I’m sure you’ve all heard about Sec. Lloyd Austin’s absence in December and the first part of January. If you haven’t Google it.
For me the mysterious absence and that his deputy was out of the country on vacation at the time and did not cut her vaca short raises an interesting question: do we really need a Secretary of Defense and if so why?
That’s a viable question. However, I have one that precedes. Kirby said that multiple defense and security operations had occurred in the absence of Austin. (Pretty piss poor spin if you ask me.) And Kirby informs that Austin’s staff was weighing in. Well how nice.
We are supposed to believe that no one, including Sleepy Joe, asked “what does Lloyd think? Not you, junior, Lloyd.” No one asked? No one asked? So the absence goes un-noticed? Pulease.
Now, your question. But re-phrased: Do we need this Secretary of Defense?
Yes. As James pointed out the SECDEF doesnt actually have that much to do in day to day operations. The assistants and lower level people do that and even then actual military leadership would determine how to carry out most actions. Anyway, yes you need someone in charge. Someone has to work on big picture issues and needs to make sure the service branches play nicely with each other.
I wonder if Drew was ever in charge of a large group of people. My experience has been that once you get much past 20 people you simply cant know everything and make every decision in real time. So the SECDEF might decide that sometime in the next month we need to attack someone, assuming there is already a green light, but after that the details and carrying out the mission will take place without his input unless its really an unusually high priority/visible event. (Really, the SECDEF will be more involved in the financial aspects anyway and also the political aspects, meeting with Congress, etc.)
Steve
Once upon a time having a SecDef who was a retired general was controversial. That made a clear distinction between SecDef and CJCS. Apparently, it’s no longer controversial but that makes me wonder what the distinction is at this point.
Furthermore, if you’re absent for 3-4 days and nobody notices and raises red flags, it really raises questions about chain of command and communications. It certainly brings into question whether he was in charge.
The largest number of people I’ve ever managed is around 50.
Underscores the fact that we are no longer a Republic or a democracy but rather a bureaucracy.
Unless the law is changed, a SECDEF is required. The military Chain of Command runs through the SECDEF to the President. The Bureaucracy is such that it can operate day-to-day without one, but statutorially, some decisions require SECDEF authority.
“Once upon a time having a SecDef who was a retired general was controversial. ”
It still is controversial. But like everything else, the controversy is subsumed by partisanship and other factors. It’s not enough for a Senate controlled by the same party as the President to deny a nomination.
The SECDEF doesnt need to be a retired general. I think it has kind of become a norm since they are easier to get approved by the Senate.
“Furthermore, if you’re absent for 3-4 days and nobody notices and raises red flags, it really raises questions about chain of command and communications.”
Only if something comes up that really needs his input or blessing. To be clear, if he really did have surgery, which I think to be the case then the Deputy SECDEF should not have been out of country. However, I would not surprised at all if some surgeon told them it was a non-invasive procedure that only takes a coupe of hours, the complication rate is basically zero and he would be back to functional after a few hours. For the important cabinet level positions they should have already had protocols set many years ago and they should have input from a non-interested party ie not the surgeon doing the procedure.
Steve