Why the Gates Pick Works

by: Jon Soltz

Wed Nov 26, 2008 at 12:02:57 PM EST


Back when Robert Gates was named the Secretary of Defense, I expressed cynicism, noting that the change from Rumsfeld to Gates meant little in the larger scheme of things, unless President Bush changed his view of the world and the role of our military in it.  And, indeed, the president did not change his view, or his playbook, so on the larger picture, the change to Gates meant nothing.

At the same time, where he was free to change things, Gates was effective and gained the respect and confidence of the uniformed military.  Gates wasn't there for Abu Ghraib or Walter Reed or armor shortages, but he came in during the aftermath and was tasked with not just cleaning up the mess, but making sure those critical errors were not allowed to happen again.  Gates moved confidently and swiftly, unencumbered by any doctrinaire view from the president on these "smaller" issues, and proved himself a very adept administrator. It's for this reason that we went from six retired Generals calling for the Secretary of Defense to be fired, to none.

Now, with a new Commander in Chief with a very different view, Gates provides the perfect short-term bridge between the eras of pre-Iraq-redeployment and post-Iraq-redeployment.  And, that seems to be what President-Elect Obama sees Gates as - a civil servant who does the job he's tasked with, and does it well.  Politically, it also gives some cover to Obama from the right, to use one of George W. Bush's team to carry out a dramatic change in policy.

For those who worry that Gates will somehow drag President Obama to the right on Iraq, I think that fear is really unfounded.  If the first question one must ask is, "Why is Obama picking Gates?" then the second question has to be "Why does Gates want to stay with Obama?"  

It's not because Gates wants to preserve some neo-con view in the administration - after all, Gates is a Bush I guy, a moderate who sees more eye-to-eye with Brent Scowcroft (an opponent of the war) than Paul Wolfowitz.  It's not to preserve the current course, because Gates is smart enough to know that with Hillary Clinton, James Jones, and Barack Obama, staying the course will never win out.

The only reasonable answer is that Gates clearly understands that there will be a new course for our military, that includes redeployment from Iraq, and wants to make it work.  If he didn't, he had a very nice private sector life that he could have gone to.

There is little time to spare here, as has been made clear by the timelines for redeployment that the Iraqis are calling for.  By keeping Gates, the Department of Defense is the one place in government that will be spared the pains of leadership transition.  Gates won't have to "hit the ground running," because he's already running.  And now - finally -  with a new mission from the top, Gates is well positioned to help Barack Obama keep the promises he made during his campaign.  

Jon Soltz :: Why the Gates Pick Works
Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
I've got to agree (0.00 / 0)
I"ve heard a lot of people complain about Obama keeping Gates on.  However, I think Gates has done a good job considering what he had to work with after Rumsfeld left.  Gates may have made a comment or two in the past that I didn't agree with but I've never seen him as anything but a realist.  Obama's decision will prove wise in my opinion.

"Armed forces abroad are of little value unless there is prudent counsel at home."

Marcus Tullius Cicero 106 BC-43 BC


I'd also add (0.00 / 0)
I would also add that I like Obama's pick of Paul Volker to head up his White House economic recovery advisory board.  Volker, in my opinion is probably the best man to lead the U.S. out of this financial mess.  After all, it was Volker who lead the U.S. out of the inflationary spiral we were in during the 70s and 80s.  True, he had to do some painful things like raising interest rates to punitive levels and contract the money supply dramatically but it worked.  Obama is putting together a very powerful cabinet and set of advisors to draw from.

"Armed forces abroad are of little value unless there is prudent counsel at home."

Marcus Tullius Cicero 106 BC-43 BC


This raises an interesting question: (0.00 / 0)
When will Gates begin to lay the groundwork for Obama's new approach to Iraq and Afghanistan?  Gates of course will obey explicit orders from Bush until the official transfer of power, but clearly DoD does an awful lot of stuff over which the President exercises little direct authority or oversight.  Until January, will Gates execute the Bush vision, the Obama vision, or a hybrid of the two?

I think it's a sound decision... (4.00 / 1)
...Gates will provide continuity, is (as mentioned elsewhere in these comments) a realist, and will respond well, I believe, to Obama's plans and orders.

 That said, I think Obama and Co. definitely need to start shopping for Gates' replacement, which I envision happening late in 2009.

 My top two picks (in precedence) are (retiring) Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb. and Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va. Both are combat vets who know the military well, have a record of fighting for the military and espousing a solid, reasonable foreign policy.

 I'll be interested to see how Gates operates after Inauguration Day, and how he and Obama will get a wary military structure to respond.

 IV


SecDef Gates has another thing going for him...just for the record... (0.00 / 0)
Biden is a fan!

It's a master stroke (0.00 / 0)
I am convinced that President Elect Obama is casting an eye toward either GENERAL Clark or GENERAL Zinni (Desert Crossing, anyone?)  to be his SecDef, but neither of them are eligible until 2010 - so  why change horses twice before you get across the stream?  Gates has turned things around and done a good job.  Keeping him makes sense, and I have been saying so since I checked the calendar against the retirement dates of the above named flags a few months ago when it became clear that Obama was going to win the election.  

VetVoice on Facebook
VetVoice Recommends

"The War I Always Wanted,"
By Brandon Friedman

"The welcome mat for memoirs by veterans of operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom might never wear out so long as they write with the savvy of Brandon Friedman . . . Friedman's take is vivid, frank, precise and dramatic." --Military Times

"Add Brandon Friedman's The War I Always Wanted to the ranks of outstanding non-fiction produced by officers from elite combat units in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Always truthful, often excruciatingly so, The War I Always Wanted rises at numerous points to the level of literature." --Steven Pressfield, author of Gates of Fire

Buy The War I Always Wanted here.

"A Time To Lead,"
By General (Ret.) Wesley K. Clark

"A Time To Lead confirms the rewarding benefits of military service at a time when such service is experiencing considerable strain. It also includes a comprehensive description of America's current national imperatives, which deserve serious consideration." --General Alexander M. Haig, Jr., former Secretary of State

"This is a primer on leadership forged in battle and by decades of experience. . .This isn't just a book; it's a manual for leading people and living a good life." --Barry McCaffrey, General, USA (ret.)

Buy A Time to Lead here.

"Love My Rifle More Than You,"
By Kayla Williams

"Whip smart, sassy, with a mouth as foul as a sailor's, 28-year-old Sergeant Kayla Williams. . .tells what it's like to be a female soldier in Iraq." --Booklist

". . .echoes military memoirists from Julius Caesar to Ernie Pyle." --Publishers Weekly

". . .a shocking, on-the-ground view of one military woman's experience in Iraq." --Bookmarks Magazine

Buy Love My Rifle More Than You here.

"How to Break a Terrorist,"
By Matthew Alexander

"...a riveting, fast-paced account that reads like a first-rate thriller." --Publisher's Weekly

" ...an absorbing behind-the-scenes look at the secret intelligence war within a war." --Military.com

Buy How to Break a Terrorist here.

RSS Feed Links

Subscribe to VetVoice in a feed reader!

Subscribe to VetVoice by Email!

Diaries and comments at VetVoice do not necessarily represent the views of VoteVets.org. VetVoice will strive to remove any illegal material as soon as it is flagged. Similarly, VetVoice will use its discretion in determining whether to remove exceedingly offensive material. However, between posting and removal, any offensive or illegal material does not reflect the condoning or endorsing of said material by VoteVets.org or VetVoice.
Similarly, the views expressed on this website are those of the authors alone. Opinions on this website do not necessarily represent the views of the Department of Defense or any of its components.
Menu

Front Page Writers
PTSD Resources
TBI Resources
IRR Information
Casualty Reports
VA Information
Support the Troops
Veteran Candidates We Support
Congressional Committees
Contact Your Elected Leaders
Sites We Like
Search

Advanced Search

Paid for VoteVets Political Action Committee. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. VoteVets Action Fund is a 501(c)(4) organization which primarily focuses on nonpartisan education and advocacy on behalf veterans and their families. VoteVets Political Action Committee is a federal political committee which primarily helps elect Iraq and Afghanistan war veteran candidates and educates about veterans and military issues aimed at influencing the outcome of the next election.

Site Design: Articulated Man

VoteVets Political Action and Vote Vets Action Fund are separate organizations.

Powered by: SoapBlox