PDF Summary:Holding the Line, by Guy M. Snodgrass

In Holding the Line, Guy M. Snodgrass provides an insider's account of James Mattis's tenure as Secretary of Defense in the Trump administration. The author depicts Mattis as a stabilizing force and "warrior monk" committed to restoring military readiness, strengthening alliances, and countering threats from China and Russia.

Snodgrass details Mattis's efforts to secure stable defense funding, maintain the military's apolitical reputation, and navigate tensions within the administration. He sheds light on Mattis's declining influence after the departures of other cabinet officials and the challenges faced in pursuing Mattis's vision amidst political turmoil.

(continued)...

Snodgrass highlights Mattis's belief that the U.S. armed forces had become too focused on winning today's fight at the expense of tomorrow's challenges. Mattis noted that a mentality of "winning no matter what" had dictated the military's priorities for far too long, a situation Snodgrass also bemoaned in a whitepaper he wrote in 2014. The author shares Mattis's view that the U.S. military should focus on deterring, rather than fighting, adversaries—a strategy that could only be successfully enacted with a restored flow of funding for military modernization and readiness.

Mattis Feared Chinese Hostility and Countermeasures

Snodgrass describes how Mattis viewed China's pursuit of global economic and military hegemony as the most strategically challenging issue facing America. Mattis was careful to ensure that his first official visit to China was perfectly choreographed. The author shares how Mattis personally directed every aspect of his preparation: the maps, the briefing slides, the talking points, the background materials, and even the seating arrangement to avoid embarrassing gaffes. For Mattis, China represented a deliberate challenge to the U.S.-led international system, methodically seeking to replace the US with China as the global leader of choice.

Context

• China's use of "soft power" through cultural diplomacy, international media, and educational exchanges is part of its broader strategy to enhance its global influence and counter U.S. dominance.
• In diplomacy, gestures such as seating arrangements and the order of speaking can carry significant symbolic weight, reflecting the status and respect between nations.
• High-level diplomatic visits, especially to a major power like China, require careful planning to navigate complex political and cultural nuances. Any misstep could have significant geopolitical repercussions.
• The U.S. and China are engaged in significant economic competition, with issues such as trade imbalances, intellectual property theft, and tariffs being central to their economic rivalry.
• China launched the BRI to develop trade routes and infrastructure projects across Asia, Africa, and Europe, enhancing its influence in these regions and creating economic dependencies.

Mattis's Resolve to Deter Russian Hostility and Preserve the Liberal World Order

Snodgrass details how Mattis saw Russia as a disruptive force seeking to destabilize regions of strategic importance to the US and our allies—in Europe, the Middle East, and the Indo-Pacific. Snodgrass also highlights a key difference in Mattis's approach to Russia and China: whereas Mattis sought a relationship of "competitive coexistence" with China, he viewed Russia as an irredeemably hostile nation under Putin. This approach translated into an aggressive posture along Russia's borders, a public condemnation of Russia's 2014 illegal annexation of Crimea, as well as efforts to bolster NATO's defensive capabilities.

Context

• The annexation raised concerns about human rights violations, including the treatment of ethnic minorities in Crimea, such as the Crimean Tatars, and the suppression of dissent against Russian rule.

Other Perspectives

• The characterization of Russia under Putin as "irredeemably hostile" may be an oversimplification that doesn't account for the potential for future changes in leadership or policy direction.
• Diplomatic engagement with Russia could be more productive than a stance of unyielding hostility, as dialogue might open avenues for cooperation and de-escalation of tensions.
• Competitive coexistence with China may underestimate the potential for cooperation in areas of mutual interest, such as climate change, global health, and nuclear non-proliferation.
• The aggressive posture could also strain relations with European allies who may favor a more balanced approach to Russia, potentially leading to divisions within NATO.
• Efforts to strengthen NATO might divert resources from other critical areas, such as domestic infrastructure or social programs.

Mattis's Part in Destroying ISIS

For Snodgrass, Trump's willingness to grant the defense department greater latitude in decision-making authority, which Mattis had requested, helped drive the defeat of ISIS with a surprising amount of speed. This authority translated into an accelerated campaign, enabling military leaders in the area to conduct missions and airstrikes without seeking White House approval. The change in approach contrasted with Obama's very centralized method of approval.

Strategy to Liberate ISIS Territory and Weaken Their Capabilities

Snodgrass details the "annihilation" approach Mattis intended to enact against ISIS. He shared Mattis's belief that surrounding terrorist groups, rather than an "attrition" approach (picking off leadership hoping to deter future attacks), would better preserve civilian lives in the long run. This meant besieging ISIS bases to prevent their escape, and then systematically dismantling the organization's command structure and leadership.

Practical Tips

• You can adopt a zero-tolerance policy towards your own bad habits by identifying and completely eliminating them. Just as an "annihilation" approach leaves no room for the enemy to regroup, apply this to your personal life by pinpointing a bad habit you want to change, such as smoking or procrastination. Instead of gradually reducing this habit, cut it out entirely and replace it with a positive one, like regular exercise or structured work breaks.
• You can enhance your conflict resolution skills by practicing the "surrounding" approach in personal disputes. Instead of trying to wear down the other party through prolonged arguments (attrition), focus on understanding their perspective and isolating the core issues. This can be done by inviting them to a neutral setting, actively listening to their concerns, and addressing each point without aggression. For example, if you're in a disagreement with a neighbor, instead of engaging in a back-and-forth blame game, propose a calm sit-down to discuss each other's viewpoints and find a mutually beneficial solution.
• Volunteer with organizations that advocate for non-violent conflict resolution. By offering your time and energy to groups that work towards peaceful solutions, you contribute to the larger goal of saving lives. Your involvement could range from supporting educational programs that teach children about the importance of peace to assisting in the organization of events that promote dialogue over violence.
• Implement a "financial siege" on your spending habits by creating a budget that locks down unnecessary expenses. Allocate funds to different categories and set up alerts when you approach the limit in any category. This approach mirrors the strategic containment in a siege, keeping your finances secure and preventing the escape of funds towards impulsive purchases.
• Start a rotating leadership program where team members take turns leading meetings or projects. This can help dismantle rigid command structures by giving everyone a taste of leadership and the chance to develop those skills. For instance, each month a different team member could be responsible for leading the team's project update meeting, allowing them to experience leadership and decision-making firsthand.

Mattis Emphasizes Utilizing All National Power Elements for Lasting Victory

Mattis recognized the need to pair the military campaign to defeat ISIS with diplomatic efforts to stabilize newly liberated areas of Iraq and Syria. Mattis shared these thoughts with the president in early 2017, noting the danger of withdrawing forces from combat zones before they were ready, a reference to the Obama administration's withdrawal from Iraq. For Mattis, America must dedicate itself to the strategic end stage, not merely the victory on the battlefield.

Context

• This approach aligns with counterinsurgency principles, which stress the importance of winning "hearts and minds" and ensuring that military victories translate into long-term peace and stability.
• Premature withdrawal can lead to unintended consequences, as seen in various conflicts where insufficient post-conflict planning resulted in instability and renewed violence.
• Historical examples, such as post-World War II reconstruction in Europe, demonstrate the importance of comprehensive planning and international cooperation in achieving lasting peace.

The Struggles Mattis Faced to Secure Military Funding

Snodgrass details Mattis's persistent work to secure long-term, stable funding for the military to enact the changes needed for the 2018 defense strategy, which he viewed as one of the most significant accomplishments of his tenure as defense secretary. The author describes how the congressional penchant for budget cuts, sequestration, and "continuing resolutions" during President Obama's tenure left the US military with unsustainable shortfalls in personnel, training, and equipment.

Mattis's Efforts to Secure Stable Long-Term Defense Funding

For Snodgrass, Mattis recognized the need for a unified, whole-of-government message to lawmakers as crucial to securing a much-needed budget deal to repair the military. Snodgrass shares how Mattis lobbied both the presidential administration and lawmakers, employing data-driven slides and a direct, matter-of-fact, reasoned argument to support the military's needs. The author highlights Mattis's work to "play the long game," building trust with senior congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle to achieve a sustainable budget deal, a feat that had proven impossible during his predecessor's six years in office.

Mattis Prioritizes Military Equipment, Training, and Personnel Challenges Due to Budget Constraints

The author details Mattis's concern about the decreasing readiness of all service branches. Years of overuse during the fight against terrorism in the region and reduced budgets had led to equipment failing more frequently. Training was also dramatically reduced—the military was forced to choose between putting aircraft and ships to sea or dedicating funds to spare parts and training. As Mattis shared, the military was caught in a precarious cycle. He demanded the forces be able to operate with a "victory by any means necessary" mentality while simultaneously denying commanders the resources they needed to achieve his vision.

Other Perspectives

• Focusing on equipment alone may neglect the equally important aspects of personnel morale and retention, which are critical for military effectiveness.
• Overemphasis on training could potentially lead to burnout or attrition among military personnel if not balanced with adequate rest, recovery, and support services.
• Decreased training opportunities might not only be a result of budget cuts but could also stem from inefficient use of available resources or a shift in training priorities.
• Prioritizing spare parts and training could actually save costs in the long run by reducing the frequency of equipment failure and the need for expensive emergency repairs or replacements.
• It may place undue stress and moral dilemmas on service members who are trained to follow strict rules of engagement.
• Partnerships with allies and the sharing of resources could compensate for any perceived lack of resources within the commanders' control.

Mattis's Reform of Military Spending for Better Value

For Snodgrass, Mattis saw the necessity of reforming the Pentagon business model of "managing money" rather than "managing results." Snodgrass shared Mattis's belief that extracting maximum value from every taxpayer dollar was a moral obligation, a duty Mattis highlighted during multiple trips to Capitol Hill and in public discussions about the military's budget. The author also recounts how Mattis emphasized achieving "efficiency and cost-effectiveness" in his confirmation testimony—to build a more nimble, responsive organization capable of adapting to the changing nature of war.

Other Perspectives

• Reforming the Pentagon's business model could introduce instability and unforeseen challenges that might hinder military readiness and effectiveness.
• The pursuit of efficiency and cost-effectiveness might inadvertently stifle innovation, as cutting-edge technologies and unproven methods often come with higher risks and costs.
• Rapid adaptability could come at the cost of thoroughness, potentially leading to oversight in planning and execution of military operations.
• Results are important, but they must be balanced with transparency and accountability in spending to maintain public trust and ensure that the military is responsibly using taxpayer dollars.

Political Challenges Mattis Faced In Securing Military Resources

The author details the arduous steps Mattis undertook to secure a restored military budget from a Congress seemingly disinclined toward providing a long-term budget deal. As Snodgrass saw it, Mattis's unwavering focus and how he was known as a non-political, "get-things-done" leader ultimately enabled the Pentagon to secure multi-year funding. Securing funding was a vital element in guaranteeing that the strategy unveiled in January 2018 wasn't just wishful thinking.

Mattis's Budget and Defense Expenditures Battles With Executive and Legislative Branches

Snodgrass shares how the defense secretary battled entrenched interests to secure a budget agreement lasting two years for the DoD. Congressional Democrats sought to raise non-defense budgets to match any increased military funding. Members of the Trump administration, and even some Republicans, also favored a lower budget to minimize federal deficits. Ultimately, Mattis overcame both internal and external resistance and increased defense spending to $700 billion, which he viewed as a sustainable level to repair the military and to meet requirements for today's world.

Practical Tips

• Develop negotiation skills by practicing in low-stakes situations. Begin by negotiating small things in your daily life, like asking for a discount on a purchase or a better seat at a restaurant. This practice will build your confidence and improve your ability to articulate your position, prepare you for more significant negotiations, and help you overcome resistance as you encounter it in more critical scenarios.
• Create a savings plan that aligns with the goal of reducing your personal deficit by setting a specific target amount to save each month. Open a high-yield savings account and automate transfers from your checking account right after payday. This mimics the idea of "paying yourself first," ensuring that saving takes precedence over other spending.
• Volunteer to serve on a committee or board of a local organization, where you can practice allocating funds effectively, much like a defense budget. This hands-on experience will give you insight into the decision-making process behind funding allocation, and you can transfer these skills to manage your personal finances or advise others in your community on resource management.

Mattis's Efforts to Maintain the Military's Nonpartisan Reputation

Snodgrass highlights Mattis's belief that defending the country is a nonpartisan priority and should matter to every American. Mattis actively sought bipartisan support—for budget assistance, new resources, and personnel. Snodgrass details how Mattis met with "the Big Eight" - the senior defense-related members of Congress - to provide advance notice of the military's funding needs. Despite those efforts, Mattis lamented how Congress responded only after a crisis, a situation where the military was forced to make tradeoffs in order to fund current missions while ignoring future challenges.

Other Perspectives

• The concept of what constitutes national defense can vary significantly between political ideologies, leading to partisan debates over the scope and nature of military actions and defense initiatives.
• Some citizens may prioritize other issues, such as healthcare or education, over national defense, based on their personal experiences or beliefs about government spending.
• Seeking bipartisan support does not guarantee that the support will be sufficient or timely, as political dynamics and priorities can overshadow even nonpartisan issues like defense.
• Providing advance notice of funding needs does not guarantee that the necessary funds will be allocated, as budget decisions are influenced by a variety of factors beyond the military's control.
• Congress may respond to crises because it operates under the constraints of political cycles and budgetary processes that prioritize immediate and visible issues over long-term planning.

Mattis Resignation Fallout and Department of Defense Challenges

The author describes the tumultuous uncertainty following Mattis's resignation and the challenges that continued to erode the DoD's attempts to maintain a nonpartisan reputation. For Snodgrass, Mattis intended to resign because his capacity to positively influence Trump and the administration's actions had eroded. Moreover, events like the directive from the White House that the Navy should conceal the USS John McCain during the president's May 2019 visit to Japan indicate a worrying trend where traditionally apolitical military organizations are being pulled into the vortex of political maneuvering.

Mattis's Waning Influence and Growing Instability in the President

Snodgrass underscores how vital it is to have leaders who serve for extended periods—especially in large, sprawling institutions such as the DoD. The author watched, disheartened, as a series of acting officials, vacancies, and firings created uncertainty and frustration throughout the military. Compounding that problem: Mattis's diminishing sway with the Trump administration led to his being increasingly bypassed by Trump himself and fellow cabinet members.

Leadership Vacancies and Acting Officials Risks at the Defense Department

The author highlights how the Trump administration set the bar for uncertainty at the defense department with record turnover in senior leadership roles. Moreover, the leadership's tendency to appoint "acting" leaders translated into individuals hesitant to make lasting changes. Mattis's own departure as the defense secretary followed what he termed a "strategy-free" environment. This vacuum was further exacerbated by being unable to fill vacant leadership roles.

Practical Tips

• Develop a contingency plan for key positions to mitigate the impact of turnover. Document the critical functions and responsibilities of each role, and cross-train team members to ensure that these functions can be maintained without disruption. This could involve regular training sessions where employees learn about different roles within the organization, so they are prepared to step in if someone leaves suddenly.
• Encourage lasting decision-making by setting up a mentorship system where acting leaders are paired with experienced executives. This partnership can provide the acting leader with the confidence to make bold decisions, knowing they have the support and guidance of someone with a proven track record.
• Develop a mentorship habit by identifying potential leaders within your network and offering guidance. By becoming a mentor, you can help fill leadership gaps by nurturing the skills and confidence of potential leaders around you. Start by reaching out to colleagues or community members who show promise and express your willingness to share your knowledge and experience.

Preserving the Military's Nonpartisan Tradition

Snodgrass discusses Mattis's commitment to preserving the military's "unapologetic, apolitical" role in keeping the country safe. Snodgrass details how Mattis opposed the overt politicization of uniformed leaders and resisted involving the military in unnecessary events that undermined the long-standing public trust the military enjoys. He believed the military's job wasn't to support a political party, but rather to protect the U.S. Constitution and the values that underpin America's system of governance.

Context

• Throughout history, military leaders have often refrained from public political endorsements or activities that could be seen as partisan, reinforcing the military's role as a neutral entity focused on defense and security.
• Military ethics emphasize duty, honor, and integrity, which align with the values of protecting the Constitution. These standards guide service members in making decisions that prioritize national security over political interests.

Other Perspectives

• By avoiding unnecessary events, there might be missed opportunities for the military to engage with the community and foster better civil-military relations.

U.S. Persistent Geopolitical and Safety Challenges

For Snodgrass, America’s defense success requires a renewed dedication to repairing every military branch—a sustained flow of funds for new equipment, restored funds for training, and a renewed effort to retain the most talented service members. Equally important is a willingness by our national leaders to restore solid partnerships with allies.

Rebuild Military Readiness, Modernize Capabilities to Deter Great Power Rivals

The author outlines the issues the American armed forces face as a result of a mentality that seeks victory regardless of the cost and years of eroding budgets. Snodgrass worries that the military's equipment is outdated, training is being curtailed, and talented individuals are fleeing to other career fields - a situation he personally studied in his 2014 "Keep a Weather Eye on the Horizon" white paper. Snodgrass shares Mattis's worry about this trend. For both men, the path to success requires a long-term, sustainable increase in defense budgets. Increased funding is the sole means of rebuilding America's military and shifting to technologies needed to compete with "great power" rivals like China and Russia.

Context

• As military technology rapidly evolves, outdated equipment can put forces at a disadvantage against adversaries who have invested in modern capabilities, such as cyber warfare and advanced missile systems.
• Older equipment often requires more maintenance and can be less reliable, leading to increased downtime and higher operational costs.
• The increasing complexity of modern warfare requires more sophisticated training, which can be challenging to provide consistently without adequate resources.
• Civilian careers often offer more predictable hours and better work-life balance, which can be appealing compared to the demanding and unpredictable nature of military life.
• Typically, white papers are used in both government and business contexts to advocate for a specific position or solution to a problem, often backed by research and analysis.
• The term "great power rivals" refers to the strategic competition between major world powers, particularly the U.S., China, and Russia. This competition involves military, economic, and technological dimensions, requiring nations to maintain advanced capabilities.
• A well-funded military serves as a deterrent against potential adversaries, reducing the likelihood of conflict by demonstrating capability and readiness.
• Competitive salaries, benefits, and advanced training programs are necessary to attract and retain skilled personnel, which requires adequate funding.
• Increased funding supports research and development initiatives that drive innovation in defense technology. This is essential for developing next-generation weapons and defense systems.

Significance of Strong Global Alliances for the U.S.

Snodgrass details how Mattis viewed America's web of alliances as a uniquely powerful advantage—a system that enables America to accomplish far more with other allied nations than we ever could alone. The author describes Mattis's frustration as he watched Trump publicly lambast allies for their lack of spending on their militaries, a sentiment Mattis understood, but one he also knew would damage America's leadership role. Trump's aim to prioritize America ignores a fundamental principle for any alliance: partnership requires trust. If Mattis's attempts to reassure other nations are not sustained by his successors, America's strength abroad may ultimately be replaced by isolation further emboldening China's ambition to replace us as the leader of choice.

Context

• The United States has historically relied on alliances such as NATO, established in 1949, to counterbalance threats during the Cold War and beyond. These alliances have been crucial in maintaining global stability and deterring aggression.
• In times of global crises, such as natural disasters or pandemics, alliances enable a coordinated response. This can lead to more efficient and effective humanitarian aid and disaster relief efforts.
• Previous U.S. administrations have also faced challenges with allies over defense spending but have typically addressed these issues through diplomatic channels rather than public criticism, maintaining a united front.
• Building trust often requires understanding and respecting cultural differences. Misunderstandings or insensitivity can erode trust and hinder collaboration.
• Isolation can lead to reduced influence in global affairs, making it harder for a country to shape international norms and policies. This can also result in economic disadvantages and diminished security cooperation.
• China is at the forefront of technological innovation in areas like 5G, artificial intelligence, and renewable energy, positioning itself as a leader in future global industries.