based on the candidates parading through trump tower for job interviews in recent weeks, the president-elect could end up with generals holding the five most powerful national security offices in the country, an unprecedented concentration of military influence that deserves more public debate than it seems to be receiving. mr. trump has already chosen michael flynn, a retired army lieutenant general, for national security adviser. he is said to be considering at least three other retired generals <u+2013> james mattis for defense secretary, john kelly for homeland security and david petraeus for secretary of state or director of national intelligence. news reports have also floated the names of michael rogers, the director of the national security agency and an admiral who is still on active duty; and retired generals jack keane and stanley mcchrystal. obviously, mr. trump, who has no national security experience, needs wise and steady counsel as he becomes commander in chief of a country still at war in iraq, afghanistan and numerous other venues. it is a little odd, though, that he has veered so heavily toward the generals given the way he disparaged them in the campaign, saying he knew more about fighting the islamic state than they did. mr. trump may see something of himself in their self-confidence and drive. and it never hurts to associate with an institution that enjoys broad public support. but mr. trump<u+2019>s over-reliance on generals as potential appointees probably has as much to do with the fact that most republican civilian foreign policy experts repudiated him during the campaign as unqualified. the generals on mr. trump<u+2019>s list are highly accomplished, though some have views and records that make them questionable for high office. take general petraeus, who was president obama<u+2019>s c.i.a. director before resigning after disclosures that he had an affair with his biographer and shared highly classified information with her. after lying to the f.b.i. about the case, mr. petraeus pled guilty in 2015 to a misdemeanor charge of mishandling classified material, paid a $100,000 fine and was given two years probation. the washington establishment has been quick to rehabilitate general petraeus. but mr. trump would be hypocritical if he did the same after demonizing hillary clinton for using a private server for her emails and demanding that she be jailed even though no charges were brought. general flynn, who has described islam as a threat to the united states, and general kelly, who opposed mr. obama<u+2019>s efforts to close guantanamo bay prison and open all combat jobs to women, also raise concerns. appointing a general as defense secretary would raise even greater questions. this has happened only once, in 1950, when president truman selected general george marshall. the constitution mandates civilian control of the military by making the president commander-in-chief. under federal law, retired officers must be out of uniform for seven years before they can become defense secretary, so mr. trump would need a congressional waiver to appoint general mattis, who retired in 2013. if that is his choice, the president-elect should have to make an exceptionally compelling argument to justify the exception. appointing too many generals would throw off the balance of a system that for good reason favors civilian leadership. the concern is not so much that military leaders might drag the country into more wars. it is that the pentagon, with its nearly $600 billion budget, already exercises vast sway in national security policymaking and dwarfs the state department in resources. mr. trump will need a mix of voices in his cabinet advocating diplomatic, cultural, economic and other responses to national security challenges. he will also need people with expertise in asia, not just the middle east and afghanistan, regions where most of his favorite generals made their mark. the united states has long warned other countries about the dangers to democracy of overrelying on the military in place of civilian leaders. if mr. trump fills his cabinet with generals, what kind of message will he send to the rest of the world? correction: december 1, 2016 an earlier version of this article misidentified the president who appointed gen. george marshall in 1950. it was harry s. truman, not dwight eisenhower.
why donald trump shouldn<u+2019>t fill the cabinet with generals
carol giacomo