The Army and Marines and Military Government

By Brent C. Bankus and James Kievit

Despite the apparent preference of many of today's military officers to have some other entity (whether of the US government, the United Nations, or even private contractors?) be responsible for doing so, the United States Army and the United States Marine Corps actually have a long history of establishing and running "governments" in both smaller-scale contingency operations and in the aftermath of major theater war.

An early example began with General Winfield Scott's publishing, during his 1847 48 campaign in Mexico, a theater-wide code of conduct (General Order 20) that spelled out the rules under which both US service personnel and the indigenous population would be governed. Using relatively rudimentary control measures, General Scott instituted a system that would not only govern the local populace fairly -- and thereby, he intended, reduce insurgency incidents --, but also ensure consistent and disciplined interactions by, as well as with, US forces in the region. By most accounts Scott's "firm but fair treatment" paid huge dividends for his Army, which as a relatively small invading force had trouble enough keeping his overextended supply lines working, let alone contending with any potential large-scale insurgency. Of necessity General Scott established direct military administration over many Mexican towns and villages. Upon the capture of Mexico City in September 1847, General Scott appointed Brigadier General John Quitman, whose combined Army and Marine task force had spearheaded the successful combat assault, governor -- military and civil -- of that city...

Continue reading The Army and Marines and Military Government.