Topic: The DOD (Department of Defense)
“…the Department of Defense is a deeply troubled institution. It has emphasized leftist politics over military readiness, recruiting was the worst in 2022 that it has been in two generations, and the Biden Administration’s profoundly unserious equity agenda and vaccine mandates have taken a serious toll.”
According to the Army recruitment website, it’s not “leftist policies” that are the problem. “71% of youth do not qualify for military service because of obesity, drugs, physical and mental health problems, misconduct, and aptitude.” [Source]
Fact check: “While Republicans have pointed to the vaccine mandate creating a retention issue, the Defense Department says all of the military services had surpassed their retention goals for the first 10 months of the 2023 fiscal year, which began on October 1, 2022. The services have exceeded retention goals even as the military has faced challenges in recruiting new service members. [Source].
Full contextual analysis of Section 2: The Common Defense here. [Source].
“The DOD is also a deeply troubled institution. Historically, the military has been one of America’s most trusted institutions, but years of sustained misuse, a two-tiered culture of accountability that shields senior officers and officials while exposing junior officers in the field, wasteful spending, wildly shifting security policies, exceedingly poor discipline in program execution, and (most recently) the Biden Administration’s profoundly unserious equity agenda and vaccine mandates have taken a serious toll.”
I touched on this a bit in the introduction to Section 2. In point of fact, the Biden administration stopped requiring COVID-19 vaccines for the military in January 2023.
What strikes me about this passage is its disdain for the military, and this coming from a former member of the armed forces and former (acting) Secretary of Defense. Evidence seems to suggest that he is a deeply disenfranchised former soldier. More about Christopher Miller here.
Full contextual analysis of Section 2.1: Department of Defense here.
“Our disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan, our impossibly muddled China strategy, the growing involvement of senior military officers in the political arena, and deep confusion about the purpose of our military are clear signals of a disturbing decay and markers of a dangerous decline in our nation’s capabilities and will.”
It was Donald Trump and the Trump administration who orchestrated our “disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan.” Read our bite-sized brief about that here.
Full contextual analysis of Section 2.1: Department of Defense here.
“We also are witnessing a transformation in the character of war. The democratization of technology and the collapse of time and space require dramatic, thoughtful changes in how we defend, deter, and fight.”
This one is interesting to unpack (and I do, in the analysis.) Miller here is referring to the shift from traditional, large-scale conflicts to more hands-off and complex types of warfare, including cyber attacks, et al.
Full contextual analysis of Section 2.1: Department of Defense here.
- Reestablish a culture of command accountability, nonpoliticization, and warfighting focus.
- Transform our armed forces for maximum effectiveness in an era of great-power competition.
- Provide necessary support to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) border protection operations. Border protection is a national security issue that requires sustained attention and effort by all elements of the executive branch.
- Demand financial transparency and accountability.
These are Miller’s four main priorities for the military as a whole going forward. You’re not crazy – that third one is federally sanctioning using the United States Military to patrol the border.
Full contextual analysis of Section 2.1: Department of Defense here.
“End USCYBERCOM’s participation in federal efforts to “fortify” U.S. elections to eliminate the perception that DOD is engaging in partisan politics.”
This is a recommendation Miller is making for USCYBERCOM. He’s straight up arguing for ending federal oversight of election security. USCYBERCOM plays a critical role in protecting the U.S. from cyber threats, including those targeting elections. Removing its involvement could potentially increase the risk of cyberattacks on election infrastructure. It’s almost certainly going to result in weakening election security and integrity. It’s 100% in the service of paving the way for a dictatorship.
Full contextual analysis of Section 2.1: Department of Defense here.
“[The Department of Defense will] Assist in aggressively building the border wall system on America’s southern border. Additionally, explicitly acknowledge and adjust personnel and priorities to participate actively in the defense of America’s borders, including using military personnel and hardware to prevent illegal crossings between ports of entry and channel all cross-border traffic to legal ports of entry.”
This is another argument for militarizing the border, which Christopher Miller argues for this as well in Section 2.1, and I talk more about the implications there.
Full contextual analysis of Section 2.2: Department of Homeland Security here.