General Austin's Nomination

And the Question of Civilian DoD Leadership

I am not opposed to General Austin's nomination as Secretary of Defense. I think there may be better qualified candidates, but there are certainly worse qualified. President-elect Biden deserves quite a lot of latitude in whom he wants in his cabinet. General Austin brings a fine record as Director of the Joint Staff, Army Vice Chief of Staff and US Central Command Commander. He worked closely and well with then Vice President Biden and has been endorsed by a number of luminaries, including Colin Powell. I'll add that he graduated from Army War College the year before me. We didn't cross paths until he spoke to a graduating class in 2012.

My concern is that he is a recently retired General nominated to a job that is—with rare exception—meant for a civilian. That General Mattis was recently waived into the job by Congress should not lower the bar to waiving senior military officers. Indeed, it should raise it. Mattis was an exception, filling a critical position in a new administration led by a rank novice, who was handpicking a collection of D-listers whose principal qualification was flattery. Mattis was one of a few adults we hoped would be guardrails. That is not the case with the incoming Biden administration.

With Austin's nomination we have to address the question; why do we have a civilian in the job (other than because the Constitution and the National Security Act of 1947 says so)?

The great insight from Karl Clausewitz is for countries to prosecute wars, their military, their government, and most importantly their people must support the effort. A general officer such as General Austin will have great sway over the military. But will he have as much sway, or awareness, over the political class that forms the government, particularly the opposition? Will he have the awareness of what the people think about a conflict? That sort of I instinct isn't a cultivated skill in many of our military professionals. Politics and popular response to politics is messy, often venal and hyperbolic. Generals and senior officers are expectedxand trained to shut down the kind of behavior in their force that the Secretary of Defense will have to work through when he deals with the political class.

In the senior service colleges we used the acronym VUCA (volatile, uncertain, chaotic, ambiguous). It certainly applies to our politics. As a Army War College graduate, I'm sure General Austin is aware of VUCA, and he is certainly familiar with Clausewitz's holy trinity. But familiarity is one thing. Being steeped in politics -- particularly in our times -- is another. I hope General Austin can navigate those treacherous waters. I wish him well and I pray for his success.