Trump's Joint Chiefs Shake Up Was Misguided

There is a steady drumbeat from some quarters about the deterioration of the quality of the Armed Forces of the United States. This is frequently attributed to perceived failings in the nation’s youth and claims that the military coddles the troops to maintain numbers and metrics of inclusivity. Nothing could be further from the truth. I am retired from active duty but continue to work closely with the military. I interact frequently with numerous junior officers and enlisted ones. As a cohort, they are every bit as strong, dedicated, and capable as my cohort during the Reagan buildup.

Gen. Brown has also held senior positions in three important geographic combatant commands (Europe, the Middle East, and the Indo-Pacific), including Deputy Commander of U.S. Central Command.  As a four-star general, he commanded U.S. Air Forces Pacific and served as Chief of Staff of the Air Force. Overall, he had five years of experience as a four-star general before assuming the chairmanship.

There are clear requirements and qualifications for the chairmanship spelled out in law.  Those requirements are in place to ensure the chairman has the appropriate depth and breadth of professional experience to adequately perform in this critical role. Caine does not meet a single one of the requirements, and the president must waive every requirement just to nominate him.  This is an indication that he lacks sufficient professional experience to be included in critical senior-level command.  

The closest Lt. Gen. Caine came to major command was serving as a two-star Deputy Commander for Operation Inherent Resolve, a limited corps-level operation in Iraq and Syria (with some minimal activity in Libya).  His one assignment as a three-star general was as the Associate Director for Military Affairs at the Central Intelligence Agency.  In that role, according to the Joint and National Support to Military Operations manual, he negotiated, coordinated, managed, and monitored all aspects of agency support for military operations. That is not the type of aggressive warfighting experience that would prepare one to overhaul the U.S. military to fight conventional major war.

It is understandable that the new administration needs to have confidence in the chairman and seeks a candidate with compatible goals. Luckily, the armed forces of the United States have a deep bench. U.S. General and Flag officers are the best in the world. If one is legitimately concerned about Gen. Brown’s ability, then there are many qualified candidates that meet the statutory requirements. Refocusing to prepare the U.S. military to fight and win conventional wars predominately against our major adversaries, China and Russia is legitimate.  The proper response is to look for a Marine or Army four-star general with geographic combatant command experience, preferably in the Indo-Pacific and European theaters.

Martin Perryman, a retired Army Colonel, is a defense analyst and 30-year military veteran.