海角大神

Will John Brennan face considerable opposition in his quest to become director of the Central Intelligence Agency? That question arises because Mr. Brennan, currently President Obama鈥檚 top counterterrorism adviser, is set for a Senate nomination hearing on Thursday afternoon. Former Sen. Chuck Hagel (R), Mr. Obama鈥檚 choice to lead the Defense Department, had an unexpectedly tough appearance himself before the Senate last week. Is it possible the same thing will happen to Brennan?

Well, it鈥檚 politics, so anything might happen. Brennan is sure to get an earful from some senators about the administration鈥檚 rationale for drone strikes against terror suspects, including those who are American citizens.

But Brennan鈥檚 not Mr. Hagel. The latter brought at least some of his trouble on himself by performing poorly: He struggled for words, and at times he even seemed unacquainted with basic administration policy. The former is likely to be better prepared, both because that鈥檚 in his nature and because he鈥檚 seen recently what happens when you aren鈥檛.

Plus, the potential flash points in the Brennan and Hagel nominations are far different.

To be sure, the administration鈥檚 drone policies are highly controversial, and Brennan helped manage that program. Prior to his hearing, the White House provided Senate Intelligence Committee members with a highly classified legal document outlining when, where, and why the United States might use drones to attack even American citizens. An unclassified summary of this memo鈥檚 points was leaked to NBC earlier this week, showing that the administration defines an 鈥渋mminent threat鈥� rather broadly, among other things.

The hearing might put the drone program itself on trial. But if it does, it will be a few members of the president鈥檚 own party leading the prosecution. Intelligence committee member Sen. Ron Wyden (D) of Oregon, for instance, has been among those expressing the most vocal reservations about using armed, unmanned aircraft to hunt down America鈥檚 enemies overseas.

鈥淭he Founding Fathers thought the president should have significant power in the national-security arena. But there have to be checks and balances,鈥� Senator Wyden said this morning on NBC.

Republicans, on the other hand, have been generally supportive of the administration鈥檚 use of drones, likening it to President Bush鈥檚 expansive use of executive power. That鈥檚 crucial for Brennan鈥檚 prospects. It鈥檚 been an organized effort by a conservative opposition angry about the administration鈥檚 response to the attacks in Benghazi, Libya, that鈥檚 thrown sand in the gears of Hagel鈥檚 nomination. Brennan won鈥檛 encounter the same thing.

鈥淚 think it鈥檚 going to be tough, but I don鈥檛 think he鈥檚 going to have a hard time,鈥� said of the Brennan nomination hearing during a Fox News appearance Wednesday.

That does not mean the drone issue will just fade away. The release of the summary white paper has only inflamed groups already opposed to the use of armed drones, indefinite detention of terror suspects, and other controversial aspects of the US war on terror.

鈥淏rennan has been something of a Forrest Gump of toxic national security policies, having been in the room when everything from torture to the killing of an American citizen was being debated,鈥� Christopher Anders of the American Civil Liberties Union said this week.

But as in The Fix blog at The Washington Post, drones are a much bigger issue in Washington than they are in the country at large. Polls show overwhelming support for the drone program among US citizens.

A Washington Post/ABC News survey from February 2012 showed a whopping 83 percent approval rating for the program, for instance.

鈥淚t鈥檚 ... important to remember as the drone debate gains steam in Washington that there is little public appetite for an extended look at how unmanned attacks fit into our broader national security policy,鈥� Mr. Cillizza writes. 鈥淢inds are made up on the matter. And, if the public has anything to do with it, drones are here to stay.鈥�