"Do not interfere with the military into politics." What changes are needed by US Army
According to the recently published survey, less than half of the respondents feel great confidence and confidence in the US Armed Forces. If civil and military leaders do not take measures to eliminate this gap, it will interfere with the recruitment, reduce the units and undermine the connection between the army and the society it serves. Focus has translated the article of Corya Sheik about why the military does not need to interfere with politics.
No less disturbing than the fall of respect is its cause. 62% of respondents said they lose confidence and confidence in the army, as the military leadership is becoming overly politicized. This attitude is independent of party affiliation: 60% of democrats, 60% of independent and 65% of republicans were given. Only 35% of respondents have expressed confidence in the ability of the military to act professionally and impartially.
In order to preserve the US Army, which covers all sections of the population, which unite in effective combat force, America must influence public opinion and separate the armed forces from the role of pawns in political disputes between parties.
This will require more discipline from military leaders and greater recognition by politicians of the harm they cause our national security, condemning the professionalism and impartial commitment of American soldiers, sailors, pilots, marines and their commanders. Military commanders must adhere to the main functions of their profession and stop saying that "this issue is within the competence of the Minister of Defense.
" Politicians should cease to cover up the military during unpopular reforms and direct their efforts to pass the relevant laws in the fields that urgently need attention. The Reagan Foundation's conclusions are greatly different from the military's opinion about themselves. The US military consider themselves a model of non -partisan professionalism, and make every effort to instill this attitude through professional military education.
Military leaders are worried that the political activity of veterans is reflected in the active army. But they do not believe that the anxiety of society about the politicization of the Armed Forces affects them. General David Berger, commander of the Marine Corps, recently stated: "I do not see or hear the conversation or influence of politics on ordinary and team composition. " The head of the army recruitment department believes that these fears do not affect the desire of Americans to serve.
However, over the last few decades, a number of events have taken place that have contributed to the formation of an opinion about the politicization of the army. The approval of the veterans of presidential candidates has only gained momentum since the retired commander of the Marines Paul X. Kelly supported George Bush Jr. 1988. Presidential campaigns now regularly release lists of hundreds of retired officers and include military in the form in election advertising.
The Bush administration enabled the military to persuade Congress to maintain a sharp increase in military presence in Iraq. In 2016, retired John Allen General made a democratic national congress to support a candidate from Democrats, and at the Republican National Congress, the retired Lieutenant General (retired) Michael Flynn forced the crowd to chant it in prison " .
In addition, Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump have put forward a record number of high -ranking veterans to high civilians. Like his predecessor, President Joe Biden put forward a veteran who recently resigned as Minister of Defense. Most recently, Biden put marines in a form where he made a purely political speech on the threat of democracy in the country. All of these actions form the public perception of the military as engaged in political force.
Some current military leaders are also increasingly involved in political actions. In particular, the current chairman of the Joint Committee of Chiefs of Staff marched with the President in combat form through a square that was forcibly cleaned during protests against social justice in 2020. General Mark Millie is very convincingly apologized, but this image is likely to remain in the memory of most people for a long time.
Millie also got involved in other political discussions: he expressed his point of view on critical racial theory during hearing in Congress and criticized almost all journalistic materials about the Trump administration to expose himself as a rescuer of the republic. Millie's supporters may claim that he defended the Civilian Defense Minister, or that he, as a soldier and a hockey player, cannot be expected that he will sit away.
But the Minister of Defense does not need protection from his military subordinates. Political struggle is the fate of civilian officials. Playing politics does not always benefit. If you behave like a hockey player, you will occasionally get a puck on your face.
Millie's awkward involvement in the discussion of political topics made a justified target for the pressure of the Congress on political issues on him and other military leaders-including each flagship officer put forward to the rise to the three-sighted rank. However, Congress should be resisted before this temptation.
Republicans in the House of Representatives are not waiting for the opportunity to call Millie for testimony, which will be a repetition of last year's shameful spectacle when representatives accused him of treason. The repetition of this political theater would be terrible for both America's security and military-civil relations. The vast majority of military, especially among commanders, are asked not to interfere with the feverish party policy of the current moment.
For the benefit of the country, politicians should listen to this request. The main factor in reducing confidence in America's military leaders is the constant pressure on them by politicians on political issues. Politicians create circumstances, whether the White House of Trump organizes Lafayette, whether Baiden's White House, which puts the Marines on the President's flank during political speech, whether congressmen who are gaining political scores by extracting military units.
Instead of developing these discussions that divide society, or send Milli to bonfires. Congress could take steps that really support men and women in shape. If Congress is concerned about the condition of our Armed Forces, a law on national defense and draft law on defense should be adopted in a timely manner. Congress should be carefully verified that Biden's defense budget is sufficient to implement the presidential national security strategy.
They can also reform procurement processes to attract technical talents to a defense enterprise and to approve or reject officials in a timely manner so that the selected leaders have decent staff. To protect America has a serious job. The politicization of the Armed Forces will make them weaker rather than stronger. Corey Shake heads a group of foreign and defense policy at the American Institute of Entrepreneurship.