The US Army announced that Eric Fanning had been confirmed as the newest Secretary of the Army:

Eric Fanning was sworn in, May 18, as the 22nd secretary of the Army during a small Pentagon ceremony.

The Army’s announcement was notable because it was probably the only one in the entire news cycle that made no mention of Fanning’s homosexuality.

Every single media article on Fanning led off with the fact he is homosexual. The media focus on his sexual preference was so obvious even the Duffelblog weighed in with a (profanity-laden) satire:

Army Chief of Staff Mark Milley is mandating SHARP training for the Pentagon Press Corps after their heavy coverage of newly-confirmed Army Secretary Eric Fanning’s sexual orientation this week…

Of course, Fanning himself fed the fire, with one of his first acts as Secretary of the Army being a retweet of Ellen Degeneres saying homosexuals now “run[] the place.”

Interesting way to introduce yourself to hundreds of thousands of subordinates, the vast majority of whom aren’t interested in Secretary Fanning’s sexual preference.

Qualifications, of course, should be the true discriminator in a defense leadership position. Unfortunately, people rarely know the true credentials of political appointees, if they have any at all. For example, everyone knows Secretary Fanning was previously the acting secretary of the Air Force, undersecretary of the Air Force, and deputy undersecretary of the Navy. A list of prior positions is not an uncommon resumé for a political appointee — but it is also fairly worthless for communicating actual skills.

Military members who receive evaluations saying only that they served in a list of positions don’t get promoted — because it is their measurable performance in those positions that actually matters.

Again, this isn’t specific to Fanning, but to virtually every civilian political appointee.

Fortunately, the US Department of Defense as an institution tends to grind on successfully regardless of leadership changes at the top. (To wit, the US Army has had three different leaders over just the past year, two of whom were temporary. The only notable policy issue was the decision to allow Soldiers to wear earphones in their PT gear.)

The only significant policy issue known about Secretary Fanning is that he is an advocate for openly accepting trans-sexual/transgender service members, but so is Secretary of Defense Ash Carter.  (Apparently, a directive allowing the “T” in LGBT to serve is being held up by a lack of “consensus.”)

Civilian leaders due bear some political responsiblity for managing the Service. Unlike the sharp contrast in leadership that often occurs after a military change of command, however, there is rarely a notable change in the institution when a new Secretary takes over.

ADVERTISEMENT

---

---