Biden Admin Essay Norman Solomon

Michèle Flournoy’s Fall Proves What Progressive Pushback Can Do

Activism succeeded in changing “Defense Secretary Flournoy” from a fait accompli to a lost fantasy of the military-industrial complex.
Super hawk Michèle Flournoy. [Third Way Think Tank / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0]

By Norman Solomon

Just a few weeks ago, super hawk Michèle Flournoy was being touted as a virtual shoo-in to become Joe Biden’s nominee for Secretary of Defense. But some progressives insisted on organizing to raise key questions, such as: Should we accept the revolving door that keeps spinning between the Pentagon and the weapons industry? Does an aggressive U.S. military really enhance “national security” and lead to peace?

By challenging Flournoy while posing those questions — and answering them in the negative — activism succeeded in changing “Defense Secretary Flournoy” from a fait accompli to a lost fantasy of the military-industrial complex.

She is “a favorite among many in the Democratic foreign-policy establishment,” Foreign Policy magazine reported on Monday night, hours after news broke that Biden’s nomination will go to Gen. Lloyd Austin instead of Flournoy. But “in recent weeks the Biden transition team has faced pushback from the left wing of the party. Progressive groups signaled opposition to Flournoy over her role in U.S. military interventions in Libya and the Middle East in prior government positions, as well as her ties to the defense industry once she left government.”

Of course, Gen. Austin is a high-ranking part of the war machine. Yet, as Foreign Policy noted: “When Biden pushed to draw down troops from Iraq while vice president, Flournoy, then Pentagon policy chief, and then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen opposed the idea. Austin did not.”

Video of war-crazed Sen. John McCain grilling Austin several years ago shows the general willing to stand firm against zeal to escalate killing in Syria, a clear contrast to positions that Flournoy had staked out.

Flournoy has a long record of arguing for military intervention and escalation, from Syria and Libya to Afghanistan and beyond. She has opposed a ban on weapons sales to Saudi Arabia. In recent years, her advocacy has included pushing military envelopes in potentially explosive hotspots like the South China Sea. Flournoy is vehemently in favor of long-term U.S. military encroachment on China.

Historian Andrew Bacevich, a graduate of the U.S. Military Academy and former Army colonel, warns that “Flournoy’s proposed military buildup will prove unaffordable, unless, of course, federal deficits in the multitrillion-dollar range become routine. But the real problem lies not with the fact that Flournoy’s buildup will cost a lot, but that it is strategically defective.” Bacevich adds: “Strip away the references to deterrence and Flournoy is proposing that the United States goad the People’s Republic into a protracted high-tech arms race.”

With a record like that, you might think that Flournoy would receive very little support from the leaders of organizations like the Ploughshares Fund, the Arms Control Association, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and the Council for a Livable World. But, as I wrote more than a week ago, movers and shakers at those well-heeled groups eagerly praised Flournoy to the skies — publicly urging Biden to give her the Defense Secretary job.

Many said they knew Flournoy well and liked her. Some lauded her interest in restarting nuclear-arms negotiations with Russia (a standard foreign-policy position). Many praised her work in high-ranking Pentagon posts under Presidents Clinton and Obama. Privately, some could be heard saying how great it would be to have “access” to the person running the Pentagon.

More traditional allies of militaristic policymakers chimed in, often vilifying the left as it became clear in late November that progressive pushback was slowing Flournoy’s momentum for the Defense Department’s top job. Notorious war enthusiast Max Boot was a case in point.

Boot was evidently provoked by a Washington Post news story that appeared on Nov. 30 under the headline “Liberal Groups Urge Biden Not to Name Flournoy as Secretary of Defense.” The article quoted from a statement issued that day by five progressive organizations — RootsAction.org (where I’m national director), CodePink, Our Revolution, Progressive Democrats of America, and World Beyond War. We conveyed that a Flournoy nomination would lead to a fierce grassroots battle over Senate confirmation. (The newspaper quoted me saying: “RootsAction.org has a 1.2 million active list of supporters in the U.S., and we’re geared up for an all-out push for a ‘no’ vote, if it comes to that.”)

Reporting on the joint statement, Common Dreams aptly summarized it in a headline: “Rejecting Michèle Flournoy, Progressives Demand Biden Pick Pentagon Chief ‘Untethered’ From Military-Industrial Complex.”

Such talk and such organizing are anathema to the likes of Boot, who fired back with a Washington Post column within hours. While advocating for Flournoy, he invoked an “old Roman adage” — “Si vis pacem, para bellum” — “If you want peace, prepare for war.” He neglected to mention that Latin is a dead language and the Roman Empire collapsed.

War preparations that increase the likelihood of war may excite laptop warriors. But the militarism they promote is madness nonetheless.

11 comments

  1. Common Dems headline yesterday: “Rejecting Michèle Flournoy, Progressives Demand Biden Pick Pentagon Chief ‘Untethered’ From Military-Industrial Complex.”

    Common Dems headline today: “‘Bad News’: Biden Picks Retired General and Raytheon Board Member Lloyd Austin as Pentagon Chief”

    So much for “progressive demands” from flacks like Norman Solomon, assured that General Austin will receive a much easier confirmation in the Senate. Here’s the real story on Biden’s MIC pick to head the WAR department: https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2020/12/08/biden-picks-raytheon-board-member-to-lead-the-us-war-machine/

    1. Trisha (above) is correct: an ex-general who left the military to immediately join a weapons manufacturer and is now returning to government as pentagon chief is the epitome of the military industrial complex. This is the exact opposite of picking someone “untethered from the military industrial complex”.

      Norman Solomon should be ashamed of his self congratulatory, delusional bullshit.

      1. 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
        Such blindness. And after doing his 4 year Pentagon rotation, guess where General Austin will head?
        The other issue is the arrogance with which Biden’s handlers think they can get away with this under the increasingly unseemly banner of identity politics….

      2. I’m grateful to Trisha for the doorway to a more complete scoop of facts about the General, especially his linkage to Raytheon. A business living off of murdered and killed people. Tempting to assign the word “scavenger”. But Raytheon furthers killing through”predation.” So is disqualified on a technicality. “Scavengers are animals that consume (profit from) dead organisms that have died from causes other than predation.” Wikipedia. What is it about us who make choices in greater and/or lesser part from the outer package? Whether Black, White, Red, Yellow, boobs or cocks? Isn’t it substance over appearance that promotes the greater good? Truth is peaking out through the nature of Biden’s choices. Indeed, maybe it is true – a leopard cannot (really) change his spots. And as the Party selected Biden, well, they’re making clear that they too, think that they can’t change theirs. Instead, stuck in the past with its faux sense of security over being “right.” The creative alternative, of course, is to dare oneself to risk for the birth holding potential for the greatest good. Haven’t we had enough of old”conservatives” ? (the current batch of seedy Republican unworthy of any connection to actual “conservation” needs a long time in soul searching life-review or anger management classes).

  2. I think you wrote too soon. Look who replaced her? Hardly a Progressive pick.
    I think Glenn Greenwald’s analysis that the NYT article detailing her overwhelming corruption and enmeshment in the arms biz was what done her in. NYT hardly a progressive icon. She just simply stank too much

  3. I’m grateful to Trisha for the doorway to a more complete scoop of facts about the General, especially his linkage to Raytheon. A business living off of murdered and killed people. Tempting to assign the word “scavenger”. But Raytheon furthers killing through”predation.” So is disqualified on a technicality. “Scavengers are animals that consume (profit from) dead organisms that have died from causes other than predation.” Wikipedia. What is it about us who make choices in greater and/or lesser part from the outer package? Whether Black, White, Red, Yellow, boobs or cocks? Isn’t it substance over appearance that promotes the greater good? Truth is peaking out through the nature of Biden’s choices. Indeed, maybe it is true – a leopard cannot (really) change his spots. And as the Party selected Biden, well, they’re making clear that they too, think that they can’t change theirs. Instead, stuck in the past with its faux sense of security over being “right.” The creative alternative, of course, is to dare oneself to risk for the birth holding potential for the greatest good.

  4. The idea of picking people for “personal details” is now the mode. Remember Tom Lehrer long ago singing about the Army refusing to discriminate including on the matter of “competence”. Are we to have in turn a Woman ,a Black person, an intellectually challenged legless blind veteran, a Trans man, a Trans woman, a Muslim, a Hindu and so on, to cover all the possible disadvantaged groups we need to include???

  5. I would like to apologize for my previous, overly harsh characterization of Norman Solomon’s very perceptive article. After all, the title is “Michele Flournoy’s Fall Proves What Progressive Pushback Can Do” and Solomon’s insightful analysis (unwittingly perhaps) makes the answer crystal clear: absolutely nothing.

    The Democratic Party is as completely co-opted by the military industrial complex as their brothers in arms the Republican Party. The forever war continues unimpeded…

  6. Solly peddles ruling class lies; choosing any member of the military industrial complex is diversity—why not a LGBT war mongering midget like Grenell?

  7. now Biden chooses mr Monsanto for sec of agriculture—more dimocrat delusions….solly works for msdnc; how much is he paid to write this propaganda?

  8. “Si vis pacem, para bellum” — “If you want peace, prepare for war.”

    To such thinking we owe the peace and prosperity we currently enjoy.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: