THE PLANK NOVEMBER 20, 2008
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
Here's a look at some tensions that could arise if Robert Gates stays on as Secretary of Defense, beyond disappointment from the get-out-of-Iraq chorus.
Since at least spring, Gates has been issuing a series of far-reaching policy documents which explicitly try to set the future direction of U.S. defense policy. As Fred Kaplan has written, "The implication [is] clear: The Army's primary mission [traditional wafighting]--which drives its weapons procurement, its force structure, its culture, everything about it--is to be relegated to secondary status and supplanted by a focus on counterinsurgency, training, and advising." That seems to have rubbed some of Obama's transition people in the wrong way. Here's what Michele Flournoy, who's heading Obama's defense transition team, said last June:
Michele Flournoy, president of the Center for a New American Security, said she was surprised to see Gates issuing such a strategy so close to a presidential election, calling it a "strategy destined to be overtaken by events" because one of the new administration's first tasks will be to write such a defense plan. She said the document appropriately emphasizes irregular warfare--focused on terrorists and rogue regimes bent on using insurgency or weapons of mass destruction--but might go too far.
"I think irregular warfare is very important, particularly in contrast to preparing solely for conventional warfighting, but it shouldn't be our only focus," Flournoy said, adding that countries such as China likely are preparing for "high-end" warfare and attacks involving anti-satellite technologies and cyberspace.
If Gates ends up staying on at the Pentagon, he and Petraeus will almost certainly be able to impose these counterinsurgency-oriented priorities on what Flournoy, who has long-standing plans to revamp DoD, hoped would be a top-down review starting from scratch.
--Barron YoungSmith
7 comments
I don't see the problem. Huge inertia and vested interest in the Pentagon will have to be overcome if there is any hope of making even gradual progress in the direction of a counterinsurgency emphasis. What's wrong with keeping the ball rolling now?
It would be a real shame if ambition on the part of some Obama supporters gets in the way of the almost wholly positive idea of keeping Gates where he is for another year or so.
- Robert Powell
November 20, 2008 at 2:33pm
The main reason I voted for Obama is due to his ability to pick the right people for the right positions. Gates has proven he has not only the mettle, but the brains to take the military in the right direction. I really hope he stays.
- TLaBorn
November 20, 2008 at 3:31pm
Hey, I got sucked in by the headline. Can someone at TNR please do a story about _Bill_ Gates who is positioning himself to compete head-to-head with the U.S. Department of Education in setting national policy including national testing and standards? It's all over the education policy blogosphere but hasn't hit mainstream yet. The big meeting in Seattle last week brought together every power broker in education including many who are possible Obama nominees. People are calling Gates the U.S. Superindent of Schools. THey are achieving this coup by brute force and size. Sounds a bit like Microsoft, doesn't it.
- stgla
November 20, 2008 at 3:53pm
I'd say that Gates is also smart enough to want to have a good relationship with the incoming president so that when he leaves it will be at a mutually agreed time, possibly with some new and interesting assignment (unless he just wants to go back to Texas). I can see him wanting to put his stamp on DoD reforms but not blocking other high-level reviews that the White House wants to broaden its options for how to reconfigure the military. Gates might even find he's having a happier time as a member of an Obama administration.
- ironyroad
November 20, 2008 at 4:00pm
Gates' focus on training and equipping for the battles we're probably going to fight is the main reason - no scratch that - the only reason Obama should bend over backward to get him to stay. But I don't think he'll have to - bend over backward that is. Obama's Counterinsurgency/Nation Building advocates [read: Samantha Power and Sarah Sewall] seem close to him and besides Flournoy's interest in much needed cyber war capabilities [remember Estonia?] hardly puts her in the lusting for more F-22s and Crusader Art crowd.
O' and CNAS is just plain stacked with Counterinsurgency boosters.
- arsonplus
November 20, 2008 at 4:06pm
The last thing Obama needs during his first term, particularly before '10 is any kind of disaster in Iraq.
If he's smart-- and he certainly is-- he'll leave Gates and Petraeus in charge and be in no hurry to get our troops out.
Nobody has been thinking much about Iraq since the Surge succeeded. Obama can easily afford to give the Kozies a silent Sister Soulja. He doesn't need those morons anymore.
- ChanRobt
November 21, 2008 at 1:45am
Chan is right. Keep Gates, be in no hurry to pull completely out of Iraq. The surge has worked, violence and casualties are dramatically reduced, and Iraq has some semblance of stability. Gates is an extemely competent, pragmatic, decisive, and modest public servant. Unlike his predecessor.
But Chan, hasn't Petraeus rotated out of Iraq?
- dubyadoubte
November 21, 2008 at 12:57pm