Toward a New Defense Policy: New US Secretary of Defense
Published in Sankei News
(Japan) on 8 December 2014
by Editorial (link to original)
(Japan) on 8 December 2014
by Editorial (link to original)
Translated from
by Thomas S. Evans.
Edited by Nicholas Eckart.
Former Deputy Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter has been nominated to succeed Chuck Hagel, who has been dismissed as secretary of defense. Mr. Carter is a solid candidate with real experience in national security, and it is expected that he will be approved by Congress.
As opposed to simply quietly handling Mr. Obama’s last two years in office, I would hope that Mr. Carter will take some bold measures to wipe clean the unease toward diplomatic and national security policy exposed by the Democratic Party’s crushing defeat in the midterm elections.
To that end, it is also essential that Mr. Obama move to rid himself of some of his White House cabinet members.
In the world today, there are three major crises: the extremist Sunni organization known as the Islamic State’s control of territory stretching from Syria to Iraq, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine under the Putin administration, and China’s illegal encroachment into the South and East China Seas.
In all of these cases, agents seeking to alter the status quo of the post-World War II global order are exploiting weaknesses exposed by U.S. military retreats enacted by Obama’s inward-facing administration.
Mr. Carter’s mission will be to prevent any more such drift in U.S. national security; particularly, a strategy to deal with the Islamic State group is sorely needed. Simply by having the “coalition of the willing” carry out airstrikes with successive installments of U.S. military assistance advisory groups doesn’t add up to a plan drastic enough to force the disintegration of the Islamic State group.
Policy focused on Asia intended to center restraints on China as a pivotal aspect of national security remains in progress. Mr. Hagel appeared to understand the central importance of the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty to such endeavors, and it is my hope that Mr. Carter will follow in his footsteps.
Without a doubt, Obama’s policies have invited criticism from within and without the administration. However, going through four secretaries of defense in one administration is odd, no matter how you look at it. Every one of them who has left the post has made the same complaint of excessive micromanagement, claiming that the inner circle of the White House would direct them down to the minutest detail. Apparently, they have also been upset by the rejection of new appointees by individuals who spread gossip about successors.
By simply pushing individuals lacking personal connections through a revolving door, while maintaining the close advisers that constitute the root cause, Obama’s dedication toward a national security team reform that reflects the results of the election is suspect. Using this post change as an opportunity, I’d hope at the least for a change wherein the House decides upon and enacts policy.
For Japan’s part, as soon as the election for the Lower House has ended, we will need to devise alliance-strengthening plans for the relocation of the U.S. Army Futenma Base and guidelines on Japan-U.S. defense cooperation, putting our support behind a “Carter Pentagon.”
As opposed to simply quietly handling Mr. Obama’s last two years in office, I would hope that Mr. Carter will take some bold measures to wipe clean the unease toward diplomatic and national security policy exposed by the Democratic Party’s crushing defeat in the midterm elections.
To that end, it is also essential that Mr. Obama move to rid himself of some of his White House cabinet members.
In the world today, there are three major crises: the extremist Sunni organization known as the Islamic State’s control of territory stretching from Syria to Iraq, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine under the Putin administration, and China’s illegal encroachment into the South and East China Seas.
In all of these cases, agents seeking to alter the status quo of the post-World War II global order are exploiting weaknesses exposed by U.S. military retreats enacted by Obama’s inward-facing administration.
Mr. Carter’s mission will be to prevent any more such drift in U.S. national security; particularly, a strategy to deal with the Islamic State group is sorely needed. Simply by having the “coalition of the willing” carry out airstrikes with successive installments of U.S. military assistance advisory groups doesn’t add up to a plan drastic enough to force the disintegration of the Islamic State group.
Policy focused on Asia intended to center restraints on China as a pivotal aspect of national security remains in progress. Mr. Hagel appeared to understand the central importance of the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty to such endeavors, and it is my hope that Mr. Carter will follow in his footsteps.
Without a doubt, Obama’s policies have invited criticism from within and without the administration. However, going through four secretaries of defense in one administration is odd, no matter how you look at it. Every one of them who has left the post has made the same complaint of excessive micromanagement, claiming that the inner circle of the White House would direct them down to the minutest detail. Apparently, they have also been upset by the rejection of new appointees by individuals who spread gossip about successors.
By simply pushing individuals lacking personal connections through a revolving door, while maintaining the close advisers that constitute the root cause, Obama’s dedication toward a national security team reform that reflects the results of the election is suspect. Using this post change as an opportunity, I’d hope at the least for a change wherein the House decides upon and enacts policy.
For Japan’s part, as soon as the election for the Lower House has ended, we will need to devise alliance-strengthening plans for the relocation of the U.S. Army Futenma Base and guidelines on Japan-U.S. defense cooperation, putting our support behind a “Carter Pentagon.”