Free Tipping Point: The War With China - the First Salvo (Dan Lenson Novels) by David Poyer

informed us his mission was liaison with the administration.
    MRS. MACLAY . Doctor, was this one of your people? This sounds very irregular.
    DR. SZERENCI . Mr. Ammermann is not attached to my office. He is, or was, I understand, a junior-level staffer in the Office of Public Liaison. I am not aware of any orders to him through my office, which stands separate.
    Dan ran his gaze along the row of faces above him. Some seemed interested; others, tuned out; one or two, hostile; most, impassive. Sandy kept staring down at him. Her head seemed to be weaving slightly. As their eyes crossed she smiled again, but it wasn’t friendly. More like someone contemplating a tasty meal.
    A nudge; one of the staffers passed up a note. When he unfolded it, it was Blair’s handwriting. Who is the woman on the right? She keeps staring at you.
    He pocketed it, then changed his mind. Wrote, Knew her in Dr. Szerenci’s class. You met her at vice president’s house. Tennessee congresswoman. Folded it, and held it behind his back until someone took it.
    MRS. MACLAY . Back to you, Captain Lenson. Your actions vis-à-vis the Israeli counterstrike. That is the crux of the matter we want to get to.
    CAPTAIN LENSON . Yes, ma’am. To cut to the bottom line, we detected the Israeli launch, and I took it under fire and destroyed it.
    MR. PARKS . Without authorization.
    CAPTAIN LENSON . Under the guidance provided in my orders. Specifically, the directive to safeguard civilian populations.
    MR. PARKS . You were aware we were at war with Iraq?
    CAPTAIN LENSON . With respect, sir, I understood we were engaged in regime change. This did not, in my view, change the intent of the orders.
    MRS. MACLAY . All right. I think we have clarified Captain Lenson’s view of the matter, as the commander on the scene. If I understand correctly, his position is that he made that decision based on his written rules of engagement. What we are concerned with here is, first, if he actually followed those rules, and, second, if so, whether those guidelines are sufficiently transparent and inclusive so as to avoid having our commanders subject to having to reinterpret them at short notice. Believe me, we here do not enjoy having to second-guess our military commanders. That is far from our intent. I would like now to have, first, Dr. Hui’s, then Admiral Niles’s position on those two questions. After that, if Dr. Szerenci has anything he would like to contribute, the subcommittee would be glad to have his input as well.
    DR. HUI . Madam Chairman, you are entering upon questions of national security, questions as to the strategic employment of certain new weapons, that go to the heart of our alliance relationships, commitments outside my portfolio. As scientists, we can comment on the technical aspects of developing antiballistic systems. But you are asking a policy question that needs to be addressed at the military command level.
    MRS. MACLAY . Your response is noted. Admiral Niles, it seems like the buck is on your desk.
    ADMIRAL NILES . Thank you, Madam Chairman. I will answer both questions. First, Captain Lenson made, perhaps not the only possible decision he could logically derive from his guidance, but still, a rational decision under conditions of great pressure. Would I have made that same decision? Possibly not. But it is justifiable under the terms of his orders.
    The answer to your second question will be unsatisfactory, perhaps. It has to do with the latitude one allows commanders in combat. As you recall, I began with the comment that Navy tradition allows its commanding officers considerable leeway in how they fight their ships. It is possible that his rules of engagement should have specified that they did not mean for him to forestall acts of war by our allies. However, that, in my view, would be a mistake.
    MR. PARKS . That is a less than satisfactory answer, Admiral.
    ADMIRAL NILES . Then I will have to say that if a more detailed guidance is