Secretary of defense of the US is, apparently, an exceedingly difficult job. Few agree as to who the "best" secretaries have been, often because they cannot name anyone who has done the job with distinction, although many suggest that Robert Gates deserves the honor. Almost everyone familiar with defense issues, however, can name a list of terrible secretaries, most notably Robert McNamara and Donald Rumsfeld.

Pundits in the US were debating Chuck Hagel's firing as soon as word came down from the Oval Office. Much of the commentary has concentrated on the poor relationship that developed between the White House and the Pentagon during Hagel's tenure.

Reportedly, US President Barack Obama found it difficult to connect with Hagel over Afghanistan and the fight against the Islamic State (IS). Hagel may also have disagreed with the rest of the administration on key priorities, including the war in Syria and the release of detainees from Gitmo.

Some have also suggested that Hagel struggled to develop good relations with the civilian bureaucracy in the Pentagon. There's not much indication that he successfully managed to bring the senior military leadership into line, always a priority during a drawdown period.

For example, the conversation over the future of the A-10 Warthog, a close attack aircraft, seemed to take place entirely between Congress and the Air Force, without much useful input from the Department of Defense.

This conversation, like many others, was upstaged by the return of the US to the war in Iraq. Instead of planning on how to dispose of A-10s, the US is now deploying them to fight IS militants.

Hagel's job was not to fight wars, but to lay the foundation for reformation of the military in a post War on Terror world. Like other "reform" secretaries of defense, including McNamara and Rumsfeld, Hagel found himself involved in conflicts that the US had not expected to fight.

Russian adventurism in Ukraine, the ongoing cauldron of the Syrian civil war, the persistence of the Taliban, and the rise of the IS all disrupted expectations over the course of Washington's military reform.

The most frustrating aspect of the debate over Hagel's firing is this; the discussion has focused on Hagel's inability to anticipate or prevent crises, as if the entire world revolved around the Washington beltway.

Americans lack a good vocabulary for talking and thinking about events that are beyond their control. To be sure, this problem isn't unique to Americans; observers around the world tend to overstate US influence on events, and on the ability of the US itself to create and resolve problems.

The rise of the IS, the persistence of the Syrian civil war, and Russia's interest in Ukraine all stem from factors that preceded Hagel, and even Obama. Hagel could perhaps have managed each crisis more effectively, but in that respect he's in good company.

Firing a secretary of defense, especially in a time of crisis, isn't an easy thing to do.

It immediately focuses criticism on the president, and suggests that the administration lacks a firm grasp on what it's trying to accomplish.

Consequently, there's little doubt that Obama must have had serious reservations about Hagel's ability to do the job. Given the administration's response to the various recent crises, criticism about lack of control doesn't seem too far off the mark.

Obama and former secretary of state Hillary Clinton sought to "pivot" the US away from Europe and the Middle East and toward the Asia-Pacific region. Obama wanted to terminate the two ongoing wars, and create a secure foundation for restructuring the US military forces.

None of that has happened, and now Obama will need to put someone new in charge of the Pentagon for the final two years of his administration.

The author is assistant professor of national security at Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce, University of Kentucky. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn 

(For the latest China news, please follow @PDChina on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/PDChina and @PeoplesDaily on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/PeoplesDaily)