977 incorrectly deleted the names of the NSC Senior Directors citing guideline WP:NOTDIRECTORY. This change does not meet any of the nine cited criteria. In fact given that these are Special Assistants to the President and Senior Directors who run large offices (many subordinates) and have a heavy role in determining US national security policy they surely qualify as "supervisory directors" as cited in criteria 7, which per the guidance are supposed to be listed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.236.195.30 (talk) 14:33, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Ok, now you've made your case. Wait a few days (about 7) and see in any other editors agree with you. If enough editors post here in support of your edit to achieve consensus, then you can re-add your list. If not, then you can't. In the meantime, you need to wait, and while you're waiting, don't try re-adding it, or it'll just get reverted out again and you could get blocked for being disruptive. Happy editing! - the WOLF  child  05:25, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Agree. User:Srich32977 does not accurately represent WP:NOTDIRECTORY criteria. Should revert and update list of Senior Director's given critical role they play in policy making. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lancer23457 (talk • contribs) 05:52, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on United States National Security Council. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050417042432/http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=2601&page=0 to https://foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=2601&page=0
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090121140145/http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/nsc to http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/nsc

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:29, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Featured picture candidate
Featured picture candidates/Lisa Gordon-Hagerty -- Editor-1 (talk) 04:55, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Fact Checking on 'Pandemic Response Team"
The WaPo fact check article does mention positions in the 'pandemic response' directorate being retained in two places. However, the wording 'expertise' does come from the NSC public info official and perhaps a more independent source is needed to verify those claims. I assert that Kessler and Kelly did just that inthe article itself. In regard to the former 'pandemic response' director Rear Admiral Ziemer the authors state "Ziemer departed for a high-level post in the U.S. Agency for International Development, though a former administration official said he was due to leave the NSC anyway. His staff, whom Ziemer had called “the dream team,” remained in place." The conclusion is stated: "Thus, one could claim the office was eliminated. But the staff slots did not disappear and at least initially the key mission of team remained a priority. So one can also claim nothing changed and thus Biden’s criticism is overstated." So Kessler & Kelly neglected to rate the matter, but the facts were stated which show a clarification of the Snopes treatment of the question which needs balance in the text of the article.Church of the Rain (talk) 18:51, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

"Pandemic team" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Pandemic team. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 12 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed,Rosguill talk 19:05, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Senior Director for Cyber
The current article lists Michael Sulmeyer as the NSC's Senior Director for Cyber (side note: this is unreferenced, but referenced could easily be added).

Politico reported in May that Sulmeyer left the NSC to return to the Pentagon, although it did not list a successor and I have been unable to find any follow-ups or other sources naming Sulmeyer's replacement (other reports covering Sulmeyer's departure cite the referenced Politico article; not sure if it is worth referencing them). Given this, I propose Sulmeyer's name be removed from the article and replaced with an "Unknown," a blank space, or the name of whoever replaced him (again, I cannot find any news on this).

As a minor note, (what appears to be) Sulmeyer's unverified Twitter account uses this link to his Belfer Center profile, which lists him as NSC Senior Director for Cyber. This page was last updated in January 2021, and so I believe the (May 2021) Politico article takes precedence over it.

TransientBovine (talk) 17:23, 7 July 2021 (UTC)