Gates at the helm of Defense

I often wondered if the only reason Bush and Cheney didn't bomb the bejeebers out of Iran was because somehow DefSec Gates talked them out of it. Based on that conjecture, I thought keeping him on was a rather canny move by Obama. As much as I would have preferred a clean sweep, it struck me there was something to be said for the logic of continuity and I hoped I was right in thinking he wasn't a knee jerk warmonger. Steve Clemmons posts an interesting piece today that suggests my optimism wasn't unfounded.

From what we know at this moment, Robert Gates deserves credit on a number of fronts. These include de-colonizing the intelligence bureaucracy that Donald Rumsfeld aggrandized around the Department of Defense that then undermined much of the intelligence reform that was part of establishing a new Directorate of National Intelligence.

Gates is also pushing back against Netanyahu's aggressive rhetoric about Iran and isn't cheerleading for troop escalation in Afghanistan. He appears to be inclined more towards diplomatic solutions than not. Steve sums it well here:

Gates is setting an example in how to manage the complex challenges facing the Obama team that others would be wise to follow. He seems focused on strategy and generating the outcomes America needs -- and seems reluctant to support reckless deployments of power abroad, which was more characteristic of the last President he served, and thinks that the real bridge-building and strategic shifts America needs will combine behind the scenes type work like he is doing followed by the photo-ops that he leaves to his administration comrades.

Nothing would really please me short of withdrawing all our combat troops from both active theaters. As I've often stated I never thought there was a viable military solution to terrorism but given the realities, we could have done much worse than Gates in this slot.

[More posts daily at The Detroit News]