Coming Soon: A Crisis in Civil-Military Relations by Richard Kohn at World Affairs Journal.
An excerpt:
When a new president takes office in early 2009, military leaders and politicians will approach one another with considerable suspicion. Dislike of the Democrats in general and Bill Clinton in particular, and disgust for Donald Rumsfeld, has rendered all politicians suspect in the imaginations of generals and admirals. The indictments make for a long list: a beleaguered military at war while the American public shops at the mall; the absence of elites in military ranks; the bungling of the Iraq occupation; the politicization of General David Petraeus by the White House and Congress; an army and Marine Corps exhausted and overstretched, their people dying, their commitments never-ending. Nearly six years of Donald Rumsfeld’s intimidation and abuse have encouraged in the officer corps a conviction that military leaders ought to—are obliged to—push back against their civilian masters. Egged on by Democrats in Congress—and well-meaning but profoundly mistaken associates who believe the military must hold political leaders accountable for their mistakes—some flag officers now opine publicly and seemingly without hesitation. Though divided about Iraq strategy, the four-stars unite in their contempt for today’s political class and vow not to be saddled with blame for mistakes not of their own making.
Read it all and then tell us 'what say you?' - Comment below or discuss at Small Wars Council.
Comments (1)
Many issues covered in this article. Responses to some:
Defense Policy - We need to realign our foreign policy with the world now, then set priorities and keep them. Certain allies don't need ground troops-Army and USMC-stationed in their countries. Europe, Japan and Korea come to mind. That would free tens of thousands to concentrate on the theaters we are fighting on the ground. The USN and USAF can take care of those theaters; it’s a reach that we even should still station troops beyond Air, Port and logistic bases in Europe at all. Frankly all our old treaties need a review based on the brutally real criteria we live with, and some may need to be scrapped.
The Budget-we could save a lot of money now by scrapping the personnel system that results in this hugely staff centric top/middle heavy organization. First step would be in firing 95% of our flag officers, and reducing their billets by two thirds. We have so many flag officers it is choking us to death, and the personnel system drives so much of what we do every day it is the single overriding factor. Not money and not politics.
Start firing flag officers the first day. Otherwise all other actions will be rendered moot, by the flag officers. This would also have the salutary effect of getting rid of the deadwood, to make way for the young talented officers...who are leaving or being driven out in droves.
National Guard: Blum put a good reform deal on the table, the Governors said no...And Shrub was busy doing whatever it is he does.
National Guard being withdrawn from Operational Reserve role; yes, a couple of years after we pass a universal lottery draft (male and female 18-38, no exceptions except physical). Have fun with that in Congress, and have more fun with that force. The NG has always been the Operational Reserve, and frankly we don't have the bodies in the general populace to play with anyway.
Blame for defeat in Iraq- Don’t worry about it. If we lose we then lose Afghanistan and will be in general retreat from the world, with the Caliphate in the ascendancy. Bush/Rumsfeld bungling, the dolchestosse (backstab) narrative, praetorian bitterness, politicization of the military- Sadly all are true, and justified. Maybe winning will get us around consequences. If we lose it won't matter anyway. The military can't justify its' existence if it loses wars, especially this one. Of course neither can the Federal Government.
.
Posted by arifJAA![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/nav-commenters.gif)
|
March 30, 2008 7:17 PM