Biden team needs to beware of insular thinking

If anyone ever believed in an acceptable margin for error in U.S. national security and foreign policy decision-making, I hope they changed their mind upon hearing Kremlin leaders casually drop the word “nuclear” in public statements recently. After expecting Ukraine to collapse in days, Vladimir Putin has wound up being embarrassed before the world as his military is becoming a Goliath in the face of Ukraine’s smaller but ferociously effective David. Backed in a corner, increasingly isolated and searching for a face-saving way out, Putin has turned to saber rattling to a monstrous degree.

With the stakes so high and an increasingly inscrutable, unpredictable adversary, it’s no time for mistakes. Fortunately, we have a president with three decades of foreign policy experience.

That’s just as unfortunate, I believe.

During his more than 30 years in the U.S. Senate and on its Foreign Relations Committee, Joe Biden developed a deep knowledge of the world and its workings and also attracted a talented, loyal staff who shared his views. Many members of his team worked for him for decades and have gone on to serve in the White House as part of a tight-knit group that reportedly works together smoothly. Five of his closest staff each spent a decade or more with him in the Senate — three as chief of staff, and in the case of Secretary of State Antony Blinken, on both his Foreign Relations Committee staff and his presidential campaign.

As one White House staffer described it to Politico, “anyone the president hasn’t known for a decade or more takes a little time to get your foot in.” And there’s the rub.

Just as President Biden likes surrounding himself with people he trusts and who know how he thinks, his team likes working for someone who shares their views and values. Personal comfort in the workplace, however, even in one as high-pressured as the White House, doesn’t outweigh the importance of the quality decision making that comes from having more and varied voices at the decision table. Without them, insularity and groupthink inevitably set in.

We first saw this in the poorly coordinated and communicated Afghan withdrawal. We saw it again in the blindsiding and sidelining of our ally France by our new intelligence and submarine partnership with Australia and the United Kingdom. Could these similar unforced errors — a blind spot to the need to consult friends and allies outside your immediate circle — have been avoided if the same people, all with long histories together, hadn’t all been at the same table advising the president?

In Congress, in private business and as governor of Ohio, I was blessed with the counsel of dozens of capable, smart team members over the years, many of whom worked with me for decades. Never did I listen to their views in isolation, however. I bounced their counsel off of others I trusted, and I cultivated an environment that encouraged respectful debate and disagreement. This didn’t always make decision-making faster or simpler, but it made it better, and good progress was made on everything from the budget to health care to law enforcement reform as a result.

The Biden foreign policy and national security team members are smart, but their long tenure together means they think similarly, and it constrains the number and newness of the ideas they will ever produce. Also, their policy-intensive experience and long tenures as staffers mean they haven’t ever been independent, “the buck stops here” decision makers. There’s something to be said for the value of the advice from someone who’s also carried the burden of being the final say.

The best example of an administration successfully eschewing groupthink and bringing in outsiders to help is — hands-down — the 1962 Cuban missile crisis. ABC News reporter John Scali, who had a good relationship with Russia’s top spy in the U.S., served as a backchannel for negotiations between the White House and Moscow and helped diffuse a potentially apocalyptic crisis. If Kennedy had been so insular as to only listen to his own team, he never would have considered trusting a reporter who’d been offered a compromise by a Russian spy over lunch. Perhaps Russia’s proposal never would have even reached him. I’m glad it did.

Given the stakes, Team Biden needs to embrace the idea that “good ideas come from where you find them.” Washington is rife with experienced “formers” who know a thing or two about leadership and the unique burden of White House decision-making. Many stay current in their fields and remain dedicated to our country’s well-being, not just cashing in. Team Biden shrugs off this rich resource of ideas and input at their peril.

I am hopeful that the Biden administration’s new “Tiger Team,” formed to develop possible American reactions if Russia uses chemical, biological or nuclear weapons in Ukraine, reflects in its make-up a realization of the need for casting a wider net for ideas.

At a time when it’s not a hyperbole to say the life of the planet could depend on it, decision-making doesn’t have the luxury of being cozy, it needs to have the benefit of varied, diverse experienced voices, even if it makes leaders uncomfortable.

John Kasich is the former governor of Ohio; he also served 18 years on the U.S. House of Representatives Armed Services Committee.