The choice of Mr. Hegseth has shocked many in Washington, and that by itself might be a recommendation. He could hardly do worse than the so-called adults in the room of recent years. The armed services can’t make their recruiting quotas, America’s military industrial base has been exposed as inadequate with little protest from Pentagon leaders, and no one in the civilian or military ranks was held accountable for the Afghanistan debacle.
The 44-year-old Mr. Hegseth has combat experience in Afghanistan and Iraq and has maintained his military ties as an officer in the National Guard. He has been an advocate for veterans, both on TV and as a member of veterans groups. He’s smart and telegenic.
***
Yet he’s never run a big institution, much less one of the largest and most hidebound on the planet. He has no experience in government outside the military, and no small risk is that the bureaucracy will eat him alive.
Another concern is why Mr. Trump seems to have chosen Mr. Hegseth. The nominee’s focus in recent years has been attacking the Pentagon for its woke policies on transgender and racial equity. He has made a cause of opposing women in combat, though women have shown they can perform well in many roles. Mr Trump seems to want Mr. Hegseth to wage a culture war against the military brass.
The Biden-era woke excesses need to be cleaned up, not least for recruiting from military families who have long prized the service for its devotion to excellence. Peacetime militaries tend to lapse into promotion based on administrative skill rather than war-fighting capability. But in the context of America’s security challenges, wokeness is a small concern.
The military isn’t Mr. Trump’s enemy, and a purge mentality will court political trouble and demoralise the ranks. The draft executive order, leaked to the press, about forming a group of former officers to rule on the fitness of current generals would be a mistake that smacks of politicising the officer corps.
Firing Chairman of the Joint Chiefs CQ Brown would also be counter-productive. Mr Trump is still furious about former Chairman Mark Milley’s criticisms, and not without cause, but Mr. Trump promoted Gen. Milley. The better path is to look for officers who understand the current global dangers and have good ideas for what to do about it. Adm. Sam Paparo of the U.S. Indo-Pacific command is one.
The Senate will also want to know what Mr. Hegseth really thinks about today’s main security issues. He was a longtime hawk and supported the use of force abroad. But in recent years he has blown with the MAGA wind against US commitments, notably in Ukraine. The risk is that he will tell Mr. Trump what he wants to hear rather than advising him to the contrary to avoid mistakes.
Successful Defense secretaries have driven a few high priorities, and Mr. Hegseth’s are unknown. Will he press to build three nuclear attack submarines a year to fulfill the Aukus commitment and deter China? What about fast-tracking the production of long-range antiship and other missiles? There are many such urgent priorities, as Michael Gallagher explains nearby. Getting those done would tax even the most seasoned Defense chief.
All of this could make Mr. Hegseth’s confirmation a close call, since Democrats are likely to line up against him. Senate Republicans like Dan Sullivan, Joni Ernst and Roger Wicker are serious about restoring US military capabilities and deterrence. They have an obligation to scrutinise Mr. Hegseth to see if he is the right man to lead the military reform and build-up that America needs.
On Wednesday Mr. Trump named former Democratic Rep. Tulsi Gabbard as director of national intelligence, the White House post that coordinates findings from the 18 U.S. intelligence agencies. Ms. Gabbard is in the Tucker Carlson isolationist wing of the MAGA coalition, which will heighten concern on Capitol Hill that the right person serve at Defence.
***
Mr Trump’s other selections are likely to get more welcome Senate treatment. Marco Rubio, the Florida Senator picked as Secretary of State, has long experience on foreign affairs and believes in U.S. global leadership. He has focused on the China threat and would likely push to restore U.S. sanctions on Venezuela and do more to combat Cuba’s malign influence in the Western hemisphere.
Managing Administration security debates will be Rep. Mike Waltz, the new national-security adviser. He’s another veteran with hawkish views and led a group of 70 Republicans and 70 Democrats in crafting a framework to counter Iranian aggression. Like Mr. Rubio, he has tempered support for Ukraine of late. But he wrote this month that “If [Vladimir Putin] refuses to talk, Washington can, as Mr. Trump argued, provide more weapons to Ukraine with fewer restrictions on their use.”
Their voices will be needed to counter some of the isolationists surrounding Donald Trump Jr. who carry sway in the White House. Mr Trump’s first term was a security success because he followed a policy of peace through strength. But the world is more dangerous now, and the mix of his nominees suggests his second term is likely to be a wilder ride.
More Coverage
Beyond ‘run, hide, fight’: what to do in an active-shooter situation
More workplaces are having to prepare for the rare, nightmare scenario. How should you respond?
How did a lone gunman breach one of New York’s most secure skyscrapers?
The shooting at Midtown Manhattan tower exposes how eliminating threats can be nearly impossible, even in fortified workplaces.
Donald Trump has quickly filled the top ranks of his national security team, and for the most part they’re politicians with solid experience and understanding of today’s security threats. The main wildcard is Pete Hegseth, the Fox News personality and decorated Army veteran, who will get close Senate scrutiny as the nominee to be Secretary of Defence.