We begin today’s roundup with this excellent analysis by Jonathan Stevenson, senior fellow for U.S. defense at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, of what Army Lt. Gen. H. R. McMaster leaves behind and what incoming National Security Advisor John Bolton brings to the table:
Among specific policies, continued adherence to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action — that is, the Iran nuclear deal — is perhaps the one that General McMaster’s departure most imperils. Mr. Trump’s primary substantive motivation for the current shake-up among his senior advisers is apparently to remove obstacles to scuttling the Iran deal, which he has already declined to recertify. Rex Tillerson, the recently fired secretary of state, was one of the two biggest ones; General McMaster was the other. The new C.I.A. director, Mike Pompeo, whom Mr. Trump has nominated to succeed Mr. Tillerson, firmly opposes the Iran deal.
Mr. Bolton, for his part, is the ultimate Iran hawk, having long advocated a pre-emptive strike on Iran. Mr. Mattis, though he has supported adherence to the deal, reportedly pushed for General McMaster’s ouster and considers Iran an implacable threat to regional security and stability. Tearing up the Iran deal would provide a pretext for unleashing American forces — about 10,000 of which are already deployed in Iraq and Syria — against Iranian proxies in the Middle East, including Hezbollah and Iran-backed Shia militias. [...]
More generally, a national security team led by Mr. Pompeo and Mr. Bolton is likely to face less resistance from Mr. Mattis and Gen. Joseph Dunford, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff — the remaining putative “adults in the room.” These two principals, alongside Mr. Tillerson and sometimes General McMaster, had reportedly blunted some of Mr. Trump’s recklessly aggressive impulses. Now outnumbered, the two will face greater pressure to acquiesce to them. Mr. Trump has self-consciously chosen Mr. Bolton as well as Mr. Pompeo on the basis not of their collegiality or bureaucratic skills — traits that the president, judging by his other appointments, clearly does not value highly — but rather their like-minded ideological tilts, penchants for contrarianism, perceived telegenicity and personal compatibility.