Former President John F. Kennedy’s criticism of the CIA in the early 1960s marked a pivotal moment in the history of U.S. intelligence, as he threatened to dismantle the agency due to concerns over its unchecked power. His nephew, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., has proposed a more modest reform rather than a total disbandment. At a recent campaign event with Tulsi Gabbard, RFK explained that restructuring the CIA could be achieved by splitting its core divisions: the Directorate of Intelligence, which focuses on espionage, and the Directorate of Operations, responsible for paramilitary activities. By reorganizing these divisions, RFK advocates for a system where intelligence-related activities are held accountable for covert operations, aligning with a vision that he claims his father, Robert F. Kennedy, once suggested.
RFK Jr.’s reform idea stems from his father’s understanding of the CIA’s dual roles and the potential for conflict inherent in their operations. He argued that paramilitary operations, which often include controversial actions such as influencing foreign elections and targeted assassinations, should be subject to the scrutiny of the intelligence division. This oversight, according to RFK, could mitigate risks associated with the lack of accountability that has plagued the agency throughout its history. His approach reflects a desire for more transparency and control over covert operations, a legacy that seems to resonate with his family’s past struggles against the agency.
Interestingly, RFK Jr.’s relationship with the CIA appears complicated. Although he has overtly accused the agency of being involved in his uncle’s assassination, he has shown a certain level of respect and decorum towards former CIA personnel. Notably, he has familial connections within the agency, as his daughter-in-law Amaryllis Fox Kennedy served as a CIA officer for a decade. His ability to navigate these relationships suggests a nuanced position regarding the agency; while critical of its past actions, he recognizes the need for reform rather than outright animosity.
During the North Carolina campaign event, RFK shared insights from a recent dinner with former CIA Director Mike Pompeo. Despite critiquing Pompeo as a “neocon” with whom he disagrees on various policies, RFK expressed admiration for him, acknowledging his intelligence and insight. This ambivalence highlights RFK’s pragmatic approach to politics; while he may have divergent views on national security matters, he recognizes the accomplishments and potential for reform within figures from the intelligence community.
Moreover, RFK highlighted Pompeo’s regret regarding his tenure at the CIA, where Pompeo admitted not undertaking necessary reforms within the agency. This sentiment underscores a broader issue within the agency regarding leadership and alignment with the core values of American democracy. RFK’s comments reflect a growing concern that the CIA’s current leadership may not fully embrace or trust the democratic institutions they are meant to uphold, which raises questions about the future direction of U.S. foreign policy and intelligence operations.
In conclusion, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s proposal for CIA reform seeks to foster accountability and oversight within an institution often shrouded in secrecy. By proposing a split between the CIA’s intelligence and paramilitary operations, RFK aims to address longstanding criticisms about the agency’s activities. His relationship with former CIA officials, combined with an acknowledgment of historical grievances against the agency, positions him as a candidate who understands the complexities of U.S. intelligence. As JFK’s legacy continues to influence discussions around national security, the need for a reimagined CIA becomes ever more pressing, reflecting an ongoing tension between national interests and democratic values.
