Strong opinions in tough times

WHEN President-elect Barack Obama introduced his national-security team yesterday in Washington, he gave a compelling explanation for choosing as he did. "I assembled this team because I'm a strong believer in strong personalities and strong opinions," he said. "I think that's how the best decisions are made."

In other words, Obama has tacitly rejected President Bush's penchant for uniformity and his reliance on one unchallenged adviser - Vice President Dick Cheney - for the most fateful decisions. With Senator Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, former Marine General James Jones as national security adviser, Defense Secretary Robert Gates staying on at his post, and Susan Rice as ambassador to the United Nations, Obama has recruited a team not so much of rivals as of strong-willed, independent spirits. America and the rest of the world have reason to cheer.

The composition of this team reflects Obama's confidence in his ability to assess diverse views. He understands that the surest way to prevent calamitous mistakes is to subject ideas to stringent questioning.

Clinton, Gates, Jones, and Rice may propose; Obama will dispose. An apt precedent for this model of decision-making would be John Kennedy's sifting and challenging of advice during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

One plausible criticism of the Clinton and Gates appointments is that they appear tinged with politics. Keeping Gates on at Defense may be calculated to shield Obama from criticism on the right. Having Clinton in charge of State is a deft way of preserving unity between the two main camps within the Democratic Party.

But such political considerations will swiftly disappear in the day-to-day work of crafting a smarter, more successful US foreign policy. Whatever his past roles as CIA director or truth-bending bureaucratic infighter, Gates has more recently been a sage advocate of diplomatic engagement with Iran and Syria. Sensibly, he wants to explore striking deals that might avoid, or tamp down, conflicts across a wide arc stretching from Afghanistan to Iraq to Lebanon.

Gates is that rare defense secretary who advocates for increased funding for the soft power of the State Department. He appreciates the limits of military force and the benefits that can accrue from diplomacy. Clinton, who has a history of hawkish statements about Iran and support for Israel's disastrous 2006 war in Lebanon, would be wise to heed Gates's sound counsel about the need to keep the nation's allies close and its adversaries closer.

Ultimately, Obama must set any such guidelines. It is a good sign that he has already begun to act responsibly and wisely.