DoD And The Next President

Truman had MacArthur. Kennedy stumbled into the Bay of Pigs. George W. Bush returned the force of nature that is Donald Rumsfeld to the Pentagon.

Whoever becomes the next commander in chief will wade into the sometimes uneasy world where admirals and generals cross paths, and sometimes swords, with presidents.

"Whenever you get new civilian leadership, you want to know: What's going to be their attitude?" said retired Navy Adm. Bobby Inman. "You want to see where they're coming from."

Although Republican Sen. John McCain comes with the broadest military experience -- both in and out of uniform -- some analysts say he might pose the greatest threat to the status quo. Democratic Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, less schooled about tanks and bombers, might be susceptible to intimidation or manipulation by the brass.

Whatever the political footing, the next president will inherit the Iraq war, a wildly expensive and mostly unpopular conflict. American forces will certainly still be fighting in Afghanistan, where many in uniform think they would now be stronger had it not been for the overwhelming need for manpower and materiel in Iraq.

And the Army, by its own description, has been stretched near its breaking point by heavy deployments and recruiting struggles.

President McCain would be a war hero whose expertise in military matters would mean instant credibility. His reputation as a maverick and decorated veteran may give him an edge on the military establishment unseen since President Dwight Eisenhower, who as an Army general in World War II led the Normandy invasion.

This President Clinton would enter the Oval Office without the baggage that handcuffed her husband -- no dubious draft record or don't-ask-don't-tell policy for gays in uniform. Instead, she has gained credibility on the Senate Armed Services Committee as an earnest and curious listener to the Pentagon.

President Obama would offer the biggest mystery. Born too late to do anything but register for a draft that never materialized, his lack of military service would seem no more a factor than Hillary Clinton's. His early opposition to the Iraq war could play two ways -- irritating officers fearful that a withdrawal would make sacrifices there in vain, or delighting commanders worried this war will break the Army.

"When I hear from military audiences that they want somebody with a military history, I tell them to be careful what they wish for," said James Currie, a professor of national security studies at the Industrial College of the Armed Forces at the National Defense University. "Veterans in the Senate like Strom Thurmond and Barry Goldwater never saw a military spending program they didn't like. It's not the same way with veterans of Vietnam. They're very skeptical of what they see coming out of the Pentagon."

McCain, a Vietnam prisoner of war, has made a reputation on Capitol Hill as a tough sell. Most recently he has spoken strongly against the Air Force's plan to lease a new squadron of tanker planes.

And in the way perhaps only a fiercely anti-communist Richard Nixon was in position to reach out to mainland China in the 1970s, McCain would have political leverage to challenge weapons systems or impose other military reforms.

"I'm not at all sure McCain would be inclined to consult with the military as opposed to being very directive and saying, 'Come into my office, and I'll tell you what we're going to do,' " said Andrew Bacevich, history professor at Boston University. "They might have a hard time taking him on."

Bacevich and other analysts say that Democrats start out at a disadvantage in dealing with the brass because of perceptions that their party is less eager, for instance, to spend money on defense.

"It's a canard," he said. "I do not like the woman, but there's no way Senator Clinton has been hostile to the military."

Richard Myers rose to chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in fall 2001 and served in high-ranking positions during the Clinton years. He said the military was too bound by rank to do anything but respect the president.

"Whoever the commander in chief is, all the salutes are going to go to him or her," he said.

But Myers conceded that President Bill Clinton ruffled feathers with some in the Pentagon and that early in President Bush's term there were references to "Clinton generals" as those who were unwilling to use force. But he said the relationship with Bill Clinton matured, culminating in the bombing campaign in Serbia to protect Kosovo in 1999.

"We had aircraft shot down and all that sort of thing," the retired general said. "There was even talk of committing ground troops. The military advice was not to do that, and the president didn't."

Would Bill Clinton have been willing to send in ground troops to Kosovo? Or might have he acted years earlier in Bosnia? Or would he have had the political leverage to stop genocide in Rwanda if not for the dodgy draft record?

In that way, World War I veteran Harry Truman was able to strip then-Gen. Douglas MacArthur of his command. John Kennedy, a hero of battle in the Pacific, suffered the failed invasion of Cuba but still had a strong enough relationship with generals for the Cold War brinksmanship that stopped the basing of Russian missiles on Fidel Castro's turf.

Rumsfeld returned as defense secretary with George W. Bush's administration and pushed the concept of defense transformation -- meaning greater reliance on swiftness and technology and less on heavy manpower. When the Iraq occupation turned out bloodier than anticipated, his uncompromising ways angered many senior commanders.

In fact, many analysts said the next president's selection of a defense secretary will matter more than their own understanding of the military.

"McCain has the advantage that he stood up to Rumsfeld when so many of the senior commanders kowtowed to Rumsfeld," said Charles Stevens, author of SecDef: The Nearly Impossible Job of Secretary of Defense.

"The next secretary of defense is going to have enormous pressures," he said. "They'll have to find a way to put a lid on the Pentagon's spending."

Hillary Clinton and Obama have, as one analyst put it, "brassed up" their campaigns with advisers drawn from the ranks of retired generals and admirals. Richard Danzig, a former Navy secretary, has signed on with Obama and is seen as a likely candidate for defense secretary. Hillary Clinton and McCain, with more experience in Washington and with seats on the Senate Armed Services Committee, have done less to tip their hands.

"It's hard to guess how any of these guys play in the Pentagon," said Michael Desch, a professor of national security at Texas A&M University. "Take Obama: He might seem a little left for these guys. But the Iraq war has reshuffled the deck. A lot of people might feel they don't agree with him a lot, but he's the only one positioning to get us out."

Author: Scott Canon, Kansas City Star