The Cheney Loyalty Test

Why did Alan Larson, a Clinton undersecretary, keep his job under Bush?

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


When a new president takes office, high-ranking officials appointed by the previous administration are usually replaced as quickly as possible. That was certainly the case with the Bush administration, which wasted little time in accepting the resignations of each of the 37 officials who served as undersecretaries for Bill Clinton — except one.

The lone survivor of the political housecleaning was Alan Larson, who continues to serve in the State Department as undersecretary of state for economic affairs. The exception is particularly notable, observers say, given that Bush demands absolute loyalty from his appointees. “It’s unusual,” notes Paul Light, who studies presidential appointments for the Brookings Institution, a Washington-based think tank. “Undersecretary positions are very high-ranking plums. You generally would use them to reward someone who is faithful to the president and to no previous administration.”

But Undersecretary Larson, as it happens, may have had a chance to demonstrate his faithfulness even before Bush was elected president. In February 2000, Larson received a visit from Dick Cheney, then the CEO of Halliburton. According to a source familiar with the meeting, Cheney wanted to express concern over a State Department decision to block $500 million in federal loan guarantees to a Russian company called Tyumen Oil. Larson was responsible for the issue at State. Sources say the State Department had blocked the aid after the CIA warned that Tyumen and its owners, a Russian conglomerate called the Alfa Group, were suspected of tampering with courts to stage hostile takeovers of rival companies. BP Amoco and other investors in one of those rivals had also lodged complaints, accusing Tyumen of driving the firm into bankruptcy and attempting to steal its assets in a rigged auction.

The decision to block the deal was bad news for Cheney, since Tyumen was supposed to pass along nearly $300 million of the federal subsidies to Halliburton to help refurbish a Siberian oil field. So at his meeting with Larson, Cheney warned that refusing the aid to Tyumen might cost jobs at Halliburton.

Cheney got his way. Two months after he met with Larson, the State Department withdrew its objections and agreed to release the money. When Bush and Cheney moved into the White House the following January, Larson kept his job.

In deciding to keep Larson, a career Foreign Service official, the State Department says that “questions of loans, contracts, or individual companies were never raised nor even considered.” Insiders say Larson is now considered something of a rising star in the administration. In October, he was sent on high-profile missions to Saudi Arabia and other oil-supply nations to secure a commitment for increased production should Iraq’s oil taps get turned off because of war.

The fortunes of Tyumen and its parent company have likewise soared. Last summer the administration signed a deal with the Alfa Group to explore a series of oil projects in Russia. And in October, not long after Cheney suggested allowing Russian companies to supply the United States with oil, Tyumen became the first Russian firm to deliver oil to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, providing the federal government with 285,000 barrels.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate