When President Obama tapped Chuck Hagel to serve as defense secretary, it was hard not to root for the former Army sergeant and Vietnam combat vet.
But almost two years later, the relationship between the two has soured to the point that Hagel will step down as soon as a replacement is named, vetted and confirmed, not likely until sometime early in the new year.
At this point, Hagel's legacy in his role is hard to discern. As SecDef, he's been a steady presence but not a commanding leader. And the administration's expressed reasons for his early exit were as hazy as its strategies for dealing with our many complex national security challenges, from the Islamic State to sequestration.
At a time when the White House desperately needs to show confidence in its handling of issues critical to U.S. security, it instead signaled a lack of strategic vision. That the administration has proposed no successor — and likely won't identify one for some time — is the icing, in stark contrast to George W. Bush's sacking of Donald Rumsfeld and immediate nomination of Robert Gates to replace him.
Related: Ex-DoD official Carter leads list of SECDEF candidates
Naming Hagel's likely successor has swiftly morphed into Washington's hoary parlor game, tossing names at a wall to see what might stick. To complicate the game, two top contenders, Washington defense policy insider Michele Flournoy and Sen. Jack Reed, already have said no.
Some wags suggest the next SecDef might be U.S. soccer star Tim Howard; Obama, impressed by the goalie's defensive prowess, once joked that he might be a good fit for the job.
The need for a Pentagon chief with the vision and skills to navigate perilous global currents has never been more critical — far too critical to become fodder for jokes and speculation. The White House should move to repair this serious blunder by quickly nominating a new defense secretary.
