In January 2013, as US defense secretary, Leon Panetta lifted a ban on women serving in combat. Some time after January 2025, if Pete Hegseth, Donald Trump’s nominee for the role, is confirmed and stays true to his expressed position, that ban may be reimposed.
“I’m particularly concerned about that, having been the secretary that opened up that opportunity for women to be in combat,” Panetta told the Guardian. “And I’m very proud of it, because I think they performed well. They’re great warriors. I’ve seen them in action in Iraq and Afghanistan and elsewhere. And we now have over 200,000 women who are part of the military … In a democracy like the United States, it makes sense for everyone who’s willing to serve to have that opportunity.”
Women can fight. Ukrainian women prove it each day of their war with Russia. But Hegseth has said he thinks otherwise – and has also opposed service by out gay Americans, another group Panetta welcomed.
Amid meetings on Capitol Hill – particularly with Senator Joni Ernst of Iowa, a Republican veteran herself – Hegseth has shown signs of retreat. But as actual policy differs from confirmation process chats, so Hegseth’s nomination remains controversial. Hegseth served in Iraq and Afghanistan and is now a Fox News host. Reporting has revealed mismanagement of veterans-based non-profits, stories of public drunkenness and allegations of mistreatment of women.
And yet, in the age of Trump, with political norms shattered, Hegseth denies wrongdoing and remains in play.
Panetta said: “I think a lot is going to depend on the FBI background check and whether it reflects more instances of abuse of alcohol or sexual deviation of one kind or another. And it’s also going to depend a lot on how he answers questions that relate to national defense.
“In order to be secretary of defense, you better damn well be aware of what the dangers in the world are, and what are the threats that are out there, and how is the defense department going to respond to those threats. And so there’s a lot of areas to cover in order to really determine at a very critical time in our history whether he’s prepared to become secretary of defense.”
Now 86, Panetta understand the demands of the job well.
Under Barack Obama, he was secretary of defense from 2011 to 2013, after leading the CIA from 2009 to 2011. Before that, under Bill Clinton, he was White House chief of staff and budget chief. Before that, he was a member of Congress for 16 years, House budget chair for four. Before that, he was an army intelligence officer, a congressional aide and director of the office for civil rights.
The New Yorker once called the Australian poet, essayist, humorist and TV presenter Clive James “a brilliant bunch of guys”. Panetta could be the political equivalent. Like James, he’s immensely engaging, laughing often, even when the subject is as serious as how Democrats should prepare for Trump’s second term.
Panetta has spoken of the “moment of danger” he thinks Trump poses on US soil, from dreams of deploying troops against protesters and immigrants to disregard for political rules and long-held rights. But Panetta expects – “deep, deep down in my guts” – that norms and constitutional guardrails will continue to hold.
In domestic and foreign affairs, Panetta counsels engagement.
Speaking from his home office, from which he co-presents the One Decision podcast with the former MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove and works with the Panetta Institute for Public Policy at California State University, he said: “Democrats should be ready to see whether they can negotiate with Republicans, to find some kind of consensus.
“This last Congress has been extremely dysfunctional, and the only way [House] Republicans have been able to pass anything is with Democratic votes, and so in a Congress where they’re going to have an even thinner majority, there are going to be opportunities.”
Based on his own experience, Panetta thinks Democrats are presently “standing back and seeing whether or not [Republicans] can get their act together, or whether they self-destruct”.
For some of Trump’s cabinet picks, self-destruction is an option. Matt Gaetz withdrew from consideration for attorney general. Hegseth’s fate is unsure. In contrast, Panetta sees few obstacles for Marco Rubio, the Florida senator nominated for secretary of state, or John Ratcliffe, a former congressman and intelligence official up to lead the CIA. Tulsi Gabbard, picked for director of national intelligence, raises greater alarm.
Panetta said: “The role of DNI involves coordinating some 18 intelligence agencies in order to make sure that they’re providing consistent and credible information to elected leaders, and she has very little background in the intelligence arena, and that’s what concerns me.”
A former Democratic congresswoman from Hawaii and a lieutenant colonel in the US army reserve, Gabbard has attracted controversy over positions and statements regarding Syria and Russia. Syria is now in chaos. Russia remains a chief concern. Widely seen to be too close to Vladimir Putin, Trump has promised to swiftly end the war in Ukraine. Most observers expect him to act to Russia’s advantage. Panetta is not so sure.
To Panetta, Trump’s plunge into international affairs, meeting foreign leaders even while Joe Biden remains in the White House, is “a hopeful sign. I think he’s embraced something that I thought was really important: Ronald Reagan’s position of ‘peace through strength’. If [Trump’s] willing to follow Reagan, it leads you to playing the role of world leadership and building strong alliances. And so I’m hopeful Trump understands that the only way you’re going to deal with a very dangerous world is by working with our allies to develop common security.”
Reagan championed Nato. Trump regularly threatens it. Nonetheless, this summer Panetta cited Reagan in his speech to the Democratic national convention, otherwise a strongly worded warning of the perils of a second Trump presidency. Reagan, Panetta said, “made very clear that the United States cannot be isolationist”. Trump ran on an isolationist slogan: “America First”. Asked if he really has any hope Trump will not turn to isolationism in power, and instead might instead continue to support Ukraine, Panetta said: “Well, it’s a good question.
“Since Trump likes to project strength, I find it very difficult to think that he’ll suddenly just turn his back on Ukraine and allow Putin to succeed. I think that would make him look very weak as a leader, particularly as his first step. It would be comparable, in my book, to the mistake that Biden made with Afghanistan [in rapidly withdrawing, in 2021]. I hope that Trump recognizes that if he really wants negotiations, what he’s got to do is give Ukraine the leverage they need, to continue to provide them with weapons and support so they can gain the initiative.”
•••
Panetta also insists on opportunities for progress in the Middle East, even though he expects Trump to give a “blank check” to Israel against Hamas in the Palestinian territories, against Hezbollah in Lebanon, and in Syria too.
“Israel has done a good job at weakening Hezbollah and Hamas and Iran, and I think it was pretty obvious that the mere fact that neither Russia nor Iran nor any of Iran’s proxies could come to the rescue of [Bashar al-]Assad [the fallen Syrian president], makes this a very important chance to try to … develop the opportunity that the Abraham accords provided.”
Signed at the White House in September 2020, the Abraham accords established formal relations between Israel, the UAE and Bahrain, ranging all three against Iran. Panetta hopes the accords can also be used as a basis for “not only governance in Syria but hopefully Palestinian governance in some kind of state where they can both secure and govern themselves”.
Iran is a major item on Trump’s plate. In 2015, the Obama administration joined a deal with Tehran, to contain its nuclear ambitions. In 2018, Trump pulled out. Now Trump is reportedly considering airstrikes.
“There are a set of options out there, some of which can lead in a better direction, some of which I think could lead to war,” Panetta said. “A weakened Iran, if they make the wrong decision when it comes to developing a nuclear weapon, I think that could very well result in military action, not just by Israel but the United States. And I’m assuming [Iran is] aware of the fact it could mean the end of the regime.
“… I guess the issue is whether Trump would be willing to have some of his own envoys engage in that dialogue [with Iran]. Because I think he understands that he did not really follow up on the United States getting out of the nuclear agreement. In his second term, the follow-up could very well be some kind of negotiations. If it isn’t, then the question becomes: ‘Do you continue to isolate Iran and hope that they can go the way of Syria?’ I don’t know that can happen either.”
Asked if this is the sort of dilemma that keeps a defense secretary awake at night, Panetta laughs and agrees. He also begs pardon to take a call, then explains that the caller was Ted Balestreri, a California restaurateur who on New Year’s Eve 2010 told Panetta that if Osama bin Laden was brought to justice, he would honor his friend with a 141-year-old, $10,000 bottle of wine. As CIA director, Panetta knew the operation to capture or kill the al-Qaida leader, and avenge 9/11, was well under way.
“So on 1 May [2011], when we conducted the operation [in which Bin Laden was killed], I called my wife and said: ‘Call Ted, tell him to look at the television. The president is going to make an announcement, and he owes me a bottle of wine.’ And she then got a call back, and he said, ‘The son of a bitch … he set me up.’ Anyway, we opened that bottle of wine.”
Panetta laughs. Then he returns to the discussion at hand, of Trump, Russia, Iran, China, North Korea, terrorism and other foreign policy challenges – and nightmares – to come.
