On 7 December 2020, it was announced that President-elect Joe Biden had chosen retired four-star general, Lloyd Austin, to be the 28th Secretary of Defense. The pick came as a surprise to many, especially since Austin ended his military career only four years ago. The current standard holds any Secretary of Defense (SECDEF) nominee with a military background to be out of uniform seven years before being installed. Because of this rule, Austin would need a waiver to be confirmed by the Senate. Historically, this has only been granted twice in US history. The first recipient of the waiver was George Marshall in 1950, and the second was Donald Trump’s pick to be the SECDEF, retired four-star general Jim Mattis, in 2017. Now, in 2020, a waiver is going to be sought again. Some are uneasy about this.
One of those people is Senator Jack Reed (D), the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. On the issue of the waiver, he stated that “waiving the law should happen no more than once in a generation.” Senator Richard Blumenthal (D) agrees, believing that this “principle is essential to our democracy.” While there is no doubt that the Pentagon and the US military at large need civilian control, there may be more to consider when breaking down who is qualified to serve as SECDEF and who is not. In a piece published in the National Review, Kevin Williamson asserted that “there isn’t much wrong with General Austin, save the fact that he is General Austin.”
This comment raises interesting questions: How grave is it to have a recently retired military officer serve as the chief in the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD)? Moreover, should being a former member of the Department of Defense’s (DOD) top brass be a disqualifier for the position of SECDEF?
These questions are important for young Americans to consider. It should be reiterated: civilian control of the military is not up for debate. This is a hallmark of the American model and should be respected for the duration of our democracy. An active duty officer will never fill the void of the SECDEF. There is something to be said for the revolving door concerning the military-industrial complex in the defense/national security world. It is a necessity that independent thinkers execute policy on the most crucial life and death decisions of our nation. The leader of the DOD is unlike any other cabinet secretary, in the sense that every decision can impact hundreds of thousands of lives both domestically and internationally.
Furthermore, what sets America apart from rogue nations, ones marked by chaos, is the fact that in the US, politicized military figures do not run their own national defense at the cabinet level. This ensures that management is composed in a way guaranteed to not compromise the lethality, integrity, good order, and discipline of the force at large.
America must present itself as a beacon of stability to the rest of the world. One way to accomplish this is through the adherence of traditional norms. Civilian leadership of the Pentagon is one of these norms; it is rooted in common sense.
That said, general officers are invaluable when it comes to leadership. Many people do not know this, but the DOD is the largest employer in the world. It is a civilian workforce of over 700,000 people, in addition to the entire uniformed military. The SECDEF needs not only confidence and competence when it comes to leadership of this vast workforce, but also expertise on defense matters in a rapidly changing world. General officers command at the theater level. Take, for instance, US Central Command (CENTCOM). Being one of the eleven combatant commands in the US military, CENTCOM is commanded by a singular Commander-in-Chief (CIC). The four-star officer that commands this organization is responsible for every single military operation in an area of responsibility (AOR) that spans all the way from Egypt to Kazakhstan. This AOR consists of over 550 million people hailing from over twenty ethnic groups. More than this however, CENTCOM is also responsible for military operations in the hotbeds Afghanistan and Iraq.
Both General Mattis and General Austin commanded at the theater level as CENTCOM commander. Mattis, who already finished his tenure as defense chief in 2018, brought valuable experience and knowledge to the post of SECDEF. As former combatant commanders, both men demonstrated their ability to handle oversight of an organization with expansive authority. This was vital for leadership in the Pentagon.
No matter how experienced a civilian nominee may be, it is rare to be pressure-tested as military flag officers. In a world of near-peer threats and competition from both China and Russia, the SECDEF needs to not only understand the ins and outs of leading extremely vast organizations; but must also be familiar with both the complex intricacies of the chain of command and the foreign policy threats of the world today. This is not to say that the only qualified individuals for this job are general officers, but evidence that former generals should not be disqualified merely because of the stars on their shoulders. Those stars were received as the result of extensive command time, decades of schooling (including years at prestigious war colleges), and extreme personal sacrifice and loss. There very well may be instances when the most qualified person for the job in the eyes of the President retires from military service less than seven years from nomination. In these cases, Congress should act to confirm the nominee if their service record is worthy of distinction. During the Senate hearing process, an officer’s record can be publicly evaluated. Public vetting should calm any anxiety about the nominee’s recent military service.
As the twenty-first century proceeds, so does a new era in national security. The rivals of the US are advancing in both weaponry and strategy. The days of waring battle formations have been replaced by significantly complex operations in the realm of multi-domain warfare. The military of tomorrow must understand how to mix all different components of national power at the joint level (sea-air-land-space-cyber). This is exactly what general officers are experts in: their trade, their profession, and their chosen field. Therefore, it is imperative they do not get ruled out from service, even if they have not hung up their cap within the seven-year period.
The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the US Army, Department of Defense, or the US Government