All throughout the last couple of months, it's been hinted at and almost roared that Robert Gates would be leaving the DOD position at the end of the year. The question has been who would replace him?
My initial view was that Jack Reed, Sen from RI would replace him as DOD. Reed is one of the most able senators in the US Senate and is very close to President Obama and his thinking. He's also a very quiet guy and in terms of personality is a very close fit to Robert Gates. It's been hinted at pretty fervently that Reed would be a contender, culminating with this:
Chris Matthews Show: Ignatius says Reed Floated as DOD Chief Replacement
Of course, in focusing on Reed, I may have missed the most obvious choice right in front of me. Current Undersecretary of Defense of Policy, Michele Flournoy. Michele Flournoy Wikipedia Page
Ms. Flournoy holds an A.B. in social studies from Harvard University and an M.Litt. in international relations from Balliol College, Oxford University, where she was a Newton-Tatum scholar.
She is a supporter of the Democratic Party and campaign finance records show she contributed $500 to Senator Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign in June 2007.[citation needed] From 1989-1993 she was at Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government where she was a Research Fellow in its International Security Program. According to The New York Observer, in an article published 14 August 2007 ("Hot Policy Wonks for the Democrats"), Ms. Flournoy was then a 46-year-old former Department of Defense official in the Clinton administration. Her colleagues think the war in Iraq and the country’s plummeting reputation abroad change the equation, and that the next president may have to rein in his or her ambitions when it comes to the projection of American power. As Ms. Flournoy and CNAS co-founder Kurt Campbell wrote in an influential[citation needed] June 2007 policy paper called The Inheritance and the Way Forward, “First, U.S. strategy must be grounded in a common sense pragmatism rather than ideology. U.S. national security strategy must be based on a clear-eyed assessment of the challenges and opportunities of the new security environment as well as realistic objectives derived from our national interests.”
Ms. Flournoy's husband, W. Scott Gould, is a retired Captain after twenty-six years in the United States Navy Reserve. He was IBM vice president public sector strategy before becoming deputy veterans affairs secretary. They have three children, and reside in Bethesda, Maryland.[2][3]
Of course, thankfully, I wasn't the only one thinking about this, as Spencer Ackerman of Firedoglake published a great piece on how she is a potential successor to Gates and how closely aligned he and she are in relation to defense policy: Flournoy and Gates close connection on defense policies
Unsurprisingly, Flournoy’s agenda sounded much like Gates’. Echoing Gates’ recent speech at the Eisenhower library on reducing inefficiencies in defense spending, Flournoy criticized the growing costs of major weapons, aircraft and sea-vessel programs as “spending more and more to get less and less.” Warning that the turbulent global economy and ballooning federal deficit will force austerity upon the half-trillion dollar defense budget, Flournoy said that the “need to make hard choices will define this generation of national-security leaders.”
So what tasks will the Pentagon need to prioritize in a future characterized by reduced resources? First, increased training, equipping and joint operations with partner militaries — alongside the Department of State, which for years tussled with Defense for budgetary influence over foreign-military financing — so that the U.S. doesn’t take on security burdens alone. Limiting what Flournoy called “national-security adventurism” is itself a priority, she said, appearing to put unilateral military action within the category of imprudent action, “recognizing the limits of what’s possible given the world in which we live and the economic pressures under which we operate.”
All of which are in line with Gates’ priorities. But looking at the spectrum of threats the U.S. needs to prepare to confront, Flournoy went somewhat further than her boss in emphasizing the uncertainty of the future. “Intelligent adversaries will seek to confront our weaknesses, not our strengths,” she said. That means U.S. forces need to be preparing for “counterinsurgency and capacity-building operations in places like Iraq and Afghanistan, but also preparing for new threats to the primary means by which the military projects its power: military bases, our sea and air assets and then the networks in cyberspace and space.”
As for the history of the pick, she would be the first woman Secretary of Defense and that would send a huge signal to the world and perhaps the military in regards to women's rights. For her chances, many people seem to think it's very likely she could be chosen. Would be interesting....