What Will Ash Carter Accomplish?

There is widespread consensus that Ash Carter is a good choice to replace Chuck Hagel. Carter has served as a DOD worker bee, as assistant secretary, undersecretary, and deputy secretary. He has worked on the policy side of the Pentagon, the acquisition side, and the management side. He knows the department inside out.

There is also a consensus that Carter, a policy expert, will have his difficulties with a White House that is determined to manage military policy, regardless of the consequences. He will face a National Security Council staff seven times larger than the one Bob Gates and Brent Scowcroft led, yet one both too small and too inexperienced to “manage” the DOD with any semblance of effectiveness. In other words, Carter will have to deal with an annoying, micromanaging White House that drove his three immediate predecessors to distraction.

Can Carter make a difference as secretary of defense? The answer clearly is “yes,” if he picks his battles carefully. To begin with, he can accelerate the pace of acquisition reform that he initiated as under secretary of defense for acquisition. His “Better Buying Power” initiative was a major step toward righting what all agree is a broken acquisition system. His close associate Frank Kendall, who succeeded Carter as undersecretary of defense for acquisition after serving as his principal deputy, has maintained the momentum of acquisition reform, with the backing of Deputy Secretary Bob Work.

But nothing moves the department like the secretary himself. Carter can not only improve acquisition policy, but — far more critically — fundamentally restructure its implementation. To the extent he does so, he will have the full support of both Republicans and Democrats on the Hill: incoming House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry (R-Texas) and ranking member Adam Smith (D-Wash.), along with their counterparts in the Senate John McCain and Jack Reed, all are strong advocates of reform.

Carter could also implement whatever recommendations are put to him by the Military Compensation and Retirement Modernization Commission when it issues its report on Feb. 15 (full disclosure: I am a Commissioner). The commission has made it clear that its primary aim is to modernize a personnel compensation system that does not fully reflect the current force’s profile: a highly educated group of men and women, many with families, who often are tempted to leave the service because their skills are highly marketable in the civilian sector. Implementing reforms will require attention from the very top of the Pentagon pyramid.

Carter can also do much to mend the tattered relations that Washington has with many of its closest allies. His policy acumen, his willingness to travel, and his personal relations with the leading defense officials of many allies and friendly states — a result of his previous Pentagon posts — will stand him in good stead in this regard. Many of our close allies feel they have been neglected, or worse, by the White House. Carter can limit the damage, in the same manner that Hagel did with respect to Israel and Egypt.

Finally, Carter will have to weigh in on sequestration, which, with the expiration of the Ryan-Murray agreement for fiscal year 2016, will likely cause severe damage to America’s military posture. It is also likely to impact the nature of the American military presence in Afghanistan and, of course, our strategy in Iraq and Syria. Carter should expect to be frustrated in each of these matters: the White House is indifferent to sequestration, especially with regard to defense, and will continue to maintain its close control over military policy.

Still, Carter’s voice will be one to be reckoned with. He will speak with knowledge, authority, and experience. The White House will ignore him at its peril.​

Chip Somodevilla / Getty