It is tempting to view Barack Obama’s announcements of new cabinet appointments as a kind of cast list for the next four years of political drama in our lives. Fun though it may be to hyper-analyze the social tensions between the president-elect and his new secretary of state, that theme may have been exhausted at some point in the last, oh, 20-odd months of continuous coverage. So instead let’s take a look at another hugely important casting decision: Marine Corps Gen. James L. Jones is a month and a half away from replacing Stephen Hadley as national security advisor.
Several things about this selection are significant, not the least of which is in his title. The last military leader to assume the role of national security advisor was Brent Scowcroft under George H.W. Bush. Since Clinton’s inauguration, the post has been filled by lawyers, academics and lobbyists. Jones, by contrast, has hands-on experience in the literal, physical implementation of national security and foreign policy, as a company commander in Vietnam, as commandant of the Marine Corps and in a more diplomatic role as the head of NATO forces. He might yet be able to repair some of the damage done by the Bush administration’s fairly consistent inability to work competently with the U.S. military.
Jones voiced an early skepticism about the advisability of war with Iraq, arguing that the Bush administration had “better have a Plan B in [its] hip pocket.” He regarded the invasion as a distraction from Afghanistan, the real “epicenter of terrorism.” He has a real working knowledge of operations on the ground in Afghanistan, and he is determined not to strategically, tactically or politically confuse them with operations in Iraq. Therefore, he might be able to help address the problems of a war so messy and so thoroughly neglected that it has ceased even to be the elephant in the room.
Equally important, Jones is well-positioned to do some of this famous “reaching across the aisle” we keep hearing about — namely in the sense that it’s hard to place him on either side of a strict political dichotomy. He has a long history of working with John McCain and regards him as a personal friend. There had also — briefly — been rumors of an Obama-Jones Democratic ticket, and as recently as October Obama claimed to receive a lot of foreign policy advice from Jones. After an exhausting and divisive campaign, we might benefit from the influence of a leader whose party affiliation is unrecognizable.
Arguably even more crucially, Jones understands and emphasizes the link between energy policy and national security. He included his pitch on a diverse energy portfolio when briefing Obama and conditions in Afghanistan. Moreover, he is president of the Chamber of Commerce Institute for 21st Century Energy, which has recently compiled a “Transition Plan for Securing America’s Energy Future.” To its credit, the plan calls for “aggressively” promoting energy efficiency, modernizing infrastructure, investing in alternative energy, developing public transportation, investing in science education at all levels and reducing a handful of “burdensome” regulations that facilitate frivolous lawsuits.
However, it also calls for offshore oil drilling, expansion of domestic natural gas exploration and production, and an investment in the delightful misnomer that is “clean coal” technology, all of which stand in awkward juxtaposition to the report’s professed commitment to investing in climate science and global leadership on the subject of climate change. These mixed recommendations notwithstanding, the Institute for 21st Century Energy presents an energy plan far superior to our present course of action. Jones’ influence might help approach the twin goals of energy independence and climate change mediation.
That was a lot of “might” and “maybe” just now, as is the case with most posts and most issues as we await the changing of the guard. Jones now has a strong voice of maybe-change and possibly-hope in this incredibly uncertain time.
Courtney Ehlers ([email protected]) is a sophomore majoring in history and environmental studies.