On Civilian Oversite of the Armed Forces

Commentary Comments (2)

If General McClellan isn’t going to use his army, I’d like to borrow it for a time.- Abraham Lincoln

Civilian oversite of the armed forces has been one of the greatest boon in modern times, but like the joint chiefs, civilians should stay the hell out of the way when there is actually soldiering to be done.

During wars, the Joint Chiefs really have no power. They run the armed forces in peace time, overseeing logictics and training, but in war time, they are often bypassed to the military commanders “on the ground” and take on a more of an advisor role. In effect, the translators for the military to Civilian just like a project manager would translate client needs to workers. We also know it doesn’t work like this. Too many damn hands in the pot (cabinets and military) and the last ultimate travesty, a failure to actually advise.

I wrote a while back on how I absorb the news. Today I shall update it with a small note: News five years later, is clarified and fixed and finally ready to be absorbed; without the cleansing of history. I say such for a personal reason; five years later i often find out what really happened in the personal stories my friends tell me. I also say that i find out the truth about news five years later because of this: The NY times wrote an article about the now fateful decision to dissolve the Iraq Army. Bush supporter or not, it makes clear to me, our military can actually plan a war and do so well.

It has generally been accepted that the decision to dissolve the iraq army has lead up to where we are now. Even more so, let me make clear, i personally think that decision was pretty damn stupid.

That being said, let us … change just a bit of direction from where you think this post is going. Giving the civilian leadership control of the military wing of government has been also viewed as one of the crowning achievement of Power by the People, aka, democracy. Over time, separate military’s have shown time and time again their ability and will to ignore the will of the people and take over. But the people are not in control of the military, one man is. A single commander in chief. That job is simply too large for any one single man, so who needs advisors. It is in this area that we have been failed and many presidents have been failed. I think about the Bay of Pigs and the failure of good advice there. I think about the Iran Contra Affair and the failure that happened there.

I read this Ny article and I am angry, at Sec of States, and Advisors who let this happen. I am angry at the Military commanders that knew better, but in the end simply decided to stop talking, cowed by being replaced if they protest too much. Military men think in ways that have a military logic to them. They are often (we say) “fighting the last war”. Some actions that are unpalatable to the armed forces have to be forced upon them from the outside. This i believe is true. This is what Cilvilan oversite gives us. It also gets us wars for political, not material reasons more often than not and politics is mess. Clarity exists in a single mission and a report that that mission is a success or a failure.

Any Military knows how to end  a war. Infact, that are exceptionally good at it. Yet the military in america has been overruled since the time of Douglas McAuthor led the occupation of Japan. From Saigan, Vietnam, Panama, Gulf War, Afghanistan and Iraq, the Civilians have decided they know how to end wars and pretty much each has been a damn disaster. Let’s be clear; it’s a failure of leadership to think that being in charge makes you right. It’s a systematic failure of democracy to go along with what you know is wrong. The NY times article clearly expresses the grave doubts of all the actors- military, and civilian- in how to end the war and yet they all went along with it.

Again. When will it end?

OceansOfThought @ March 16, 2008