Can Mattis Make It as Secretary of Defense?
There is no question that General James Mattis, Donald Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Defense is an incredible general and military tactician. However the Secretary of Defense is not a purely military appointment. Whoever is appointed must be an equally impressive administrator, and at the least, politically competent. The question of whether General Mattis can be as good of an administrator and politician as he is a military commander is the biggest unknown about Trump’s most heralded cabinet pick.
Mattis the Soldier
In Iraq and Afghanistan, Gen. Mattis led from the front, constantly traversing the battlefield with a platoon. He is the definition of a “muddy boots general,” and this type of action is at the heart of why he receives cult like adoration from soldiers and veterans across all branches of the services. At the same time, Mattis showed great tactical acumen and is, by all accounts, universally respected by his peers. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) went so far as to call Mattis “one of the finest tacticians of his generation,” and supported the waiver required to allow Mattis’ appointment as Secretary of Defense before seven years after his retirement from military service, as federal law requires.
This law is in place in order to maintain civilian control over the military. It is for this reason that some senators, like Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), oppose the effort. However there is precedent for granting a waiver. In 1950, Congress gave Gen. George Marshall such an exemption when he was appointed by President Truman. This, in addition to the unification of the House and Senate under Republican control, along with Mattis’ stellar qualifications, make it likely that he will survive the nomination process and be appointed Secretary of Defense.
Only two of Mattis’ command decisions have been publicly called into question. The first being his air strike of a suspected gathering of militants outside of Mukaradeeb in northwestern Iraq, and the second being allegations by a former Green Beret that Mattis denied his unit medical assistance after they were hit by friendly fire in Afghanistan. In both of these cases there are arguments supporting either side, but Mattis’ record would indicate that he should be given the benefit of the doubt in both. Mattis’ successes, however, are without question.
Earlier in his career Mattis led the 1st Battalion, 7th Marines as part of the tip of the spear into Kuwait in the First Gulf War. In Afghanistan, Mattis “oversaw the deepest insertion of Marines into a combat zone in U.S. history” according to the Military Times and “conducted the longest ground march in Marine Corps history” with the 1st Marine Division in Iraq according to the unit’s own website. Furthermore, as a scholar and avid reader himself, Mattis literally co-authored the American counterinsurgency manual with Gen. David Petraeus. He has also received numerous medals, including the Legion of Merit “for exceptionally meritorious conduct in the performance of outstanding services to the Government of the United States.”
Mattis the Administrator
Despite his success, however, there are reasons to be concerned about Mattis’ appointment. In the past, Mattis has underperformed in the department of acquisitions and spending, arguably one of least sexy and most tedious aspects of being Secretary of Defense. According to USA Today, “[He] oversaw a key command in 2005 that failed to field urgently needed combat vehicles to Iraq to protect Marines from roadside bombs.”
This is especially troubling because one of the major roles of the Secretary of Defense is to supervise the acquisitions programs of the military. This will include such troubled projects like the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter which is 200 billion dollars over budget, the Zummwalt Destroyer and its 400,000 dollar per shot guided shells. In addition, the aging U.S. nuclear arsenal will soon need a major upgrade and overhaul that could cost close to a trillion dollars, to name the biggest issues.
It is concerning that the man who will be responsible for all of this previously failed to provide the soldiers who trusted him with adequate protection from the greatest threat to their safety. The worst part of this is that Mattis is well known to care about soldiers, once refusing to wear winter gear in Afghanistan after finding out some Marines were not yet issued theirs. Mattis’ shortfalls, therefore, are indicative of a lack of administrative focus or capability, not desire.
While it seems to be in Mattis’ character to take his failure as a learning experience, his lapses may also be evidence of an admittedly very human tendency: a disinterest in paperwork and bureaucracy and the formalities of government life. If this is true, it would be very unfortunate indeed, as Mattis will spend far more time as an administrator than as a general in the coming years, and his decisions as an administrator could have far more consequences than his more strategic ones.
Much of the skill of being a great general has to do with one’s logistical abilities, and Mattis’ continued promotions indicate that he does possess some skill. However, he will have to deal with more serious and wide ranging challenges as Secretary of Defense than he ever did as a military commander.
Mattis the Politician
During the Republican primaries, a group of powerful Republican donors attempted to tap Gen. Mattis to run against then front runner Donald Trump. General Mattis refused on the grounds that he had no interest in becoming President of the United States. In fact, Mattis has shown no indication of being interested in politics whatsoever, and has instead demonstrated open disdain for politics as a whole. His lack of hunger for power makes Mattis and his motives exceedingly trustworthy, however, his honesty has caused him trouble in the past and likely will continue to do so as Secretary of Defense.
While previously serving as a commander of the United States Central Command, Mattis ruffled a number of feathers, including some in the Obama Administration, and was forced to retire. It is unknown exactly what the final straw was but many have speculated it is the General’s opposition to the Iran Nuclear deal. As Mattis said in his own words during a Senate inquiry into Iran, “I am paid to take a rather dim view of the Iranians.” However, this should be taken with a grain of salt, as the Obama administration has a poor relationship with the military and Mattis’ personal style. His dismissal may say more about the Obama Administration than it does Mattis.
Some have also raised the possibility that Gen. Mattis’ brash manner could lead to clashes with Donald Trump. Despite this concern, preliminary reports indicate that Trump is willing to listen to Mattis on matters of defense. During a meeting with Mattis prior to his appointment, the President-elect asked him his opinion about waterboarding. Gen. Mattis responded, “I’ve never found it to be useful,” and went on to support his opinion by saying that “a pack of cigarettes and a couple of beers” was more effective in his experience. This drew a concession from Trump indicating that Mattis will have more influence in military matters than previously thought.
Mattis’ brashness alarms his critics as much as it endears him to his supporters. This includes statements made to Congress in which he asserted, “It’s fun to shoot (terrorists),” amongst others. His supporters maintain that his words, while harsh, are true, and well liked by soldiers who feel it represents their experience in war, an environment with a brutality that cannot be understood by those who have not experienced it. Regardless, this makes Mattis a liability for the Trump administration.
Mattis clearly dislikes politics. Whether this dislike comes from a lack of ability or just distaste is unknown. Once again, Mattis’ ability to swim fluidly through the political world will be crucial to his success as Secretary of Defense. The problem is that his honesty, his forthrightness, and pragmatism ––his very nature itself––are unusual in the world of politics. The foundation of his appeal to the general public is precisely what will make him unsuited for political life in Washington, D.C.
Mattis as the Secretary of Defense
As one Politico article notes, distrust between the military and the White House is “practically an American tradition.” This rift has only grown under President Obama, so employing a well respected member of the armed services could serve to suture the wound. James Mattis is precisely that man. The flaw that makes him such a poor politician with serve him well to heal the wounds between the White House and the armed services. However, this does not negate the very real concern about Mattis’ abilities as an administrator and a politician.
While this lack of polish can be endearing to some, it will present problems for him as Secretary of Defense. Overall, Gen. James Mattis is an extremely accomplished individual, but he is still only human, and displays the same flaws as many of Donald Trump’s other cabinet picks. Gen. Mattis is smart and humble, but he will need to work on his skills as an administrator and a politician in order to achieve the highest levels of success as Secretary of Defense.
