Few Willing To Suggest Rumsfeld Successor
By Robert Burns
Associated Press
Boston.com
April 29, 2006
WASHINGTON --In all the recent talk about whether Donald H. Rumsfeld should quit running the Pentagon, little has been said about successors who might be better able to complete the U.S. military mission in Iraq.
When lawmakers and others are pressed, the names that come up most often include several current and former members of the Senate. Some say a member of Congress taking the defense secretary's job would improve an oft-cited Rumsfeld shortcoming -- impatience with the legislative branch and a reluctance to consult fully with its members.
A current or former lawmaker might also do a better job of communicating with the public -- a key factor in an election year in which party control of Congress will be up for grabs.
Even a supporter, Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, calls Rumsfeld "not overly communicative."
Names sometimes mentioned include Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner, R-Va., a former Navy secretary; Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn.; and former Sen. Sam Nunn, D-Ga.
With President Bush's strongly worded public support, it appears Rumsfeld will remain at the Pentagon, where after more than five years in the job he is one of the longest-serving defense secretaries in history.
When his critics attack Rumsfeld, they generally focus on blame for what has gone wrong in Iraq. A resilient insurgency has taken nearly 2,400 American lives since the 2003 invasion, far more than expected, and Iraqis have struggled mightily to create a stable government and provide their own security.
But the critics have said little about who might do better at this stage, which the Bush administration has labeled a year of transition from U.S. to Iraqi control, with the hope of beginning to withdraw some American forces.
"America deserves a secretary of defense who has the vision to implement a policy in Iraq that is worthy of the sacrifice of our men and women in uniform," said Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., one of Rumsfeld's harshest critics.
Jon Soltz, a veteran of the Iraq war and director of a political action committee for Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, said his group is neutral on the question of whether Rumsfeld should go or stay.
"What's more important than identifying a possible successor is that those of us who have been on the ground in Iraq, have served in the war on terror in Afghanistan, know that there needs to be a fresh start," Soltz said.
He rejected the administration's emphasis on "staying the course" in Iraq and said fresh ideas are urgently needed.
Michael O'Hanlon, a defense analyst at the Brookings Institution, said he has little doubt that Rumsfeld will remain at the Pentagon for some time, despite the unpopularity of the Iraq war and criticism of his management style. He called Lieberman one of the few Democrats who would accept the job and who could get along with Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.
There is recent precedent for having a member of the opposing political party at the head of the Pentagon. William Cohen, a former Republican senator from Maine, served as defense secretary throughout President Clinton's second term.
Clinton's first defense secretary was Democrat Les Aspin, a former chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, who stepped down after one year in the aftermath of U.S. intervention in Somalia.
O'Hanlon also mentioned Nunn, a former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, as another possibility. "But I'm not sure even he would take it under these circumstances," O'Hanlon said.
Of the several retired generals who have stepped forward to urge Rumsfeld's sacking, none has proposed a specific replacement. Asked about the qualities he'd like to see in a replacement, retired Maj. Gen. John Batiste, who has called Rumsfeld dismissive and arrogant, offered a rather broad prescription for success.
"My point is that we need a new senior leader in the Department of Defense to lead us through the rest of the war on terrorism, a leader whose track record in strategic decisions is not so dismal and who understands leadership," Batiste wrote in an e-mail exchange last week. "For sure, we must complete what we started in Iraq and our service men and women deserve the best leadership."
Many lawmakers from both parties were mum when pressed for possible replacements for Rumsfeld, perhaps seeing little point in advancing a candidate for a job that may not be vacant.
"I'm not going to speculate on who would be a good secretary of defense," Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and a longtime critic of Rumsfeld.
Asked about Lieberman's qualifications, she said, "Senator Lieberman would be wonderful in a whole variety of posts, but I hope he stays" in the Senate.
Associated Press
Boston.com
April 29, 2006
WASHINGTON --In all the recent talk about whether Donald H. Rumsfeld should quit running the Pentagon, little has been said about successors who might be better able to complete the U.S. military mission in Iraq.
When lawmakers and others are pressed, the names that come up most often include several current and former members of the Senate. Some say a member of Congress taking the defense secretary's job would improve an oft-cited Rumsfeld shortcoming -- impatience with the legislative branch and a reluctance to consult fully with its members.
A current or former lawmaker might also do a better job of communicating with the public -- a key factor in an election year in which party control of Congress will be up for grabs.
Even a supporter, Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, calls Rumsfeld "not overly communicative."
Names sometimes mentioned include Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner, R-Va., a former Navy secretary; Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn.; and former Sen. Sam Nunn, D-Ga.
With President Bush's strongly worded public support, it appears Rumsfeld will remain at the Pentagon, where after more than five years in the job he is one of the longest-serving defense secretaries in history.
When his critics attack Rumsfeld, they generally focus on blame for what has gone wrong in Iraq. A resilient insurgency has taken nearly 2,400 American lives since the 2003 invasion, far more than expected, and Iraqis have struggled mightily to create a stable government and provide their own security.
But the critics have said little about who might do better at this stage, which the Bush administration has labeled a year of transition from U.S. to Iraqi control, with the hope of beginning to withdraw some American forces.
"America deserves a secretary of defense who has the vision to implement a policy in Iraq that is worthy of the sacrifice of our men and women in uniform," said Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., one of Rumsfeld's harshest critics.
Jon Soltz, a veteran of the Iraq war and director of a political action committee for Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, said his group is neutral on the question of whether Rumsfeld should go or stay.
"What's more important than identifying a possible successor is that those of us who have been on the ground in Iraq, have served in the war on terror in Afghanistan, know that there needs to be a fresh start," Soltz said.
He rejected the administration's emphasis on "staying the course" in Iraq and said fresh ideas are urgently needed.
Michael O'Hanlon, a defense analyst at the Brookings Institution, said he has little doubt that Rumsfeld will remain at the Pentagon for some time, despite the unpopularity of the Iraq war and criticism of his management style. He called Lieberman one of the few Democrats who would accept the job and who could get along with Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.
There is recent precedent for having a member of the opposing political party at the head of the Pentagon. William Cohen, a former Republican senator from Maine, served as defense secretary throughout President Clinton's second term.
Clinton's first defense secretary was Democrat Les Aspin, a former chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, who stepped down after one year in the aftermath of U.S. intervention in Somalia.
O'Hanlon also mentioned Nunn, a former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, as another possibility. "But I'm not sure even he would take it under these circumstances," O'Hanlon said.
Of the several retired generals who have stepped forward to urge Rumsfeld's sacking, none has proposed a specific replacement. Asked about the qualities he'd like to see in a replacement, retired Maj. Gen. John Batiste, who has called Rumsfeld dismissive and arrogant, offered a rather broad prescription for success.
"My point is that we need a new senior leader in the Department of Defense to lead us through the rest of the war on terrorism, a leader whose track record in strategic decisions is not so dismal and who understands leadership," Batiste wrote in an e-mail exchange last week. "For sure, we must complete what we started in Iraq and our service men and women deserve the best leadership."
Many lawmakers from both parties were mum when pressed for possible replacements for Rumsfeld, perhaps seeing little point in advancing a candidate for a job that may not be vacant.
"I'm not going to speculate on who would be a good secretary of defense," Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and a longtime critic of Rumsfeld.
Asked about Lieberman's qualifications, she said, "Senator Lieberman would be wonderful in a whole variety of posts, but I hope he stays" in the Senate.
posted by Hanan Elbadry at 11:35 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home