H.R. McMaster

H.R. McMaster

Prior offices

National Security Advisor

---

Education

Bachelor's

United States Military Academy West Point, 1984

Graduate

University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Ph.D

University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Military

Service / branch

U.S. Army

Herbert Raymond "H.R." McMaster served as the 26th national security advisor. He served in the Trump administration from February 20, 2017, to April 9, 2018.

McMaster, a three-star lieutenant general in the United States Army, was the first active duty military officer to serve in the position since General Colin Powell, who served in the Reagan administration from 1987 to 1989.

The assistant to the president for national security affairs (APNSA), commonly known as the national security advisor (NSA), is part of the National Security Council (NSC). The NSC "is the President's principal forum for considering national security and foreign policy matters with his senior national security advisors and cabinet officials. Since its inception under President Truman, the Council's function has been to advise and assist the President on national security and foreign policies. The Council also serves as the President's principal arm for coordinating these policies among various government agencies," according to the White House.

Career

Below is an abbreviated outline of McMaster's academic, professional, and political career:

• February 20, 2017 - April 9, 2018: National Security Advisor
• 1984 - Present: Member of the United States Army

• 2014 - Present: Director of the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command’s Army Capabilities Integration Center

• July 2014: Promoted to Lieutenant General

• 2012-2014: Commanding General, Maneuver Center of Excellence at Fort Benning

• 2012: Promoted to Major General

• 2008-2010: Director of Concept Development and Learning at the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, Fort Monroe, Virginia
• 2007-2008: Special Assistant to the Commander, Multinational Force-Iraq
• 2004-2006: 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment at Fort Carson, Colorado, and in Iraq
• 2003-2004: Director, Commander's Advisory Group at U.S. Central Command
• 1999-2002: 1st Squadron, 4th Cavalry in Schweinfurt, Germany
• 1999: Graduated from the United States Army Command and General Staff College
• 1997-1999: Squadron executive officer and regimental operations officer in the 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment
• 1994-1996: Assistant professor of history at the United States Military Academy
• 1989-1992: Assigned to the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment at Warner Barracks in Bamberg, Germany, and in Southwest Asia

• 1991: Persian Gulf War, Captain-Eagle Troop of the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment at the Battle of 73 Easting

• 1991: Earned Silver Star

• 2002-2003: National Security Affairs Fellow at the Hoover Institution
• 1997: Dereliction of Duty published
• 1984: Graduated from the United States Military Academy at West Point

National security advisor

McMaster was appointed as the 26th national security advisor by President Donald Trump on February 20, 2017. After accepting the position, McMaster said, "I'd just like to say what a privilege it is to be able to continue serving our nation. I'm grateful to you for that opportunity. And I look forward to joining the national security team and doing everything I can to advance and protect the interests of the American people."

On March 22, 2018, Trump announced that McMaster would resign from his position on April 9, 2018. Trump named John Bolton as his pick to replace McMaster as national security advisor. Trump said McMaster’s “bravery and toughness are legendary” and that his leadership “helped my administration accomplish great things to bolster America’s national security.”

White House chief of staff John Kelly called McMaster "a fine American and military officer" who "brought and maintained discipline and energy" on Trump's national security team. He continued, "A true solider-scholar, his impact on his country and this government will be felt for years to come."

After the announcement, McMaster said, “I am thankful to President Donald J. Trump for the opportunity to serve him and our nation as national security advisor. I am grateful for the friendship and support of the members of the National Security Council who worked together to provide the President with the best options to protect and advance our national interests.”

McMaster keeps rank

On March 15, 2017, the Senate voted 86-10 to reappoint McMaster as a three-star lieutenant general. The Senate is required by law to reconfirm the ranks of three-star and four-star generals when they assume new positions in the government.

Issues

Afghanistan

See also: Federal policy on Afghanistan, 2017-2020

• On August 25, 2017, McMaster said, "Winning in Afghanistan means there are not terrorist groups who are able to control key parts and population centers there that could be used to mobilize resources, raise funds, use funds to conduct attacks against us and our allies and partners. That's what the success is: It ensures the safety and security of the American people." Commenting on Trump's strategy in Afghanistan, McMaster said, "He [Trump] wanted to have a sound regional strategy, not a strategy that lasts a year. We have had 16 one-year strategies in Afghanistan. It gives us the greatest chance largely in support of the Afghan government and their long struggle against groups and the Taliban and to integrate it with what we hope to achieve diplomatically. Afghanistan is connected to broader security concerns across the region. It is to make sure it doesn't jeopardize the safety of the American people."

• During an interview on August 5, 2017, McMaster was asked if Trump had chosen a strategic plan for addressing Afghanistan. McMaster said, "So what we– what we have is a number of decisions the president has made. You know, ’cause he has said, 'I want to prioritize the safety and security of the American people.' And he wants to destroy I.S.I.S. wherever they are. There’s a tremendously successful campaign going on with Afghan forces in the lead. It’s an unreported campaign in Nangarhar Province of Afghanistan. The president has said that, 'He does not want to place restrictions on the military that undermine our ability to win battles in combat.' He has lifted those restrictions, and you’re beginning to see the payoff of that as well. The president has also made clear that he, that we need to see a change in behavior of those in the region, which includes those who are providing safe haven and support bases for the Taliban, Haqqani Network and others. This is Pakistan in particular that we want to really see a change in and a reduction of their support for these groups. I mean, this is of course, you know, a very paradoxical situation, right, where Pakistan is taking great losses. They have fought very hard against these groups, but they’ve done so really only selectively. And he’s also said, "Others have to share the burden.'"

• During the same interview, McMaster discussed what was at stake in Afghanistan and the strategy to produce a desirable outcome. He said, "I think there are two things that the American people ought to understand, and that we all have to talk about. The first is, what is at stake? All right, what are the stakes in Afghanistan? And the second is, what is the strategy that secures an outcome consistent with the vital interests of the American people? And an outcome that is worthy of the sacrifices that our servicemen and women are making, and the tremendous efforts, right, and the risks that they take. And so that’s the answer that you’ll hear, essentially you’ve heard in pieces. And what we’re endeavoring to do is pull this all together in a regional strategy that makes sense. Right, so that we, so that our Secretary of State has laid a very strong foundation for this. What we’ve had in Afghanistan for years is a disconnected strategy. What we’re doing militarily was disconnected from what we’re trying to achieve politically. So you say to the Taliban, 'Hey, let’s see what we can do to accommodate some of your concerns, so we can end the violence. And by the way, we’re leaving.' And how does that work? And how does it work when your enemy believes that they are ascendant militarily, if you’re trying to negotiate some of an agreement? It doesn’t work. You know, and how does it work that you’re not connected with what you’re doing into– inside of Afghanistan to what you want to achieve regionally? And in particular, to engage other countries in the region to play a more productive role or a less destructive role in some cases."

• During an interview on April 16, 2017, McMaster said, "Well, I think what this long campaign here in Afghanistan shows is that the future course of events in war depends not on what you decide to do, but also on the actions of your enemies. And so what we’ve seen here is an interaction between ourselves, our NATO and other partners here, and especially our Afghan partners, and very determined and brutal enemies. And so what has happened in recent years, at a period of our maximum effort, we didn’t have as reliable a partner in the Afghan government as we would’ve liked. Now we have a much more reliable Afghan partner and we have reduced considerably the degree and scope of our effort. Our enemy sensed that and they have redoubled their efforts and it’s time for us, alongside our Afghan partners, to respond. And so what’s clear in here in Afghanistan is the stakes are high. I mean, this is -- this is really the modern-day frontier between barbarism and civilization. And so with those high stakes in mind, recognizing that the Taliban groups that we’re fighting here, that the ISIS groups that we, alongside -- really the Afghan forces are really fighting and we’re just enabling them -- in the eastern part of the country, are a threat to all civilized peoples. And so really what we do from this point on is going to depend on the decision that the president makes, and he’s asked our team to integrate the efforts of the various departments, because what we haven’t had, Martha, really here is a very well stitched-together effort that combines what we’re doing politically and diplomatically and militarily and economically and through -- with our Treasury and Commerce departments in the areas financing the economy -- so that hasn’t been stitched together as well as it might have, along with the efforts our multinational partners. So that’s what we’re assessing now and the president has asked for a range of options, and we’ll give him those options. And we’ll be prepared to execute whatever decision he makes."

Iran

See also: Federal policy on Iran, 2017-2020

• During an interview on August 5, 2017, McMaster was asked if Trump wanted to exit the Iran nuclear deal. McMaster said, "Well, the– the president, you know, is more than skeptical about that deal. He calls it, 'The worst deal ever.' And in many ways, it was the worst deal ever, because it did, it rewarded the regime, gave them so much up front. And what happened is, Iran began immediately to violate the spirit of that agreement. Which was meant not only to prevent this horrible regime that has been victimizing so many people across the greater Middle East and beyond through their support for brutal proxy forces, their support for the Assad regime who’s, you know, gassed and murdered his– his own people in large numbers. The support for Hamas, the support for Hezbollah and how that has created so much mayhem in the region for these Houthi rebels in Yemen, for example. A regime that has caused so much human suffering already. The intent was to prevent them from getting a nuclear weapon, but also then to get them to moderate their behavior. What the regime did is the opposite of that. They actually intensified their destabilizing behavior across the region. So the president’s very strong about this when he says, 'The main point we oughta focus on is that Iran has violated the spirit of this agreement.' And so what we have done is we have crafted a strategy along with a lot of our likeminded nations, allies, partners, to counter Iran’s destabilizing behavior. While we still aim to prevent by whatever means is necessary to do so– Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon."

• During the same interview, when asked why the U.S. had chosen to remain in the deal, McMaster said, "I think what’s holding us in there right is our determination as to the degree at which they are violating the letter of the agreement. And they have in the past. Right? They had too much heavy water. They had too many centrifuges running. But when we go to the I.A.E.A. to enforce this agreement they’ve taken remedial measures. But of course, what they’re doing is they’re stepping over that line. And we have to be very clear. And all of our, all the signatories to this have to be clear that, 'If you violate the agreement, then there are gonna be consequences. And– and we can’t adhere to an agreement if the main party here, Iran, is violating it.'"

North Korea

See also: Federal policy on North Korea, 2017-2020

• On April 16, 2017, ABC News' Martha Raddatz asked McMaster about North Korea's failed missile test. He said, "Well, this latest missile test, it just fits into a pattern of provocative and destabilizing and threatening behavior on the part of the North Korean regime. And I think there’s an international consensus now, including -- including the Chinese and the Chinese leadership -- that this is a situation that just can’t continue. And the president has made clear that he will not accept the United States and its allies and partners in the region being under threat from this hostile regime with nuclear weapons. And so we’re working together with our allies and partners, and with the Chinese leadership, to develop a range of options. And the president has asked the National Security Council to integrate the efforts of the Department of Defense, State, our intelligence agencies, so we can provide options and have them ready for him if this pattern of destabilizing behavior continues, and if the North Korea regime refuses to denuclearize, which is the accepted objective of both the United States and Chinese leadership, as well our allies in the region."

Venezuela

• During an interview on August 5, 2017, McMaster discussed the crisis in Venezuela between anti-government protesters and Venezuela's President Nicolas Maduro. He said, "Democracy’s over right now in Venezuela. And people have talked about what is, could there be a coup? Well, there’s already been a coup that has happened already. Maduro has prevented the Venezuelan people from an—havin’ a say in– in their own future. And so with the seating of this constituent assembly, it is a watershed. And it’s a tragedy for the Venezuelan people who are suffering all kinds of deprivations based on the failed policies of two regimes now. And it’s really a situation that’s intolerable from the Venezuelan people’s perspective. And so what we’re endeavoring to do is to work with partners in the region and to work on behalf of the Venezuelan people to help rescue them from this dictatorship." He added that he did not see the U.S. getting involved militarily in the conflict.

Personal

Note: Please contact us if the personal information below requires an update.
McMaster is married to Kathleen Trotter McMaster. They have three daughters, Katharine, Colleen, and Caragh. He was named to Time magazine's list of the 100 most influential people in 2014.

Dereliction of Duty

In 1997, McMaster's doctoral dissertation on the Vietnam War was published. The book, Dereliction of Duty, "is a blistering critique of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who he argued failed to provide necessary military advice to President Lyndon B. Johnson and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara," according to The Hoover Institution. McMaster wrote, “The war in Vietnam was not lost in the field, nor was it lost on the front pages of the New York Times or the college campuses. It was lost in Washington, D.C."

Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), a veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan, discussed the book, saying, "He talked about, in essence, the military's responsibility to talk to civilian leaders, to challenge the status quo, and I think that's what we need in the White House."

See also

• John Bolton

Footnotes

Political offices
Preceded by Michael Flynn	National Security Advisor February 20, 2017 - April 9, 2018	Succeeded by John Bolton