Former Defense Official: Obama Keeping Gates The "Dumbest Thing I've Ever Heard"

Defense Secretary Robert Gates is often mentioned as a potential Bush 43 holdover in the new Obama administration. According to most reports, Gates is not only popular among the service branches, but also with Democrats, who have appreciated the secretary's moderate instincts during his time at the helm following Donald Rumsfeld.

But not everyone is sold on the idea. One former high-ranking defense official now advising Obama told the Huffington Post that keeping Gates around is "the dumbest thing I've ever heard." The former official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said he has told the Obama transition team as much.

"Most people don't realize that you can't just keep Gates," the former official said. "You've gotta keep some part of his team. We're not going to keep Gates and then appoint a new deputy, a whole new staff." The official, who spoke from personal experience within the bureaucracy, said that as an administrator, "you need your own people. And a lot of those people [under Gates] were neoconservative architects of the [Iraq] war."

The official cited in particular Defense Department undersecretary for policy Eric Edelman as a key assistant to Gates who should not remain in an Obama administration. Edelman, a former aide to Vice President Dick Cheney from 2001 to 2003, courted controversy last year when he criticized Sen. Hillary Clinton's position on the Iraq war for "reinforc[ing] enemy propaganda."

Recently-retired Army officer Bob Mackey said that the concern over Gates's staff had some merit, but might not be too difficult for the Obama transition team to address, should they decide to keep Gates in his post. "It all depends what level [of assistants] we're talking about," Mackey said, agreeing with the former defense official that Gates's "undersecretaries and assistant undersecretaries, you'd need to replace those people."

However, Mackey argued, the benefits of keeping Gates might be worth that trouble. "The argument, besides the fact that everybody likes Gates, is 'don't change boats in midstream.' He's actually listened to the commanders in field, instead of battling them back and forth."

Mackey also said Gates could be a serviceable interim secretary until retired four-star Gen. Anthony Zinni is available to serve in 2010 (since he only retired from the military in 2000). "Zinni's the guy you really want in there," Mackey said.

The former defense official, by contrast, had another person in mind for the department. "I would push [Sen. Chuck] Hagel. He's very well qualified," the official said. "And again, Obama's talked about being bipartisan. But the best thing would be the fact that he was an enlisted soldier in Vietnam. Think of the message would send to our young troops. Plus, he has management experience: he was number two in the VA and he started his own company [in the private sector]. It's not like this is a guy who's never managed anything."

As for another rumored DOD short-lister, former Navy Secretary Richard Danzig, the source said he could make a good choice as well. "But again, the question is in terms of that signal that you send. You and I know who Richard is, but what about people around the world? What you want to do with Cabinet selections is send a signal about what you want to do."

Comments

[snarkopolitan]

Gates isn't staying forever, but it seems reasonable to keep him for a few months at least. Obama's been P. E. for under a week, and every single name that's been mentioned for any post has been the subject of hysterical meltdowns from one faction or another. Thank God he has a cooler head than some of the people here.

As for the unnamed kvetch, since Rahm Emanuel is Obama's COS, staying anonymous might be the best idea you've had.

VirginiaMom may have something in thinking it's Wesley Clarke, except I think Gen. Clark would just come out and say it on record. But perhaps his bad experience with voicing his opinion this summer (being a POW isn't a qualification for being Pres) burnt him.

[mulegino]

Gates was a better secretary than Rumsfeld, and had the good sense to dowse water on the neo-conservative loons' plan for an attack on Iran. So, chalk up one for the "realists". Gates has served adequately, considering the "might have beens". He will probably leave of his own volition.
However, if real (not cosmetic) change is indeed the order of the day, Obama needs to look beyond a simple rerun of the Clinton administration's foreign policy. In retrospect, of course, Clinton's policy looks better than his successor's-which is not saying much. What the U.S. now needs is to make fruitful use of the window of opportunity that Obama's election has provided-almost unanimous international good will-and move ahead with an aggresive agenda for peace in the Middle East, a new dialogue with Iran, renewed negotiations with Russia, and an international humanitarian development and peace project for those parts of Africa terribly affected by bloodshed, poverty, and instability. Cotinuing to blast smaller and weaker nations into the stone age will quickly squander the world's goodwill, and probably bury this nation's reputation once and for all.

[CSE]

For those commenting, take the time to research Anthony Zinni. He indicated out loud and in no uncertain terms how and why Iraq was a bad idea. He has successful experience working with Middle Eastern allies.

He and Eric Shinseki stood tall when they had to and without deference to party.

Both men are also highly respected among troops - as opposed to the likes of Rumsfeld, Gates, et.al.

[elcojonu]

With so many GREAT Democrats to fill that Super-Important slot , I can't see keeping this guy; not even for a few months.

[dustdevil]

Gates was a key player in the Iran-Contra weapons for money exchange. He was alleged to be a bagman for the money paid to Iran to delay the release of US hostages (October Surprise) that allowed Reagon to defeat Carter. He is now knee-deep in Neocons on his staff. How can you possibly think it would be good to keep him on? Do you think he would want Obama's presidency to be successful? I think he would be in a powerful position to sabatage Obama if he is retained.

[nirek]

Yup, we need new blood in this case, and all new in the Def. Dept. !

[riverhouse]

Gates has to go. Obama will not be taken seriously as an agent of change, most especially in the vital arena of the Iraq war, if he does not remove all the GWB Iraq war stalwarts and install his own people.

[OliverTwist]

Gates has a history of involvement in right wing sponsored covert actions including assassinations and other criminal acts.

He should be replaced and his connections should be replaced also.

[Donald-Iowa]

There is, of course, no way to identify the source of this material, but I tend to agree that Gates comes with too much baggage. The DEFSEC does not act alone but needs a host of his own people who aren't going to sabatoge his effots.

Republican Sen Chuck Hagel of Nebraska is hands down the absolute best man for the job. Obama knows and has worked with him in the past, traveled with him to Iraq, and Hagel stood up against Bush when it was extremely unpopular to do so within the Republican Party. A cool thinker like Obama, Hagel has the intelligence, the experience, and the right stuff to give Obama the staight talk he needs.

Hagel who chose not to run for his Senate seat despite being a virtually shoe-in, explained in his recent book that he could no longer in good conscience serve in a "politics as usual" congress which ignored to well being of the people.

[SpringDoc]

A republican as Secretary of Defense? With Cohen in the Clinton Admin., Rummy/Gates in the Bush Admin and now another republican in the Obama DOD #1 spot? I guess it's fitting since the GOP is the party of wars in recent years. I tend to think Hagel would be acceptable with his experience of actually being in battle, but isn't there a Democrat that's qualified? I guess I'm curious, after 28 years of a republican being the Pentagon Chief, as to what it would be like to have a qualified Democrat hold that position.

[Marlyn]

"isn't there a Democrat that's qualified?"

There is Wes Clark, but it seems for some unknown reason, Clark and Obama don't have good "chemistry".

[lastcallmd]

All very interesting, but Gates doesn't want to stay. And this kind of manufactured controversy, with obvious intellectually inferior people (bloggers, anonymous "defense" officials, etc.) is anathema to a guys like Bob Gates. You all are like teachers in the old saying "Those that can, do (that would be Gates), those who can't, teach.

[VirginiaMom]

is this "anonymous former defense official" Gen. Wesley Clark?

[Marlyn]

No it wouldn't be Clark.

"obvious intellectually inferior people" ???

Wes Clark graduated top of his class at West Point.

[YesWeCanada]

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel.

[elcojonu]

No Repugs at Defense; we've got plenty of Dems that can do BETTER than any Repug.

[XME]

I can understand concerns of keeping those under Gates, but I can also understand the benefits of keeping Gates on. I'm sure that if Obaman wants to keep him and Gates wants to stay, they can work on replacing those under Gates with with less partisan people. And I'm sure Obama will make good decisions on whether or not it can work.

[Manx]

Compared to Rumsfeld, Gates looks like a saint but there is a political side to Gates. He has parroted Bush talking points many times. He should definitely be replaced.

[carriellbee]

So far, President Elect Obama has given us no reason to second guess his decisions. He is a brilliant man and he does what he does for a reason. We have elected a LEADER and we should let him do his job. Just my .02.