By Charles C. W. Cooke
I don’t possess even a smidgen of John Noonan’s national security expertise, but I nevertheless wish to agree with his post here on the Corner regarding the nomination of Pete Hegseth for Secretary of Defense. From my perspective, Hegseth is a fine pick. I hope the Senate will agree.
As John notes, it’s rather churlish to describe Hegseth as merely “a guy on TV,” as so many commentators have. He went to Princeton and Harvard. He served in Iraq and Afghanistan, winning two bronze stars in the process. He has experience in private enterprise. He’s been a tireless advocate for veterans — and, better still, he’s been one of those tireless advocate for veterans whom veterans actually like. Sure, he’s now on TV. So is Michael Strahan. That doesn’t tell us much about his past.
As far as I can tell, Hegseth also has the right personal qualities for the role. I am just one voter — and this is just my one view — but, as someone who regularly spent time with Pete a few years ago when we did a TV show together, I will tell happily anyone who will listen that he is a smart, caring, curious, hard-working guy who treated everyone around him with respect. The news of this nomination was first presented to me alongside a dismissive “wow.” I do not share that sentiment. My reaction, instead, was “sure.” I haven’t seen or spoken to Pete for years, but, unless he’s turned into a different man in the interim, there’s nothing “wow” about this choice other than that it was unexpected.
The broader arguments I’ve seen made against the pick do not impress me either. Yes, Hegseth is young. But so what? At 44, he’s just three years younger than Barack Obama was when Obama was elected president, and, frankly, he’s done a lot more with his life thus far than Obama had at that point. Moreover, there may actually be a benefit to his youth. The current Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin, is 71. Trump’s first-term pick, Jim Mattis, was 67 when he took the job. Hegseth is thus a lot closer in age to the average deployed American than either of those men — which, given the apparent disconnect between the rank-and-file and the top brass, and the arrival of the worst recruiting crisis “since the creation of the all-volunteer force,” might not be a bad thing. Yes, he’s something of an outsider. But that’s not always bad, you know. Have we forgotten about the current guy, who lied to President Biden about being hospitalized for four days, who has presided over one disaster after another, and who, despite his insistence to the contrary, has permitted some of the worst progressive ideas to wiggle their way into his tent.
CNN reports that, when responding to the news yesterday, “one defense official” told the network that “everyone is simply shocked.” If that was supposed to alarm me, it did not. One of the most precious principles that undergirds the United States is that the military must be subordinate to the civil power. Naturally, this does not make everyone within the civil power qualified to be Secretary of Defense. But it should temper any temptation one might have toward prioritizing the preferences and interests of the existing bureaucracy. The president is the commander-in-chief, and the Secretary of Defense serves at his pleasure. If that president wants Pete Hegseth to fill the role — and if Pete Hegseth is duly confirmed by a majority of the Senate (not recess appointed, confirmed) — then Pete Hegseth ought to be Secretary of Defense. Any argument to the contrary should be grounded in more than that the guy once threw an ax on TV.
LINK
Don’t forget that when Reagan rebuilt the military his SecDef was Casper Weinberger whom I believe was a former Army captain. If former rank is supposed to be the standard by which a SecDef candidate should be judged, then Austin should have been the best SecDef in history. Instead he was the worst.