Mara Karlin and Brig. Gen. (Ret.) Paula Thornhill
We’ve written for years about civil-military relations and raised concern about potential crises in the delicate American system of civilian control. The crisis has occurred, but it didn’t ride in as a general on horseback launching a military coup. Instead, it came in the form of a Friday night bureaucratic massacre when the commander in chief fired—for no apparent cause— the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the chief of Naval Operations, and the vice chief of staff of the Air Force. Because President Donald Trump did not give a reason for their removal, one can only look at their gender, their race, and their comments on diversity to conclude that was the cause. Less noticed is the similarly historic firing of the senior lawyers in the U.S. military, known as the Judge Advocate General of the Army, Navy, and Air Force. We’re now in a civil-military crisis, but it is a very different one than we expected.
In a democracy, the trust between the military and the nation it serves is inviolate. Military members must have faith in the civilian leadership’s ability to develop and use the institution responsibly. When the political leaders fire, for no apparent cause, senior leaders and, as important, the lawyers who embody the protection of the military members under the law and the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), the relationship between the military and the nation has been fundamentally altered.
To be sure, presidents and secretaries of defense have fired senior military leaders throughout history. From exercising poor judgement with the press to obstinately ignoring civilian priorities, generals and admirals have been removed from their positions by civilian leaders, who have the prerogative to do so. However, there are no examples of firings at this level without any reason or evident failure to perform. The military is now in uncharted territory. And so is the nation.
First, there is the question of loyalty. At every level, officers will have to determine if they are being assessed for their competence or their loyalty. That will undermine unit cohesion in a very coercive way as members start to question personal or partisan motives rather than focusing on building their unit’s competence and unity.
No comments:
Post a Comment