Young Professionals Briefing: Securing the Future—Navigating Careers in Defense and National Security

Panelists discuss careers in defense and security within the U.S. government and the many forms they can take.

The CFR Young Professionals Briefing Series provides an opportunity for those early in their careers to engage with CFR. The briefings feature remarks by experts on critical global issues and lessons learned in their careers. These events are intended for individuals who have completed their undergraduate studies and have not yet reached the age of thirty to be eligible for CFR term membership.

DUNDERDALE: Good evening. Welcome, everyone, to the Council on Foreign Relations. Thank you for joining us tonight for this session of our Young Professionals Briefing Series. My name is Sam Dunderdale. I am the deputy director of the Term Member Program here at the Council, and also the Washington Meetings Program. I’m pleased to welcome those of you who are here in D.C. along with the over 130 participants joining on Zoom.

CFR is an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher. On our website you will find links to past events, reports, podcasts and analysis from our fellows. CFR aims to be a resource for its members and for the public to provide information and timely analysis on U.S. foreign policy. We try and organize about one event in the Young Professionals Series per month, and we also send out a newsletter that highlights Council meetings and publications.

Tonight we will have about thirty minutes of conversation with two Department of Defense professionals, Stephanie Ahern and Peter Belk, followed by thirty minutes of Q&A where we encourage you to raise your hand and engage in the discussion. For those of you who are here in Washington, we’ll also have a reception afterwards. And for those of you attending virtually, to ask a question during the Q&A period, please click on the “raise hand” icon on the Zoom window.

Lastly, as a reminder, please silence all mobile devices, and tonight’s discussion is on the record.

So, again, thank you so much for joining us this evening, and I will turn things over to our presider, Tammy Schultz, director of national security and professor of strategic studies at the U.S. Marine Corps War College. Thank you.

SCHULTZ: Thank you for that introduction. Thank you all for braving the snow to come out to listen to some old people. By that I mean me, not them. (Laughter.)

One thing to mention is we are all term members from the Council on Foreign Relations, so we really—I just enjoyed the heck out of the program, and we may talk about that a little bit more.

You have the speakers’ bios so I’m not going to really deeply into those. We’ll sort of introduce it with the first question.

But Peter Belk is the acting director for the deputy assistant secretary of Defense for personnel and readiness. That’s a huge job. It essentially—and he’ll talk more about that—means that he has to ensure that our forces are ready to go in many different contingencies. And like I said, we’re not talking forty-hour weeks there, are we, buddy? (Laughter.)

Stephanie Ahern I have known for probably twenty or thirty years. Like, last time we saw each other was a term Council event, so obviously we’ve got to get back on each other’s Christmas cards list. (Laughter.) She’s a major general and she now is the Army’s director for strategy, plans, and policy—another huge job. For those geeks, it’s the G-3/5/7. What’s that? Three means operations—we can go into it later.

I will say just really briefly, I’m going to leave very quickly. I would love to stay for the reception but if you’re interested or have any questions, I’m more than happy to answer those. My email is [email protected]. So again, my apologies for that.

I want to start with a question that will get to what they actually do and what they have done. And in some ways it’s not a fair question given your portfolios, but—and why don’t we start with you? But what does a normal day look like?

BELK: A normal day. (Laughter.) A normal day starts for me pretty early, and that’s largely because there’s quite a bit of preparation that, at least in the role that I do, that I need to do in order to get going for my day, whatever that is going to look like. And no day really looks like the same, any particular given day.

So basically—so just let me maybe go back a step—a little bit about what I do in the aggregate. One way to think about the role of the assistant secretary of Defense for readiness is to serve as that chief risk or impact officer for the secretary of Defense. So secretary of Defense at the macro level, the Department of Defense, right—we’re making decisions about how we’re going to deploy the force, how we’re going to resource the force, if you will, so the development of the force, and then ultimately the things that go into how we design the force, at again, the macro level. And what goes into that and the tradeoffs that go into that, right, are very complicated—not something that you probably already haven’t figured out, but there’s a lot that goes into that that work and what the department does in that. There’s a lot of competing interests that go into that. Services have particular interests and perspectives on that. Other parts—what we call the Fourth Estate—other parts of the Department of Defense’s organization have perspectives on that.

My job is to be able to provide—and don’t want to say my job. It’s not really my job; it’s really my team’s job—is to be able to provide the secretary with the best advice possible about what are the impacts, what we do about where we put people, how we resource the capabilities that those people are going to have and how we are planning for the future of what those people and systems need to be able to do against particular threats, and what are the things that we do that make sure that those things—our force is the most ready force possible to be able to do those—do those things.

So oftentimes the kind of advice or council or oversight that we’re performing on a day-to-day basis is being able to say, hey, we want to be able to keep this carrier group in the Red Sea for X number of days; we can do that, but that wasn’t part of our original plan, and this is what the impact of that is going to be, whatever decision you want to make about what that’s going to have for the force.

So a lot of my day looks like having to figure out through the various processes and routines that we run in the Department of Defense, how to provide that perspective to the deputy secretary and the secretary on a routine basis, and that involves a lot of careful, considered partnership and collaboration with partners like General Ahern and others who we work with in the services so that we make sure we’re giving the best possible advice to the department.

So what does that look like on a day-to-day basis? An early basis—like I said, it starts pretty early, and then it’s, you know movement to contact, as we like to say in the Army, right, about what we’re going to potentially face in terms of the various meetings, reviews, and oversight and things that I do and my team does, right, in order to provide that best perspective, if you will, to our seniors.

SCHULTZ: That’s a great answer. And I should point out too that Mr. Belk served in the U.S. Army, has done public service his whole life. So both individuals up here are part of the civil service, which essentially—highest level, Senior Executive Service, basically means they serve at the pleasure of the president, but they serve—how long have you been working in DOD?

BELK: Oh, God.

SCHULTZ: Or how many presidents have you served? (Laughter.) Probably that’s—that may not be an easy—

BELK: I’m really showing my age. (Laughter.) I think it’s five. It’s been—it’s a lot.

SCHULTZ: Yep. So they—so this is—they are shining stars of what the civil service looks like, and I just want to put that note in there.

General?

AHERN: (Laughs.) Doctor.

SCHULTZ: (Laughs.)

AHERN: So I think for us—the same, there’s no normal day. I would say for most folks you do go to the gym or something in the morning, one, for just mental stability, but as far as just to keep healthy. Maybe we’ll just talk through today at the top level of what I did.

So, you know, after exercising, the first meeting we had—we have foreign area officers, so not only military teammates but also civilian teammates, and so there was a meeting across the leadership of that. So we dialed in.

I should say, I do go to meetings. And I told that to my kids and they’re like, that’s terrible. (Laughter.) But it’s a way to talk to people, I guess.

So we were talking about kind of the leadership and some focus of that. We then shifted over to—we’re running a wargame with the Center for Army Analysis, and so we have a whole lot of operation resource systems analysis forces in the Army, and so they’re running a wargame for us. We’re focused on Europe. So we had teammates that were dialing in from Europe, teammates that were from the other services, so from the Navy, from the Air Force, the Marines. We’re talking about a wargame that we’re going to be running at the end of the month to make sure people knew what were happening—what were the bad guys planning to do, what were we planning to do, what were our allies planning to do, and then how we would get the evidence.

So right after that—I actually left that one early, went to another teammate—we have acquisition professionals, so in addition to the security cooperation part of what the services, with a whole lot of support and guidance from office of secretary of Defense, are making sure that we’re doing, from a foreign military sales—what are the equipment that our allies or partners are interested in, and then how do we make sure that they’re trained on that? So we went through and that was focused on a different region, as far as what were priorities and how were we going through that.

We came back. We had passed—the secretary of the Army had done a memo going to the SecDef. We’d gotten feedback on that, so we went through in trying to figure out, OK, what does that then mean from the Army and with the allies?

We had one of our teammates that’s going to school, and so he worked within our organization. So today was his last day before going down to a school, and then he’s going to go teach at West Point, so he’ll go to grad school en route to teaching in the physics department.

We’ve got some evaluations, so the people aspect of it.

And then the very last meeting before I ran over here was talking to my immediate boss. We have meetings in the Pentagon called Tanks, and so they get the senior leaders coming across the military, and so we were preparing him to support our chief on Friday for a Tank. And that was just today. (Laughter.)

So I’d say that the fun part is, is that the subjects are really pretty broad, the people are amazing, the challenges are really complex, and every day you leave intellectually exhausted and knowing that as a group you’re helping make a difference.

SCHULTZ: That’s great.

And I should note for all of you, I’m not going to do the normal thirty minutes of me asking questions. I want to turn it over to you like in twenty or so—like, I’m going to ask one or two more questions, and the challenge is, I want some from people online because I was told that won’t happen. (Laughter.) So there is beer for me riding on somebody online focusing in.

What advice, Steph or Peter, would you give your twenty-two- to twenty-nine-year-old self?

BELK: Chill out. (Laughter.) That’s first.

Yeah, I mean—well, I do mean that seriously. I would talk a little bit about this—like, what I think that I thought was pretty consequential and important at twenty-five—I’m fifty-three and I’ll be fifty-four in March—you know, pales in comparison to some things that are much more consequential now, that—(inaudible)—was talking about, you know, normal day.

I’m a late father, so I have a six-year-old.

SCHULTZ: Oh.

BELK: And—yeah.

SCHULTZ: That’s a blessing.

BELK: I feel the same way. Right. Yeah.

SCHULTZ: But ouch, yeah. (Laughter.)

BELK: But it isn’t, right?

SCHULTZ: Right.

BELK: And so, you know, would I—if I were to tell my twenty-five-year-old or twenty-four- or whatever-year-old self, you know, what to be thinking about, think about—you know, what you think is important at that particular moment is, at least for me now, you know, pales in comparison to why I prioritize my family and things along those lines.

So would say—you know, what’s the so-what of all that? You know, that balance, if you can. And the thing I probably would have said a lot more of that to myself at that time, I probably should say it more to myself today, you know, is pretty important.

And the only other thing I would also add to that is don’t be afraid to fail.

AHERN: Yeah.

BELK: You’re going to learn more from—and I’ll say this, to this day I learn more from what I do—what I fail at, what I don’t succeed at, than I do from what I succeed at.

And that’s really hard to internalize at every stage, I think, of your life. And what you’ll find though—I promise, as long as you’re ethical, legal, and moral and you’re doing those kind of things, you’re going to learn more—and by the say, when I say ethical, legal—as long as you know, because lots of people are going to say lots of things throughout your career. As long as you know that, right, you know, everything is going to be something you’re going to pull away from and it’s going to make you a stronger, better person about what it is you do, and you’re probably going to learn more about what other opportunities come from that. I guarantee it. And I have to tell myself that continuously, I think, to this day. And for—I think everybody here is probably in some form or another Type A in some capacity. (Laughter.) It’s really hard to internalize and to live—but anyway, that’s probably what I would say, you know—Belk, grab a drink and chill. (Laughter.)

SCHULTZ: And I see some of you are already doing that tonight. It will make more sense. Cheers, in fact.

General?

AHERN: Yeah, so I think what I would suggest is, is try to figure out what’s the azimuth that you’re wanting to head. Try not to get a point solution. And it’s not that “if I get this, then therefore I will be happy.” But I would say that when you have your azimuth is that there probably will be opportunities that come up that you weren’t expecting. And if you know the direction that you’re wanting to head towards and an opportunity comes up, it’s absolutely okay to shift your azimuth; just do it purposefully. And I think one of the things that, you know, I’ve actually—this is the first job that I’ve had that I’m like, I want that job.

SCHULTZ: (Laughs.)

AHERN: But what’s funny was that I actually got announced in this job as a different job, and then I got shifted over to this job. And so, but what I always—it’s like, what are jobs that would really allow me to push the boundaries of what I was able to learn, what I was able to contribute.

Another is, if it’s an amazing boss it almost doesn’t care what the job is, you’re going to learn a lot and you’re going to contribute a lot.

The only other thing that I’d say is, is that make sure you continue to find things that make you happy, that bring joy. And sometimes for me that’s just making sure that I can go to the gym. And sometimes I’m half asleep, but that’s for me. And as you’re continuing to contribute to other people and to help make huge differences, finding some way to continue having your batteries recharged is something that I would encourage you. You can’t always to everything at the same time, but even when, you know, you’ve got the little kids—and thankfully mine are no longer six—(laughs)—but making sure that you’re finding some ways to keep yourself inspired so that you can help make a difference for others.

SCHULTZ: That was great.

And Michèle Flournoy I think at one point said, so—hopefully will still be the first female secretary of Defense—we’ll see—to follow the boss.

AHERN: Yeah. Yep.

SCHULTZ: So she started in nuclear stuff. That was in her area. And that boss then mentored her throughout the way.

AHERN: Yep.

SCHULTZ: One of the things that has been brought up, and I heard it in both of your remarks—how do you—like, everybody talks about balance, right? So one—actually Christine Wormuth has said this, Michèle Flournoy, Kath Hicks, so, like, you know, it’s solid. But it’s like, you can have it all but you can’t have it all at the same time.

AHERN: Yeah.

SCHULTZ: I sort of try to think of it as there’s—you’re juggling balls and a couple of them are crystal—my family, right; you mentioned health. Like, OK, those can’t drop. But how do you guys make those decisions in terms of prioritization, in terms of getting to be very successful where you are? There were probably tradeoffs that came along the way that—like, ouch, that one hurt. How do you decide when to let even a crystal ball sort of get close to the ground, right, and then pick it back up? Like, how do you find that balance?

Let’s start with the general.

AHERN: Not well. (Laughter.) And people that say they do—they may. It’s really hard. And I think of when I was at the War College as a student and every person that came through, they’re like, you have to have balance in your life. And you’re like, and how did you do it? “We didn’t.”

SCHULTZ: Yep. (Laughs.)

AHERN: It’s like, OK. (Laughter.)

But I also think, you know, there are some things that there are better or worse times to do things, and then sometimes life just happens. And so I think it’s again, trying to think through is that, you know, what is it that you need to do right now? What are the things that you can only do right now? And then what are the things that you can put off?

And I think it’s also making sure that you’ve got people that you can talk with—your family, your friends, many mentors. Having many different people that you can go use as sounding boards, because you’re probably not going to follow any one specific person’s path. You’re probably going to chart your own. But if you can have people that can better understand if you do this, here are doors that will close; if you do this, there are doors that will open. It just helps you make more informed choices.

And then again, sometimes these weird, wacky opportunities come up—seize them if it’s something that you think will help you get to kind of the longer term of where you’re wanting to get to.

SCHULTZ: Peter? And then I’m going to turn—I’m going to do one more question and then it’s over to y’all.

BELK: Two things. One is, plan—short-term, mid-term and long-term planning, and I’ll give a little more detail around that. Actually, that’s actually pretty easy, believe it or not.

The harder part is how do you generate the self-assuredness and the security to make the decisions that you need to make about balance that are probably going to get you and get—they’re all going to have the right outcomes, right, but you’re going to feel comfortable with it and also feel comfortable vis-à-vis the folks that you’re potentially working with, you know, who are placing those demands on you.

It's easier to do—in some ways, right—there’s—it’s easier, I would argue, for me to do that at this stage of my life and my career with the benefit of perspective and just, you know—Indiana Jones liked to say, “It’s not the years; it’s the miles,” right? (Laughter.) The miles underneath it, right, versus something else. And that’s hard. That I think is hard.

The planning piece is a little bit easier, and I’ll talk a little bit about that, right, give you—give an example.

I was at the—I was coming out of an assignment at the National Security Council in 2016, and I’ll share very—personally my wife and I were trying to have a child. So at that time I was forty-five, so a little later, also. And we made a deliberate decision based upon not just the fact that I was at the National Security Council at that time but because I was looking to do some work with a special mission unit I had been attached to in my Reserve capacity and go out and pretend I was doing cool things and things like that. But those cool things were going to place certain demands. So we had a very deliberate planned conversation about how to balance, if you will, what were going to be the commitments that were involved with being parents as well as what we knew were going to be the demands not just coming off from the White House but, you know, in some of the work that I was going to be doing in that particular community, what I ultimately did for another two years right after that.

It worked. At least from my perspective it did, and I think from my wife’s as well. But it really required us sort of doing a map, right? You can see I’m doing this tactile drawing, right? Like, it required actually mapping that out and being—and sticking to the plan, if you will. And yes, no plan survives contact, blah, blah, blah, but this one—you have a little bit more control over some of that than you might realize.

You know, General Ahern’s point about, you know, getting that time in the gym—you know, that’s about planning. That’s even a more tactical piece, right? It’s a planning of the day, right?

So, you know, we kind of were joking about that one or two drinks, right, but you know, if you’re—chances are, right, if you’re spending the front end of your evening, right, or whatever it is—it’s going to be harder to make that planful decision to be up at, you know, four a.m. or five a.m. And yeah, that’s what you’re going to need to do in order to get that in, right, to balance that against everything else, right, so those competing priorities.

And the last thing I would say is that as you’re thinking through those planful pieces and then the things that make you feel comfortable and secure and the things—the choices you’re going to make—and this is where, again, I would give myself some advice that—now to my twenty-something-year-old self, like, what is it that is—where are you putting your time and your effort into? And you know, where do you need to—I’ll put it in these terms—potentially fish or cut bait? You know, is it really maximizing it relative to the things that you think you want to get involved in and you want to do? If you think that learning Chinese is important to—or Mandarin to be very specific, right, to be very—is critical to what it is you want to do in life, that’s choice and balance right there that are going to be—that are going to have impacts on other things. You don’t do that without significant investment of time and effort and the rest of it.

So, some additional thoughts.

SCHULTZ: Great.

One more question from me but then let’s open it up to you.

Stretch assignments—getting in over your head. Right? I’m sure you have taken—most people at higher levels, I’ve asked them like, were you scared when you showed up the first day? And this is to include like secretaries of departments. And they’re like, oh God, yeah. Like, it was terrifying. (Laughter.)

And we were talking before we came in here about just how consequential many of the decisions we make in national security are—I mean, in some cases, life or death. How do you balance stretch assignments, getting in over your head, which allows you to learn more, you’ll get—like always—in all reality, we’re all in over our heads. (Laughter.) But how do you balance that stretch assignment with the risk, knowing that you’re going to have to get up to speed and some of the decisions you’re making have really consequential outcomes?

BELK: If I may, I’d just quick pick up on it.

SCHULTZ: Please.

BELK: Yeah. So I came out of a—what in DOD parlance was a one-star job to what’s called—when I—and I was at—I don’t know if it’s in my bio or not but I was a deputy director of operations at U.S. Northern Command. So it was a one-star job. And then I fleeted into, if you want to call it that—it’s kind of the way the civil service works—into what is called a three-star job, SES 3—as the principal deputy assistant secretary of Defense for readiness. That’s the job I was hired into in June of 2023.

So there was a bit of a stretch even just that, just if you kind of know how these things work from a department perspective, civil service—how you’re viewed, blah, blah, blah.

About a month after I arrived I was told the undersecretary had resigned and you’re getting fleeted up to be the acting assistant secretary, which is, in the DOD parlance, a four-star job, right?

And it’s come up in other contexts where, you know—and my particular portfolio is interesting, I guess, and challenging in even the way it’s staffed and the rest of it. But it’s even come up in conversation, like, hey, are you in over your head? Do you feel in over your head? And the answer is, yes and no, right? Yeah, I’d—not only did I not know anything about the portfolio, but I’d never operated—and the time at the White House is not—(inaudible)—has similar—you know, we spent some time there, right? It’s not the same, right? And so operating in the department at that level immediately—folks you were calling sir, ma’am—now all of a sudden it’s, you know, Jim and Jim, right—I’m thinking of the two vices when I say that, right? You know, it’s a very different dynamic, right? So you’re—it’s different.

But the question wasn’t really about that, but just to give you some context on how do you deal with it—I asked a lot of hard questions and I did a lot of diligence—which also has some impact, by the way, because, if you know anything about the Department of Defense, people actually don’t—they say they do but they don’t. they really don’t want to get asked too many hard questions. They kind of want to know—we know and we go on with it. And that’s the culture thing, by the way. Everybody’s very protective about their slice of it.

So how do you get those hard questions and get the understanding you need to do to be effective, and then try to be as effective as possible in your environment?

Fast-forward. You asked about a typical day. Today my day was mostly spent with transition, OK? And what I mean by that is I had to talk to a number of folks on our transition team. And in talking to them, I’m essentially walking into folks who are extremely—I will share with you—very bright, very committed patriots who want to do the right thing for the president and the nation, OK—and—but don’t—haven’t had the tactile feel on what is a very esoteric portfolio. The highest compliment I believe I’ve received in my time in role was after that discussion, coming out and them saying to me, “I thought what you did is what the services do, but now I understand what you do relative to what the department’s needs are and the requirements and the distinction in your role and theirs.”

That to me was success. It sounds very bureaucratic and that kind of thing, but it was a fundamental understanding. But more to the point, there was at least the communication of some degree of confidence that what had been communicated and shared about the work that we did was impactful and meaningful to those folks. So that was a heck of a journey in what I think was a big reach for me and for my team, to be honest with you, because I think we moved and we grew together over what’s been about an eighteen-month stretch.

SCHULTZ: Yep. And so, just for clarification, civilians in the Pentagon have—like, you can be a one-star, two-star, three-star, but it’s just for protocol purposes, right? So as one gentleman told me for yet another unfinished book I’m working on—(laughter)—like, hey, see those stars in the flag that he has? Those stars belong to the office, not to you. So you treat them with dignity.

Steph’s stars—those are Steph’s stars, right? So if you do run into the Pentagon and somebody starts hoarding over—“I’m a three-star” or whatever and they’re a civilian—you got yourself a problem, and sort of put them back in the box. And you can quote me on that.

AHERN: (Laughs.)

SCHULTZ: In terms of the transition teams—so any presidential election, there is the team who has the football—like, literally—right now, and the job of the other team—so Peter, in this instance, has to get the team who’s coming in sped up—up to speed, because if not that creates huge problems.

So just a couple pieces of context.

Steph?

AHERN: No, thanks.

I think one of the things I love about being in the defense and national security community is that every job is pushing you in ways that are uncomfortable. And so I forget which Star Wars movie it is, but it’s the one when Leia dies—

BELK: “The Last Jedi.”

AHERN: “The Last—

BELK: Oh, no, it’s “The Return of Skywalker.”

AHERN: And you know, they’re—people are like, I’m not ready. And they’re like, no one’s ever ready.

And I think to me one of the things within the jobs are is that, you know, when you get to a place is that what’s the expertise that your job and your office needs to have, and very quickly behind that, who are the partners that you have to work with, right? Because there’s—even if you‘re in charge, there’s still a lot of people that you’re working with you, right? And many of the jobs that we have, we’re in meetings where no one actually works for anyone. And at the Pentagon, you’re coming from so many different places, and how do you get the different responsibilities and authorities to help make a difference together?

I do think—again, like, the people not wanting to ask to ask the tough questions, for good or ill, this is part of what you’re going to need to do, is to ask questions. There’s a lot of people that don’t actually speak English, because we just speak in acronyms. And that’s not unique to the Defense Department. But wow, do we have a corner on that market.

And so I would say that even within the Army, so my last job, I was working in Army Futures Command. I was looking at concepts, how are we going to operate with our allies, with the joint force in 2040 when technology is changing is fast as it was. I changed into this job, and we used a completely different set of terms.

And so I was just like, stop. What do you mean by that—and so asking people, expecting people to speak in clear English, and just realizing that that’s normal and that’s okay. But I think it’s being able to ask that question, why are we doing this? Why are we not doing this?

And then I think as far as, you know, being ready for what’s coming at you, it’s also what does your leader need? What does your leader want? And then, what are the things that your leader should want that once you’ve helped them get what they need and what they want, and you’re able to help, OK, what’s some additional things that you didn’t ask for but you know, if there’s time after you answer their question to help then, OK, what are the things that are really important that you haven’t yet got to.

And I think this is where, as long as you’re not trying to solve everything yourself, you’re bringing as many possible teammates with you, leveraging what they’re good at, giving credit to people who are helping, no task is insurmountable—even though in this—what we all do and what hopefully you all will be interested in doing, it’s really, really critical, and there’s very rarely good answers, because those have been solved a while ago.

SCHULTZ: Although they keep coming. And honestly, asking the right question, I hammer that at the War College. If you ask the wrong question, your answer doesn’t matter, right? You’ve already missed the boat. So figuring out that right question.

I’m going to give a fifteen-second anecdote. We have mics around. So we’ll bring the mic to you. And please, online, get stuff going on in the chat.

To the point—I think Peter made it—that like there’s or maybe—you both are so smart. I’m going to say you both said it—like I think Steph said, there’s no job that you’re actually ready for. And so when President-Elect Kennedy told McNamara he wanted him to be his Secretary of Defense, McNamara was like, I don’t know how to do that. Like, there’s I just—and Kennedy said there’s no class for being president either. So by the time they walked out, McNamara didn’t know he was going to do it, but just announced that McNamara would essentially be sec. of state.

So over to you online or—and anything’s up for grabs. Yep, right up there in front.

Q: Hi. My name is Madison. I am a war gamer contracted to OUSD(R&E).

And I was curious with kind of the growing focus on critical and emerging technologies, how do you both keep the person centered in your analysis, be that the warfighter or the decision maker?

AHERN: So, one, I think is understanding what the technologies can and can’t do. And you know, when we were in the 2040 space, like terminators are not 2040 space, right? So I think that you know, understanding what are machines good at, but then also what are machines not good at. And I think just, you know, staying at that center of that, and there are certain things that as Americans and as people that believe in freedoms and have the values grounded in some of our original documents that people always have to be making these decisions, especially if you were prosecuting lethal force not in a defensive way. And so I think being able to make sure that, what are the things—you know, what must humans do, is one of the things we would continue to come back at.

And so, I mean, there’s technologies that have existed for a long time for self-defense, self- protection, right? This is non-concerning. But I think, one, of not being scared of the technology, but then making sure you’re being smart enough about it so that you’re not waiting. Because, from an AI perspective, you can’t bolt on ethics at the end.

SCHULTZ: Exactly.

BELK: I’ll keep it quick. It’s a talk I gave at a special operations forum about six months ago. Artificial Intelligence is not a substitute for human intelligence, and machine learning is not a substitute for human learning. And I think that dovetails with everything General Ahern said, which is, you know, there’s a human element to all of this. And any capability, I would argue, whether it’s some type of autonomous capability that reflects human intent—again, human intent—or anything else out there, it’s really important to focus on what the underlying concepts—some of the work that General Ahern has talked about, right?—is ultimately, it can be driven by human factors.

AHERN: Absolutely, like AI has so much bias in it. And I would echo not being afraid of it, but we can’t leave ethics at the door. I actually see a scenario in which maybe China gains some tactical advantages, and then gloves off, right—which, like human off the loop or whatever, like, that scares me. But there’s no silver bullet. We always look for one. This is not it, and we need to keep track of the ethics.

Other questions?

SCHULTZ: Good question.

Yes, sir.

Q: Thank you all for your time this evening. I’ve found it very insightful thus far.

My name is Avi. I work in the Bureau of East Asia and Pacific at the Department of State.

I’m wondering what you all see as the maybe two or three top policy challenges, national security issues kind of further down the line that we all as young professionals starting our career can focus on now that will set us up for success in five, ten, fifteen years.

AHERN: I’ll just do a quick—my quick is the answers—the best advice I’ve got are the analogy—I was studying al-Qaida in 1998, then 9/11 happened. My mentor was like, oh, you’re going to do terrorism now. It was like, nope, that’s going to be flooded. We’re going to invade some places, and we’re going to get that part really right, but not what comes next, right? The post-conflict reconstruction then.

So the analogy is, don’t be where the hockey puck is at. You want to try via trends, via your gut, whatever, where’s the hockey puck going. So if you all get on the same, you know, bandwagon of where it’s at right now, you don’t want to be there, because that’s going to be obsolete by the time you’re done.

SCHULTZ: So that’s for either of you.

BELK: You know, and I apologize. I’m going to answer, kind of answer, not answer your question. And partly because we’re on the record, I want to preserve the space of the work that I do in the roles I do it now, and candidly preserve the space of an incoming team and the priorities that set and not prejudice that one way or another.

But what I would offer, right, and this is going to sound kind of cliché-ish, but this is the suggestions I give to folks all time. I kind of work on a “be, know, do” way of thinking, and I’ll just hit on the B’s: Be good. Be flexible. Be ready.

So whatever it is you’re doing now—and this will get to what potentially you might have to think about in the future—you know, be good at it. You know, if you’re focused in the EAP right now within State, and you have a particular portfolio, be good at it. That’s what’s going to be most relevant for how folks, you know, see for other potential opportunities. It’s going to be less relevant about the fact that you did it in a particular East Asian and Pacific issue, but it’s going to be more relevant how you did it.

Then being flexible, to point, right, where you think you were studying al-Qaida in ’98 and that was going to be the issue du jour, it’s be flexible about what’s going to be. And this much I can promise you: There’s will be a continuously, rapidly evolving and changing environment.

And then it’s the ready piece, which I think that is also critical, is that it’s not just being flexible about what to do. It’s not being good at what you’re doing, but also being ready to engage in a wide variety of different opportunities. And those opportunities, I think, will be much more reflective and evolve, right, over time, versus trying to game that. Like AI is the thing to do, or, you know, it’s all about China or Russia, or pick your poison, right? More to the point, what is it that is particularly passionate and interesting for you, and those things, once you’re good and ready, and the rest of that with that, right, those, I think, will you know reflect the potential opportunities now and in the future.

SCHULTZ: Yeah, passion is important. It’s not sustainable unless you make sure you add the joy part too.

AHERN: Yeah. I mean, I emphatically agree. I think that finding something that you love, that you’re good at, and get paid for, follow that. (Laughter.)

I do think that—there is a book called Range, and you know, how—there’s some people that are just born, you know, masters of one thing, but many of them as such—how do you get as many different perspective as possible? Because that’s when you start seeing some linkages. But follow your passion.

And I think this is one of the things that I think the Council is very, very good at. There’s so many different experts, and that’s good. If everybody has expertise in one thing, those will help. But what are the things that we’re missing because we’re only focused in on one topic?

The other thing I’d say is just, you know, learn as much as possible. Intellectually hungry, intellectually humble.

And this is where things like the term member program—I was an international affairs fellow, things that the Council and things that, you know, Washington D.C. provides, go to things that you actually have no idea about, things of which you don’t think you’re interested in, and sometimes you’ll get some of those nuggets you’re like, huh, I didn’t even realize that those were happening so. But if you try to become something that you’re not, you’re probably going to be miserable along the way.

SCHULTZ: I can echo. Like so a lot of graduate students I teach at Georgetown, Maxwell, and the Marine Corps War College—but I have a lot of time on my hands apparently—there’s students who just drill down into their field because they think that will be helpful. And there’s some goodness to that. But I think the students that are most intellectually capable actually have the values you’re talking about. They take a class that is, you know what, this isn’t in my wheelhouse—and some people actually like, this is what I wanted to do, like, so not even just making the connections. But you may not know that your perfect topic is out there because you haven’t gone to, you know, CFR events that aren’t about that topic or whatnot. So I would totally echo that.

And we have a question online.

OPERATOR: We’ll take our next question from Sofia Ramirez.

Q: Hi. Good afternoon. Thank you so much for your time. My name is Sofia, and I am a Foreign Service Officer with the U.S. Department of State.

I wanted to ask a question about career switching. I realized from reading your bios that you all have been established in various circles, whether that’s the Pentagon or Army or Department of Defense, and I wanted to know if there was ever a time that you considered switching to a different career, whether that’s completely outside of government, whether that’s from department to department or agency.

Personally, I’m thinking in my own future—and if you know, being in the Foreign Service, to be completely frank, is what I want long term for my own lifestyle. And I’m at a point where I think it’s a bit scary to see what else is out there, given like the stability of the career and just how entrenched you become in the systems of your own surroundings. So any advice as to a time that you potentially pursued or considered pursuing a career search would be very helpful.

Thank you.

SCHULTZ: I’ll start since it’s on the record and forgot to say that it was on the record. So, everybody, we’re on the record, and I’m doing that in part because you may be a little handcuffed with what you guys might be able to say.

But I think the one thing I would offer to all of you is watch your student debt. I know that sounds like a stupid answer to that question, but you can find yourself in golden handcuffs that you may want to do a switch, but you can’t, because you’re making too much at the job you are now. It’s stable, as Sofia said. So as much as you can keep that down, that will allow you to have more options.

The other thing I’ll offer and turn it over, like, I don’t think I’ve ever interviewed for a job. Like, for realsies. Like I knew people from coming to events. I don’t call it networking just because I think that’s—I literally when I meet people have zero agenda with them, zero. And big guys can tell that, and gals can tell that, when you’re not essentially just trying to fish for a job or something. And because I have zero agenda, my rolodex has people like Steph in it, and now it’s got you. I’m bringing you to the dark side.

So if you are thinking of switching, the more events you can go to, the more people you can meet, et cetera. But you need to allow your—I mean, even just stupid stuff like getting a dog. I now, like, have a German Shepherd who’s on Prozac. Don’t ask. That’s a problem for later tonight. But that means I’m here because no one else will take him. So that was a self-limiting in terms of, obviously, D.C. is where you do stuff, but you just want to make very deliberate choices. Like you were saying in terms of mapping out, that would just be my short—which one of you wants to go first? Want to flip for it?

AHERN: I don’t care.

BELK: Look, I’ll let General Ahern—speak for herself, but I think actually our career paths are probably actually a little more dissimilar than similar. You know, General Ahern’s a career Army officer; if you look closely at my bio, I’m not clear that it’s actually been able to hold a job down, right? (Laughter.) So I’m not sure that’s actually—so I’ve been on one end of the extreme, which is I’ve had actually a lot of transition with my career. Sure, I’ve had eighteen total, I think, or I haven’t done the math. It’s been in some form or another associated with DOD. But the balance of the other time has been at the State Department, has been in law, has been in other career choices. What I would say is—or career opportunities, maybe a better way to think of

it. I’ll say two things. One is that, at least, I’d like to think that there’s been a certain measure of constancy in terms of the opportunities at least that I pursued. Yeah, there’s common threads maybe they come through, but I would say it’s anything but linear and anything necessarily that was predictable. I didn’t wake up one day and say, gee, it’d be great to be the acting assistant secretary of X or, you know, I really think I want to go, I don’t know, whatever it was, the portfolios I got involved in. It certainly wasn’t I was thinking—more to the point, and probably more relevant for you all, I don’t think I could have mapped this out the way it worked out at age twenty, whatever, right? So it certainly wasn’t what I was thinking about as I grew passion for this field, right, in my college years and later. And probably could talk endlessly about that.

What I would say, Sofia, is that career shifts can be extremely valuable, but they can also be extremely challenging, you know, and they need to be managed. So it isn’t necessarily that one should fear making shifts, but you want to be prepared and manage your expectations, and telling the folks that you’re going to be working with the expectations.

The final thing I would say is this, though—and I’m glad someone—I’m glad, Sofia, you came in and came online coming. I’m glad we’ve had a couple folks from the State Department talk. You know, I think all three of us are coming very Defense-heavy, if you will, perspective.

What I will share is, I think—I don’t think—I firmly believe that it’s important that we continue to look for talent opportunities across the spectrum of functions that a government performs in the security and/or national security space. And one area in particular is the more good work that the State Department does, the less money and blood and treasure that this department needs to expend. And one can have—and I think that could probably have—we could spend a couple hours talking about chicken and the egg about what should be where, what should be in lead and what’s not and why things have been deferred to that.

But in any case, Sofia, if you want to find me, you can find me somehow online, or through your counselor, or what have you. There’s some email that gets to me somehow. Believe me, I’m happy to share more thoughts about it, especially when you’re thinking about—because I started my—I started, in a way, part of my—I’ll keep it simple. I started—the early part of my career was at the State Department. So you know, and I wouldn’t have given that up for the world, and I would argue that it afforded me much more opportunities. I was thinking in other things going into defense then had I probably had started in defense, or a defense related, you know, agency or one of the services, or what have you.

AHERN: So I’d say, from an Army perspective, a constant has been, I’ve worn this uniform, but as an Army officer, I started off as an engineer. And so those of you that know Tonka Toys, that’s what I did for the first eight years. And it was amazing, because everything that you did, your soldiers, you finished projects, you took pictures, and we helped people. We helped U.S. people. We helped folks that were overseas.

I spent my company command—it was a long time ago, but it was in Afghanistan right at the very beginning when we went in. And my battalion commander, he helped refix the power grid at the Kandahar Airport so that we had power until the Army units were coming in. And my battalion executive officer, so his number two, helped fix the water well so that we would be able to have water until we were able to get, you know, some point. And I thought that was amazing, and I didn’t want to do that.

And so I switched over. I went to grad school for political science and switched to be a strategist. And it’s a very, very, very different way to serve the country, still wearing the uniform. I would say again, for most of you, the Department of Army civilians, the Department of Defense civilians, very, very similar ways, Department of State, Department of Treasury. There’s a lot of different opportunities. Intelligence community. In order to continue to go forward, you have to spend time in the different departments and agencies.

And so I would say it’s really trying to figure out, is it that you want a fundamentally different approach? Is it that, from a life perspective, that, you know, you want to have kids and they simply take a little bit more time, or you’ve just come off some really terrible like heart-wrenching assignments, so you need to slow down?

I would say grad school is a great opportunity to shift, to give you exposure of things you’re not aware of. I think the International Affairs Fellowship, which CFR hosts, that entire fellowship is to give you opportunities that you wouldn’t otherwise have to transform your career to be able to get faster, farther, to help make a difference. And so I think it’s being able to find these opportunities, but one’s trying to figure out why are you wanting to change? And then, in the organization that you’re at, do they offer different opportunities, or you’re actually wanting to try something different? And if you’re trying to do something different, talk to mentors, talk to different ways and take the plunge, make a difference.

SCHULTZ: No, and I would just add because they can’t—given their positions, Sofia, that if it’s because you’re an FSO and you are civil servant to different presidents, right, you may be wrong about if that’s the reason that you’re thinking for the shift, right? I work a lot with the State Department folks, another unfinished book on that, but I see a trend, and a lot of Foreign Service officers resigned or were close to doing so in the Obama administration about Syria. And that was to them, like, from speaking to them, doing some interviews and stuff, heart wrenching, because they were like, oh man. Like, so if it’s for partisan reasons, just know, like the ball, like, floats both ways. And if you’re a civil servant, I personally would not—if you love what you’re doing, and you said you want this for your life, the life is great, that that’s what you want to do, you know, travel, learn, don’t let anybody take that away from you.

Any other questions here?

Yep, up in front.

Q: Hi. My name is Thad (sp), naval officer, currently studying in graduate school here in D.C. Thank you for being here.

I just want to ask at what point in your careers did you learn the most about leadership and like management, and then how did you personally kind of continue to foster that, or continue to work on that as you continued to progress? Thank you.

SCHULTZ: Why don’t we start with the Army?

AHERN: So mine’s going to be very short. So again, this is where, growing up as an engineer, you start as a platoon leader. So you have thirty of your favorite friends that, you know, were in Bosnia, were fixing roads. I was company commander. And then when I went to grad school, taught at West Point, I switched to be a strategist. And I went for a very, very long time responsible for myself.

And so I was very fortunate coming out of the National Security Council, I went and worked for Secretary McCarthy as his secretary initiatives group chief, and got to get mentored by a truly great American. And that was really—that was the first time, also, I’d been in charge of people since company command, and no one that I was responsible for was even in the Army at that point.

And so one of it’s you have to be a good teammate. You have to be working with others. So that was just something that—again, peer leadership is hard, but it’s very different from leading down. And so I think, you know, having those examples. And then when I went to Army Futures Command—and I leaned very, very hard on my bosses. Part of it was, is that I may not know what you’re talking about. You may have to tell me once, but I’ll do my homework. And so I think it’s who are those good leaders that you want to emulate, challenges of things, like I will never do that, you know, keeping notes on that. But I think it’s being able to how—what does right look like, and then how do you find ways to get feedback from people so that, you know, giving people permission and telling them I need you to tell me bad things behind closed doors, giving them permission and giving them like the responsibility, I need you to provide me this feedback so that it’s not just everybody saying yes, yes, yes, you’re awesome.

SCHULTZ: No, that’s very important. It’s like everybody who’s transitioned out of my office, we do the transition meeting. But if I haven’t like—I’ve already told them—I’m like, no, I want you to tell me, like areas where you think I need improvement. Yep, right? And then there’s a variety of ways to work on that. But a lot of times, I mean, it’s the people who work with and for you that they know your weaknesses, and if you open the door, they’ll be happy to share some of them.

BELK: Yeah, I’ll keep it quick.

First, I would argue the most profound lessons I learned about leadership were from the mistakes I made, and that’s throughout. and it a common theme about even failing or what have you, right, that, again, understanding what I did—wrong is the wrong way to put it, but what I could have done better, or could have been more effective at and seeing the results of that and the rest of it, right, I think those are—and in some cases, having to be accountable for those stakes, right? That’s where I’d argue I’ve learned the most. Some good lessons, and I’ll be honest, some not so great. But lessons nonetheless.

Remember, I said, “be, know, do,” right? So I’ll tell the “know” thing. Two things: know yourself and know the people that you’re working with on your team.

And the first one of that is I think the most important one, right? It’s that if you know who you are, what you are, right, the good and the bad and everything in between, right, that self-awareness is going to reflect in the way in which you work with, for, and direct other people. It doesn’t mean that you’ll be perfect. It doesn’t mean that you’ll always get it right, and it certainly doesn’t mean that everybody’s going to like it. That, you know, it’s a longer conversation. I think there’s an active one, by the way, I think going on in the Army right now about how those types of issues about what people like and don’t get adjudicated, and who has agency, and how those agencies are done, between those who manage and those who potentially come in to look at how those things are going. I’m kind of indirectly referencing a message that General George sent out to the force about this particular issue, which I think I have a particular interest in from a readiness perspective, because I think it’s a pretty critical issue.

Having said all that, though, if you know yourself, it’ll be that much more better. It’ll give you that much more strength with which and perspective in which to really get to know your team and to afford them the true meaning of the word respect, taking care of them, and also the mutual grace that you will need to afford one another as you move towards a particular set of objectives, outcomes, or what have it, whatever it is you do. But it’s not going to be perfect. And, ultimately, I think for each of these it’s going to be a learning experience.

I’ll add one more piece. Find a coach at every level. Find someone that you’re able to have a conversation with who’s going to also be able to provide you that honest feedback and feedback you’re not going to like, right? And the top leaders—and I can’t speak necessarily for government, I’ll tell you, right, in private sector, majority of them have some form of coaching relationship with someone, and it’s someone that they are able to bounce off and have that interaction with. I have a coach and a formal coaching relationship precisely for those reasons, and it’s someone I know, knew beforehand, and a fellow executive, and it’s one of the most valuable relationships I have, because it helps me know myself and better know my people.

SCHULTZ: Yeah, I would add journal. You have to know yourself, handwritten so it doesn’t get hacked. And read, read, read, read. I would say that as a professor, not just nonfiction. Fiction. I actually use fiction at the War College because then you’re not bound by two people getting in a fight about Gettysburg. I could care less, right? So it allows me, essentially, to stay on the learning objectives.

I want to thank Anne, who put all this together. A quick round of applause. (Applause.) Thank you.

Also thank you to Stephanie and to Peter. I should have covered. Are you guys going to be some at the happy hour?

AHERN: Yes.

BELK: I think so, yes.

SCHULTZ: All right. They’re going to be at the happy hour. I’m going to try to get to Georgetown in ten minutes. But with that, note that the video and the transcript for this will be online. So if there’s anything that you want to review or whatnot, including, you know, and Peter—I know actually all of us are happy if you reach out to us. It’s not—we all had mentors, and we’ve got to pay it forward. So thanks to our panelists. (Applause.)

(END)

This is an uncorrected transcript.