Senator Mark Kelly Is in the Wrong Job
In a recent clash between Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona, tensions have flared over military conduct and political accountability. Kelly, a decorated combat veteran and former astronaut, was one of six Democratic legislators who released a video emphasizing that military personnel are obligated to disobey illegal orders. Hegseth, taking offense to this assertion, has suggested that Kelly should be recalled to active duty in the Navy and court-martialed for allegedly inciting disobedience among troops against the commander in chief. This controversy highlights not only a disagreement over military ethics but also raises questions about Hegseth’s qualifications as Secretary of Defense.
Mark Kelly’s military credentials are impressive; he flew 39 combat missions during Operation Desert Storm and holds numerous awards for valor. His post-military career has also been noteworthy, transitioning to an astronaut role and later entering politics to advocate for gun control following the tragic shooting of his wife, former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords. In contrast, Hegseth’s tenure as Secretary of Defense has been marred by a series of missteps and controversial remarks, leading many to question his competency. Critics argue that Hegseth’s approach—characterized by petty social media jabs and a lack of substantive military strategy—contrasts sharply with the professionalism shown by past secretaries of defense, who were often seasoned leaders with a track record of public service and national security expertise.
The broader implications of this conflict are significant, particularly as the U.S. faces global security challenges. Hegseth’s call for Kelly’s court-martial appears to be less about military discipline and more about silencing dissenting voices within the military community. Furthermore, as tensions rise internationally, especially with ongoing conflicts in Europe, the need for a competent and stable Secretary of Defense becomes paramount. Critics argue that Hegseth’s lack of experience and questionable judgment could lead to dire consequences in times of crisis, emphasizing the urgent need for leadership that prioritizes national security and the welfare of service members. As the political landscape evolves, the discussion surrounding Hegseth’s role and Kelly’s qualifications continues to spark debate about the future of military leadership in the United States.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7LHaeCSWGM
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth apparently thinks that Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona is in the wrong job. Kelly was one of six Democratic legislators who released a
video
reminding the officers and enlisted people of the U.S. military that they are bound by their oaths to disobey illegal orders. Now
Hegseth
wants to recall Kelly, a decorated combat veteran and former astronaut, back to active duty in the Navy so that Kelly can be court-martialed for what Hegseth sees as riling up the troops against the commander in chief.
Hegseth has a point: Maybe Kelly shouldn’t be in Congress. But the secretary is wrong about putting the senator back in the naval service. In a more sensible and serious world (and, yes, I know this is not the one we live in right now), Hegseth would be fired—and Kelly would take Hegseth’s job as secretary of defense.
Kelly is at least as qualified to lead the Pentagon as other recent appointees, and would probably be an easy addition to any future Democratic administration’s shopping list for senior defense or national-security roles. (He was also shortlisted to be Kamala Harris’s running mate in 2024.) A Navy pilot, Kelly flew 39 combat missions in Operation Desert Storm. He has a uniform heavy with awards, including
medals
with the combat “V,” a special addition that denotes valor and heroism. After the senator posted a
picture
of those medals yesterday on social media, Hegseth, one of the most eager and petty
trolls
in an administration full of them, immediately took to social media and claimed that they were in the wrong order. He also
warned “Captain” Kelly
—putting Kelly’s rank in scare quotes—that he will have to submit to a uniform inspection once he’s recalled.
[
Jonathan Chait: Trump and Hegseth’s hysterical reaction to an ad
]
After his combat service, Kelly joined the astronaut corps, and piloted or commanded multiple Space Shuttle missions. (His twin brother, Scott, also became an astronaut.) In 2011, he retired—not to kick back and get rich, but to help his wife, the former member of Congress
Gabby Giffords
, who had been nearly killed in a shooting earlier that year.
Kelly’s had some business ventures, but he’s a bit light on management experience. Still, he’d be a far better choice than Hegseth, who is now vying to snag the never-coveted title of Worst Secretary of Defense in Modern American History.
Hegseth, for the moment, is in no danger of taking the crown from Robert McNamara, a brilliant man who nonetheless kept sending American boys to
Vietnam
even when he knew the war was lost. The day is young, however, and Trump seems determined to start a war in
Latin America
that could offer Hegseth the opportunity to give McNamara a run for his money.
But unlike Hegseth, McNamara also did some good during the frostiest days of the Cold War, including modernizing Pentagon procedures and updating American nuclear strategy. So did other flawed secretaries: Melvin Laird created important new Defense Department institutions while privately (and ineffectively) opposing the expansion of the Vietnam War to Cambodia; Jim Schlesinger and Harold Brown did what they could to arrest the free fall of American power in the 1970s; Les Aspin tried, and failed, to kill national missile defenses; Donald Rumsfeld initiated post–Cold War reforms but stubbornly refused to think about the post–Gulf War administration of Iraq.
Even James V. Forrestal, the first modern secretary of defense, was also better at his job—and he was fired in 1949 after a conflict with President Harry Truman and a nervous breakdown. (He killed himself later that year by jumping out of a window at Bethesda Naval Hospital.) Whatever his shortcomings, Forrestal was an honorable and hardworking public servant, which is why a building in Washington, D.C., and an aircraft carrier were both named in his honor.
All of these secretaries were competent men with records of achievement before coming to the Pentagon. They were professionals and patriots who cared about the security of the United States and the people who served in uniform. Hegseth, by comparison, is a dude-bro sporting some questionable
tattoos
, a creation of television who’s acting as if he won
The Apprentice: The Nuclear-Weapons Season
. He seems to believe that his job is hectoring young men about being
fat
and forcing Black men out of the military for having
beards
. He has no understanding of national strategy, and no real experience managing anything.
Nor is he a man who can serve as a model for his organization. Hegseth wants to recall Kelly so that he can level charges under the Uniform Code of Military Justice against him, but when Hegseth was a serving officer, he could have faced the UCMJ himself: By his own
admission
, he was an adulterer with an alcohol problem. (Apparently,
military justice for thee and not for me
is the new rule in Hegseth’s Pentagon.) His tenure so far has featured a series of appalling security lapses and janky public performances that call into question not only his character but his emotional stability.
[
Read: Holy warrior
]
The Trump White House knows that Hegseth is nothing like Forrestal, or Aspin, or even Rumsfeld, for that matter, and that he is unqualified to do anything but push-ups. This realization is probably why Secretary of the Army
Daniel Driscoll
, and not the actual head of the Pentagon, is the person meeting with the Russians in Geneva trying to stop the biggest war in Europe since 1945.
Trump
seems to like Hegseth, but the administration also seems to be taking care not to let Hegseth near anything breakable or dangerous.
Of course, Hegseth is still the secretary of defense, and thus the person who, in theory, must advise the president of the United States on the most dire issues of war and peace. He is also the official likely to be in the room and who would verify the orders if the commander in chief calls for the use of nuclear weapons. The idea that Hegseth would have to advise Trump in a moment of crisis is genuinely terrifying: The president is already showing increasing signs of panic and irrationality, and Hegseth is hardly the kind of stable or prudent aide one hopes would be nearby in times of danger.
For now, the White House seems content to let Hegseth
preen and strut
and yell, but the United States still needs an actual secretary of defense, and Pete Hegseth is completely
unqualified
for any position of public trust, elected or appointed, in the government of the United States.
Trump should look around and choose one. He has plenty of options—including Mark Kelly.
