James Mattis, A Warrior in Washington
Question: Given Secretary Mattis' background and experience, what are the potential opportunities and challenges he must address concerning civil-military relations?
Leading Like a Gardener
Q. Do you agree/disagree with the concept of "leading like a gardener?" Explain your answer.
Secretary Mattis is an interesting case study. Such a brilliant warrior, and almost universally trusted among military circles. I feel like this fact is both a blessing and a "curse". He is trusted by the Trump Administration as a military leader...so much so, that they have given him a lot of autonomy in defense matters...as pointed out in the article. The Obama Administration was often criticized for being overly cautious, but has the "pendulum swung too far", as the article states? Our Constitution and tradition have long valued civilian control of military forces, and this blurs the line a little bit.
ReplyDeleteMattis fully understands that military force is only one of the options available to the Administration in order to influence other countries/regions in our favor. However, having so recently worn the uniform, one wonders if military force remains the "top" option in his mind, when perhaps diplomacy or other means may be more effective in certain situations. I fully trust that Mattis and the DoD wouldn't commit (or give advise to the Administration to commit) military forces when it isn't necessary, but given his recent past and myriad quotes about obliterating the enemy, it's a fair question to ask.
Concur with you CSM Nelson. The pendulum has certainly swung back towards more control to the military. The primary challenge I see is that SEC Mattis will need to take on a role as a civilian that may not square well with his experience and background within the military. He has a unique opportunity to bridge the civil-military challenge because he has enormous credibility within both the military as well as civilian circles. With President Trump giving him extraordinary autonomy over the military as the SECDEF, he has tremendous potential to improve civ-mil relations in a way that hasn't been possible in recent memory. On the other hand, there is also a risk that his military background may skew his perspective in such a way as to further justify why there must be a waiting period before an active duty officer can assume the position of SECDEF.
ReplyDelete