Secretary or comrade Pete?

Jan. 22 (UPI) -- At this point, Pete Hegseth seems destined to become America's 29th secretary of defense. Despite the hyperbole and exaggerations of Hegseth's fitness to serve, he is arguably the least qualified person to hold that office.

Commanding an Army company of 150 and serving as a talk show host, to most people, is not quite the right stuff to lead a department of 3 million uniformed and civilian employees and a nearly $900 billion annual budget -- and whose job is to prevent, fight and win wars.

Hegseth is rumored have taken the nom de guerre of Secretary Pete. If that is the case, Secretary Pete, one would hope that your first action will be to understand how underqualified you are to hold this office.

And second, you need to determine what exactly your job is. A good starting point is Title 10 of the U.S. Code, subparagraph 113, which makes you principal assistant to the president on all matters pertaining to the Department of Defense.

Rumors, abound, however that your principal assignment is to be Comrade Pete, with the task of purging the Pentagon from all elements of diversity, equality and inclusion and "woke" policies of the prior administration. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and chief of Naval Operations have been mentioned as DEI targets. Reportedly, others also are on this so-called purge list.

You have said that your priority is to support the warfighter by enhancing lethality of the force. But who is this warfighter? Is it a member of the Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force responsible for maintaining the F-35 and other fighter aircraft? Is it the soldier responsible for the logistics train on which the Army is totally dependent? Or is it the Space Force guardian responsible for operating the satellites without which our forces cannot function?

In other words, "warfighter" is a term that may be harder to apply to the Pentagon than one might imagine, and should be used with caution. Further, why is increasing lethality such a high priority when the force is pretty lethal, equipped with precision munitions and thermonuclear weapons? Would it not seem that identifying first principles in to provide for the common defense is more important?

What is the defense strategy that sets priorities and objectives for the Pentagon? Do you know? For more than a decade and spanning both Republican and Democratic administrations, the national defense strategy has been to compete or contain, deter, and if war comes, defeat a series of adversaries headed by Russia as the "imminent" threat and China as the "pacing" threat.

But, in reality, where have Russia and China been contained or deterred? Russia twice invaded Ukraine and has threatened to use nuclear weapons. The Chinese military has been ordered by paramount leader President Xi Jinping to be prepared to seize Taiwan by 2027.

The defense budget is underfunded by hundreds of billions of dollars. Where do you get that money from -- conservative members of Congress? And no one wins a thermonuclear war. So what is your strategy?

You talk about changing culture to solve recruiting problems. Yet, stubborn facts stand in the way. A supermajority of the 17-to-25-year-old cohort needed to meet recruiting numbers does not want to join the military. Worse, a similar number are not physically, morally or mentally qualified for service. How do you fix that?

You will be home alone at the Pentagon with no other senior personnel confirmed. To what degree have you had input in naming your team? Are the deputy and service secretaries individuals you know and can they form the team you want? And how do you intend to deal with the military, many of whom are far more combat experienced than you and may resent that you have exaggerated your time under fire?

That you refused to meet with Democratic members of the Senate Armed Services Committee does not augur well when you may need their support in defense legislation you advance. And, regardless of partisanship, when Sen. Jack Reed, former chair of that committee, West Point graduate and paratrooper, has grave reservations about you, you need to take that seriously.

I have known many defense secretaries since Robert McNamara and advised a number of them. I also served on active duty in Vietnam, a war in which I fought and we lost despite the presence of, like you, the "best and brightest." So beware: You will not last the year if you become Comrade Pete and not Secretary Pete.

Harlan Ullman is UPI's Arnaud deBorchgrave Distinguished Columnist, senior adviser at Washington's Atlantic Council and principal author of the doctrine of shock and awe. His next book co-written with General The Lord David Richards, former U.K. Chief of Defense and due out late next year, is The Great Paradox: Strategic Thinking in an Unstrategic World. The writer can be reached on Twitter @harlankullman.