Based Department

The Potential of Hegseth as SECDEF

If Pete Hegseth ends up taking over for Lloyd Austin early next year, I’m optimistic about what he might accomplish for a DOD struggling amidst a widespread and warranted loss of trust in the institution. I won’t address any of the arguments being made across mainstream outlets that this is a terrible/dangerous/unprecedented nomination. They’re all made in bad faith as

Chris Bray

explains so clearly. Instead, I’ll focus on what I think he can do for the organization given three key recognitions he made in his recent discussion with Shawn Ryan¹:

1. The military COVID vaccine mandate was a mistake that functionally purged military members of conscience from the ranks.

2. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) training and programs are counterproductive and need to go along with leaders who promoted them.

3. The Global War On Terror (GWOT) didn’t translate to improved security for the American people, especially the invasion of Iraq.

Military COVAX Mandate

The military COVID vaccine mandate was dangerous and ineffective to mandate on young and healthy service members.² Continued insistence that it enhanced readiness in spite of overwhelming evidence that this is not the case (not to mention that the way it was implemented was clearly illegal) has been disastrous on several fronts. It has severely injured untold thousands, removed thousands of others of wisdom and conscience who refused, and destroyed the credibility of leadership who went along with it. Having a senior leader who is capable of recognizing this is an essential step in healing the damage that has been done.

DEI

Senior leaders routinely insist that DEI enhances readiness. After years of operational DEI programs and training along with command emphasis at every level, there is still no evidence for these claims. In fact, the evidence that we do have suggests the opposite.³ DEI is divisive and incompatible with the Equal Opportunity (EO) program that is required to comply with the Civil Rights Act. More importantly, considering anything aside from capability and performance in the selection, training, and employment of personnel is an abdication of our oaths to the Constitution. We owe the American people the most capable military we can deliver given moral, ethical, and legal constraints. Hegseth’s comments about women in combat arms reflect that he understands and embraces this principle. Policy that does not align with the purpose of the organization can’t be tolerated if we’re going to get out of the mess we’re in. Hegseth’s willingness to tackle controversial policy that isn’t appropriately aligned is promising.

Recognizing Failure Enables Success

I’ve long believed that the Global War on Terror (GWOT) was a mistake. I joined up anyway figuring that the military serves a legitimate Constitutional purpose and that there would come a time when alignment with that purpose is restored. In order for that to happen, however, we need leaders who can recognize failure for what it is. We were led into conflict with Iraq and Saddam Hussein’s regime under false pretenses. The transition from hunting for Osama bin Laden to nation building in Afghanistan was equally suspect. With the clarity of hindsight, it should be obvious that these military ventures should have been avoided.⁴ That the entire Afghanistan debacle culminated with 13 dead service members and arming the Taliban with billions in material should have made this impossible to ignore, but that is what our senior leaders have done. There has been no open acknowledgement of these failures, and so astute observers are left to assume all of our training and current efforts are destined to be wasted repeating these same mistakes. Hegseth’s ability to recognize failure makes future success possible. Where success is possible, motivation can follow.

Warriors and Bureaucrats

There is a massive spiritual divide between warriors and bureaucrats. The difference in a warfighting organization like DOD comes down to priority. Is it the mission, or the organization? Is it delivering a ready and lethal military capability oriented towards advancing the core interests of the American people, or maintaining comfortable sinecures for you and your friends? For the DOD to perform to the fullest extent of its capability, it needs to be lead by a warrior. I won’t try to argue that Hegseth is a warrior, I’ll just say that my intuition tells me he is. The only way we’ll restore alignment between the institution of the DOD and its raison d'être is with a warrior at the helm who believes and understands it. Given Hegseth’s words it is clear that he understands. Whether or not he truly believes, only God knows. That said, I can’t help but see his “We The People” tattoo as a good sign.

1. Please note, these are my takeaways given my priors. You might have different takeaways if you watch the interview, which I recommend as it covers a lot of interesting stuff about the VA and education system.

2. This study is on boosters in a similar population, but the same arguments apply: https://jme.bmj.com/content/50/2/126 (Also, boosters were recommended and widely coerced on service members pertaining to deployment/redeployment and leave authorizations).

3. DEI programs are typically supported with references to McKinsey’s influential and self-serving studies oriented towards corporate America. All of these studies failed to replicate when evaluated by capable and unbiased researchers. This essentially means that there is no association between diversity and performance. As for programs targeting increased diversity, the best military data demonstrating that these programs adversely impact performance come from West Point and the USMC study on gender integration.

4. You can argue that intervention in Iraq was necessary to maintain the petrodollar, but it isn’t at all clear that Saddam Hussein would have threatened this system absent the US foreign policy establishment signaling a desire for regime change in Iraq.