From Spy Chief to Peace Broker: Haines Takes Helm at a Turbulent Carnegie

WASHINGTON, D.C. – June 11, 2026 – The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a century-old institution dedicated to global harmony, has named Avril Haines, the former U.S. Director of National Intelligence (DNI), as its next president. The appointment, effective September 28, 2026, places one of the world's most informed intelligence figures at the head of a think tank grappling with a world teetering on the edge of compounding crises.

Haines succeeds Mariano-Florentino (Tino) Cuéllar at what the Endowment’s board chair, Jane Hartley, calls a “consequential moment.” Hartley lauded Haines as “an extraordinary leader whose trusted voice shaped some of the toughest global decisions,” adding that her “intellectual depth is coupled with genuine moral purpose.”

The move is more than a high-profile leadership change; it represents a strategic convergence of intelligence and diplomacy. Haines, who led the sprawling 18-agency U.S. intelligence community from 2021 to 2025, brings an unparalleled insider’s view of global threats to an organization whose mission is to forge solutions from the outside. “I’ve seen the weight of these issues firsthand, and from the inside, you learn both the power and the limits of what governments can do alone,” Haines said in a statement. “Often, the ideas that are capable of galvanizing action come from the outside.”

A New Kind of Peacemaker

Avril Haines is not a traditional peace advocate. Her career was forged in the crucible of post-9/11 national security, serving as Deputy Director of the CIA and Principal Deputy National Security Advisor in the Obama White House. Her tenure was marked by a pragmatic, data-driven approach and a commitment to the principle of “speaking truth to power,” a pledge she made during her DNI confirmation hearing.

As DNI, she championed the elevation of open-source intelligence (OSINT), arguing that the digital deluge of publicly available information was a foundational resource that the intelligence community had to master. This focus on transparent data streams may prove to be a significant asset at Carnegie, an institution that relies on independent analysis to influence policy. Her leadership also involved navigating the intense geopolitical competition with China and Russia, giving her direct insight into the strategic thinking in Beijing and Moscow—knowledge that is invaluable for an organization trying to prevent great power conflict.

However, her record also includes grappling with the complex ethical dimensions of modern warfare. Her work on the legal frameworks for the U.S. drone program during the Obama administration drew scrutiny from human rights organizations. This experience, while controversial, provides her with a granular understanding of the difficult trade-offs that define contemporary conflict, a perspective rarely found outside the secure walls of government. Her transition from shaping lethal policies to leading a peace endowment is a stark illustration of the evolving nature of global security, where the lines between intelligence, defense, and diplomacy are increasingly blurred.

Charting a Course Through a 'Consequential Moment'

The “consequential moment” that both Haines and the Carnegie board reference is no hyperbole. The global landscape is arguably more volatile than at any point since the Cold War. According to the Council on Foreign Relations, the probability of a high-impact conflict involving a U.S.-China clash over Taiwan or a direct Russia-NATO confrontation in 2026 is alarmingly high. The World Economic Forum’s latest risk report identifies geoeconomic confrontation and state-based armed conflict as the most severe short-term threats.

These geopolitical tensions are inflamed by what Haines calls “rapid technological change.” The race for dominance in artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and biotechnology is the new great game, creating novel avenues for conflict and destabilization. Under outgoing president Tino Cuéllar, a former California Supreme Court Justice and technology scholar, the Endowment significantly expanded its expertise in AI and its impact on governance. Haines, who participated in classified briefings on AI for lawmakers as DNI, is uniquely positioned to build upon this foundation.

Her challenge will be to steer the Endowment’s global network of scholars—with centers from Berlin to New Delhi—to produce actionable ideas that can cut through the noise. This includes continuing the vital work of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center, which was established in Berlin after the Kremlin shut down its Moscow office in 2022. Understanding Russian public opinion and the Kremlin’s strategic calculus remains critical, and Haines’s intelligence background provides a powerful lens for that analysis.

The View from the Inside Out

Haines’s appointment is a prime example of the well-trodden path between high government office and influential think tanks, a phenomenon often dubbed the “revolving door.” Carnegie has a long history of being led by figures with deep government experience, from its first president and former Secretary of State Elihu Root to Jessica Tuchman Mathews and, most notably, William J. Burns, who left the Endowment’s presidency in 2021 to become Director of the CIA.

The symmetry is striking: as Burns went from think tank to intelligence chief, Haines is making the opposite journey. This underscores the symbiotic relationship between the U.S. national security establishment and the intellectual ecosystem that seeks to inform it. Far from a simple retirement post, these roles allow former officials to shape policy debates with the benefit of classified knowledge and an intimate understanding of governmental machinery.

Haines’s own words suggest she sees this not as an exit from the arena, but as a change in position. Her acknowledgment of the “limits of what governments can do alone” is a powerful mission statement. It implies a strategy where the Endowment, under her leadership, will not just analyze problems but will actively seek to catalyze solutions that are beyond the reach of bureaucracy-bound state actors. For an institution founded to advance peace, bringing in a leader who has spent her career understanding its antithesis may be the most strategic move of all.