President-Elect Barack Obama announced Monday that Leon Panetta, former congressman from California and chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, will be CIA chief in Obama’s administration. Navy Admiral Dennis Blair will be the country’s highest intelligence officer; he will head the national intelligence, which oversees all the nation’s spy agencies.

The picks have taken many by surprise. Especially Panetta was not often touted as a favorite for director of the CIA. As Yahoo! News explained in its report about the picks, Panetta is not exactly a man with great experience in the intelligence business.

The Panetta pick will undoubtedly raise some eyebrows. Since Panetta has little to no experience in the intel business one cannot help but wonder whether Obama chose Panetta for this position because he is a loyal Democratic Party man. 

Although that could certainly be the case, the stronger argument is that Panetta “is not tainted by torture.” 

Torture has been a major issue for Democratic activists in the last couple of years. They (rightfully) believe that ‘Enhanced Interrogation Techniques’ have done tremendous damage to America’s image abroad. Additionally, they say, EIT is in breach with human rights and immoral. They want the CIA to stop this practice immediately. 

Obama made this a major issue during the primaries as well; he sided with the liberal wing of his party, demanding an immediate halt to all such practices. Panetta has presented himself as a firm opponent of torture, or enhanced interrogation techniques, as well recently, so choosing him for the top slot at the CIA makes some sense.

Not only does Panetta oppose torture, he is also a good manager. As The Weekly Standard’s Michael Goldfarb explains, many politicians believe that the CIA cannot truly be trusted no matter what. “So you take someone with a reputation as a competent manager and caretaker and install him there in the hopes that the agency does as little damage to you as possible”

Since Panetta is “a competent manager and caretaker,” his selection makes even more sense.

As one would expect when one hears that Panetta is posed to head the CIA, not everyone is happy. Somewhat surprising, however, is that the most aggressive criticism comes from Democrats rather than Republicans at this point in time. For instance, the announcement left Dianne Feinstein, the independent-minded Democrat from California who will head the Senate’s Select Committee on Intelligence, flabbergasted.

“I was not informed about the selection of Leon Panetta to be the CIA Director. I know nothing about this, other than what I’ve read,” she said. “My position has consistently been that I believe the Agency is best-served by having an intelligence professional in charge at this time.”

Concluding, it is more than likely that Panetta will face a hostile crowd during his confirmation hearing. He will have to explain to Republicans and Democrats why he is the best man to lead the CIA despite his rather obvious lack of intel experience. 

One nonetheless expects Panetta to be confirmed: he is a Democrat with great connections (to the Clintons, to Obama) and Obama won the elections fairly easily in November 2008, meaning that he has quite some political capital to spend in the first months of his presidency. Voters wanted, nay demanded change and believed that Obama would deliver just that. He was a hero before he won the elections and became a saint for many right after his impressive and historic victory. Some of his nominees may face difficult confirmation hearings but considering Obama’s comfortable electoral victory and the Democratic majority in Congress one expects his nominees to be confirmed in the end nonetheless.