"Not My Job"

To his credit, General James Mattis does not emphasize his former status as a member of the military, yet in an interview with PBS' Judy Woodruff on September 2 he remarked

I believe that when someone departs an Administration over policy disagreements, you have what the French call "a duty of reserve, a "devoir de reserve." I don't want to, on the outside, be making it more difficult for our Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, and President, who have to deal with this very complex world. There will be a time when it's right for me to come out on strategy and policy disagreements (but not at this time).

Nine days later, the former Defense Secretary, this time at an appearance at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, said much the same thing. He commented

But there is a 700-year tradition in America about military officers not passing political judgments on our political masters. And that's the way we want it. We don't want the military mastering decisions in this country.

That would be valid if Mr. Mattis were still General Mattis, active military. However, he is now retired from the military and thus, like almost all of the rest of us, has no Commander-in-Chief. President Trump is merely President Trump, not Commander-in-Chief, to everyone not currently in the armed services. The (ex-) General continued

But there's also the sense when you look at that tradition that we, I believe when you leave a government, leave an Administration and you leave it over a matter of policy- the President was straightforward with me, I was straightforward with him. I put it out on a letter, that's all I have to say about it.

I had certain policy disagreements and now that I walked  out, the President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, they are dealing with some very, very difficult issues. They don't need someone who was in there before, coming outside, no longer responsible and critiquing what's going on.

The American people do need that person now. It is precisely now that he has the freedom, the moral duty, and the ability to critique what is "going on." Mattis explains

You have right now over a million troops and tens of thousands of them are deployed overseas. Now what would they be thinking if the former Secretary of Defense was coming out making political assessments right now and particularly at a time when the political discussions are so corrosive?

They might be thinking "that's what we believe but while on active duty we cannot say what we want to about the President," who actually is their Commander-in-Chief and thus owed strict loyalty. Mattis, by contrast, owes his loyalty to law and to country, not to any political figure. He notes 

So I believe I've led a responsible life. I've done the best I can and I was in the Marine Corps for 40-odd years, I was in the US Marine Corps. I belonged to you, answerable to you, and I think right now, the French call it devoir de reserve. Doesn't that sound impressive that I would say in French? But it's a duty of quiet when you leave to allow those who carry this very heavy responsibility of protecting what I call America, this experiment that we try to keep alive.

I can not speak or understand French and therefore have a hard time confirming this. Nevertheless, this online conversation, for what it's worth, suggests that the "devoir de reserve" pertains to the responsibility of maintaining confidentiality while employed by the federal government. That no longer applies to Mattis.

Moreover, this "experiment that we try to keep alive" is probably the notion that the USA is not a people- French, British, Chinese, Sengalese, or whatever- but an idea. That idea- most often symbolized by the Statue of Liberty- is perhaps best encapsulated in e pluribus unum- "from many, one."  President Trump's hostile and bigoted remarks aside, consider policy. A quick glance at the cages on the border, an essential part of dividing members of one family from another in order to deter people from pursuing that idea, reveals that Donald Trump is hostile toward "this experiment that we try to keep alive."

Additionally, the suspicion that determination of human worthiness is based on skin color or ethnicity is hardly consoling. Then Mattis concluded this segment with

I don't want to do anything right now that our adversaries can interpret as a weakening the fabric of those who are out there right now, the diplomats, the intelligence agents, the military guys and gals who are out there right now defending the country. So I'm just going to stay quiet.

That's touching, especially the part about "intelligence agents" because the President

has privately said that foreign spies can damage relations with their host countries and undermine his personal relationships with their leaders, the sources said. The President "believes we shouldn't be doing that to each other," one former Trump administration official told CNN.

In addition to his fear such foreign intelligence sources will damage his relationship with foreign leaders, Trump has expressed doubts about the credibility of the information they provide. Another former senior intelligence official told CNN that Trump "believes they're people who are selling out their country."

Even in public, Trump has looked down on these foreign assets, as they are known in the intelligence community.

Of course, if James Mattis really wanted to stay quiet, he could have avoided writing a book, or at least going on an interview tour to hawk it. Still,  that's selling Mattis short. He did answer what he believed to be a call to duty, spending over 40 years in the military, so he deserves to be criticized for something more substantive than simply wanting to make money, a common human instinct.

Mere hours before Mattis took the stage in Chicago, Donald Trump revealed that one of the two most brutal dictators in the world held veto power over the President's appointment of a national security advisor: "And I don’t blame Kim Jong Un for what he said after that. And he wanted nothing to do with John Bolton." James Mattis should recognize dereliction of duty as a former general choosing to give strategic air cover to a President whose loyalty lies elsewhere than with the security of the nation.

Share |

The Time Has Come

On Thursday's "Dateline White House," Nicole Wallace, White House communications Director for George W. Bush, led a discussion about an upcoming book by James Mattis. Mattis tendered to President Trump his resignation as Secretary of Defense late last year and part of the excerpt-which bears upon the role(s) of Wallace's former boss and his successor- shown by Wallace read

Nations with allies thrive, and those without them wither. Alone, America cannot protect our people and our economy. At this time, we can see storm clouds gathering. A polemicist's role is not sufficient for a leader.

Well-meaning, Wallace remarked

It is abundantly clear, if you take that statement from Mattis at the beginning with Mattis' letter- he resigned in a policy dispute with Donald Trump over the precipitous withdrawal of troops from Syria.... With that excerpt from the book, you have to me perhaps the most subtle but the most stinging rebuke of Donald Trump.

Yes and no, respectively. The American people, aside from a portion of individuals which voted against Donald Trump in 2016, do not do subtle. After Eugene Robinson (who mailed it in years ago) responded "exactly" and went on to say whatever he said, it was left to MattMiller to explain

I hate to be a contrarian. I have a great deal of respect for General Mattis; he's a great patriot. That essay left me thoroughly unimpressed, probably for the word you used- it was too subtle.

There are a lot of reasons that Donald Trump is President today. But one of the reasons is there are too many people that decided "it's not my fight to take him on: and I think Jim Mattis has decided it's not his fight to take him on.

Everyone in this country who knows how unfit Donald Trump is for this office has the responsibility to say something about it and do something about it but that responsibility is higher for those who served in that Administration and really know- really saw first-hand just how unfit he is for that office And I don't think this is the time for Jim Mattis to be subtle. I think this is time for him to tell the American public this man is not fit to be President and I know he probably thinks it inappropriate for him as a former military leader, and I know he's been marshaling his credibility, and his reputation, his integrity his entire life and this is the time to use it.

Miller was talking about James Mattis- but he might as well have been referring to someone else additionally. Wallace responded

Someone asks me once a week the same question about George W Bush- where's George Bush and why doesn't he same something? And I'm sure they ask Valerie Jarrett about Obama, too. And I mean, I take your point about people who have seen him up close- but you could say the same thing about HR McMaster, Dina Powell, Rex Tillerson ....

Bush is a former President and thus bears some responsibility. But it has been nine years since he left office, and President Trump's every move is not predicated on "what did President Bush do and how can I undo it?"

The Trump Administration has rolled back regulations on methane-emission rules. Predictably and justifiably, environmentalists and climate activists have denounced the move.  However, reaction from the fossil fuel industry has not been universally positive because it is a boon to oil and gas interests at the expense of natural gas. It is

the latest in a series of aggressive moves by the administration to roll back regulations imposed by the administration of former President Obama.

The EPA in June finalized plans for replacing Obama-era regulations on emissions from coal-fired power plants. Administrator Andrew Wheeler also signed the Affordable Clean Energy Rule, which gives individual states wide discretion to decide whether to require limited efficiency upgrades at individual coal-fired power plants.

Why, of course: Obama did it, and so it must be undone.  It's not enough for Barack Obama that candidate Trump and his surrogates routinely denounced the 44th President during the presidential campaign and that Trump's Administration, in its ideological extremism and commitment to corruption stands in stark contrast to "no-drama Obama."

President Trump seeks to implement policies through regulation and deregulation, Executive Orders and legislation as a means to rebuke Barack Obama. He is authorized to do, constrained only by constitution and law, and will do so, unconstrained. 

In an interview for the October issue of The Atlantic, James Mattis stated "There is a period in which I owe my silence. It’s not eternal. It’s not going to be forever." As Matt Miller told the MSNBC audience, "this is the time" for Mattis. But it's time also for someone else who has been  marshaling his credibility, reputation, and integrity, and it's a former President who is not short, a Texan, and bearing the name "Bush."

Share |