The opinions expressed in this op-ed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Military.com. If you would like to submit your own commentary, please send your article to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.^[1] for consideration.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin was recently hospitalized for prostate cancer surgery and apparently incommunicado for a few days in early January. Although Austin never lost consciousness or went under general anesthesia, some members of Congress and media commentators have described the situation as reckless and irresponsible and one of great peril for the United States. These critics contend that, by failing to inform the president or the White House staff in good time, Austin left open the possibility of disruption of the civilian and military chains of command by ambiguous delegation of authority during his absence.

Much of that criticism is misplaced, some of it motivated by partisan discontent with the Biden administration's national security policy, while some commentators are simply misinformed. There are at least two reasons these criticisms are simply wrong, and a few reasons the critics are misguided in their complaints.

First, the military chain of command runs from the president, to the secretary of defense, to the combatant commanders who are in charge of the unified or specified warfighting commands for the armed forces. The president is the commander in chief of the armed forces and can issue orders at any time with or without the secretary of defense. In fact, on Jan. 11, the Biden administration and the British struck dozens of Houthi targets in Yemen, a matter that President Joe Biden had discussed with his national security team on Jan. 1. Not only did Austin participate in that meeting, he also directed the operation on Jan. 11 from his hospital room.

In the absence of the secretary of defense, presidential orders would go directly to the combatant commanders and to the deputy secretary of defense, who would presumably inform their staff. In this case, the deputy secretary of defense apparently was informed that Austin was temporarily unavailable and received the delegation of authority, although whether she was informed the reasons why is less clear.

Second, in the extreme and unlikely situation that a timely response to attack is necessary while the civilian delegation of authority in the Pentagon is ambiguous, and the president and secretary are unavailable, the combatant commanders are authorized to respond to imminent threats. They are required to promptly notify the president, the secretary of defense, the national security adviser and other principals if emergency action is taken. For example, a nuclear missile attack on a U.S. military base overseas, or even worse, on the American homeland, would not be ignored by a paralyzed chain of command.

Setting aside the fact that there never was a risk to the military's ability to manage threats during Austin's medical emergency, public officials should be careful not to convey to the world the mistaken impression that the United States is a helpless sleeping giant if one or more officials in the defense chain of command are temporarily out of pocket. Bureaucracies have their faults, but one of their redeeming features is that there is always someone backstopping his or her immediate superior who is, or should be, prepared to step in and assume command.

But beyond the logistics of the hubbub, Austin has served his country for decades as a military officer, much of it in combat, and now as a cabinet official. He is entitled to a presumption of good faith, especially under the exigent medical conditions. There are grounds to question how the process of intradepartmental and interagency communication worked in early January and how it might be improved, and Congress should work with the Department of Defense on a postmortem. Jeff Zients, the White House chief of staff; Kelly E. Magsamen, Austin's chief of staff; and Robert P. Storch, the Pentagon's inspector general, have all already opened investigations into what happened and why.

However, this episode does raise the issue about whether the Pentagon as a one-size-fits-all military headquarters is perhaps a dated World War II-era construct. We should ask if it's time to consider whether a distributed Department of Defense command system that is more adapted to the technology of the 21st century should replace the five-sided pyramid next to Arlington, Virginia.

-- Lawrence J. Korb, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, is a retired Navy captain and a former assistant secretary of defense.

-- Stephen Cimbala is a professor of political science at Penn State University, Brandywine.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has been formally called to testify before Congress about his hospitalization for complications from prostate cancer surgery that he initially kept secret.

In a letter Thursday to Austin, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Ala., said his panel would hold a hearing on the matter Feb. 14 and that he expects Austin to appear at the hearing after what he described as the defense secretary's "unwillingness to provide candid and complete answers" in private.

"Specifically, I am alarmed you refused to answer whether you instructed your staff to not inform the president of the United States or anyone else of your hospitalization," Rogers wrote in the letter^[1]. "Unfortunately, this leads me to believe that information is being withheld from Congress. Congress must understand what happened and who made decisions to prevent the disclosure of the whereabouts of a cabinet secretary."

Read Next: Navy Redesigns Its Pregnancy Policy to Give Sailors More Choice, Career Stability^[2]

Asked whether Austin would agree to testify, as well as for a response to Rogers' charge that the secretary has withheld information from him, the Pentagon did not directly answer.

"On Wednesday, the department provided the committee three letters in a good-faith effort to respond to the committee as expeditiously as possible, recognizing that there is an internal 30-day review underway, and the DoD inspector general is conducting his own review," a Pentagon spokesperson said in an emailed statement Friday.

"The department looks forward to continuing to work with the committee to accommodate its legislative needs," the statement added. "As always, we will respond to congressional requests as appropriate, to include requests for the secretary to testify."

If Austin agrees to testify, it could be the first public airing of his thought process since the Pentagon disclosed earlier this month that he had been in the hospital for days without telling even the president.

On Jan. 5, the Pentagon announced Austin had been in the hospital since Jan. 1, and the department later acknowledged that the White House hadn't been informed of Austin's hospitalization until Jan. 4. Congress didn't learn of the hospitalization until just before the public disclosure Jan. 5.

The hospitalization stemmed from complications from an earlier surgery to treat prostate cancer. While Austin was diagnosed with cancer in early December and had the initial surgery Dec. 22, President Joe Biden and the public were not told about the diagnosis until Jan. 9.

The revelation that Austin kept his health issues secret from even the White House for weeks prompted fury and bewilderment on Capitol Hill.

Rogers opened an investigation^[3] into the episode last week, sending letters to Austin, his chief of staff and Deputy Defense Secretary Kathleen Hicks demanding a stack of documents and answers to a slew of questions.

In his Thursday letter, Rogers said several questions from his earlier letters remain unanswered. He also said several new questions have been raised since last week, pointing to a 911 call obtained by news outlets^[4] in which an aide to Austin asked for the ambulance to be "subtle" when it arrived at the defense secretary's home Jan. 1.

"This is a time of immense global instability," Rogers wrote. "Our country deserves reliable leadership at the department. Maintaining the most ready and lethal force possible requires that everyone in the national security community be able to rely upon the secretary of defense's availability and transparency. Regrettably, you have not exhibited these attributes throughout this most recent string of events."

In addition to Rogers' investigation, the Pentagon is conducting an internal review into the breakdown in communications; the White House has instructed every Cabinet agency to review their protocols for notifying the White House about an absence; and the Pentagon's inspector general is conducting its own probe^[5] into the episode.

Pressed at a Pentagon briefing this week on why Austin's aide asked the ambulance to approach quietly, Pentagon press secretary Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder declined to answer amid the ongoing investigations.

Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, has also demanded a public hearing with Austin, but as a member of the minority party in the upper chamber, he does not have the power to schedule one. Senate panel Chairman Jack Reed, D-R.I., has not ruled out calling Austin in for testimony but has said he wants the committee to gather more facts and for Austin to be fully recovered first.

Austin was released from the hospital Monday, but he said in a written statement that day that he is continuing to recuperate at home.

While several Republicans and at least one House Democrat have called on Austin to resign, Biden said last week that he remains confident^[6] in his defense secretary, though he considers Austin's failure to inform his boss about his hospitalization a lapse in judgment.

Related: Austin's Secret Hospitalization Prompts Congressional Inquiry, Calls for Hearings^[7]