Civil-Military relations in the US

2 Comments

• 
  Andrew November 14, 2009 at 2:17 pm

  Barak, I’m going to have to disagree with your assessment of Michael Cohen’s thoughts. To quote Shakespeare, his is “a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

  Point One: Just because the public thinks something would be better, doesn’t make it actually happen. This is the logical fallacy that underlies this post. A public perception that the generals might make better military decisions than the President doesn’t mean that the chain of command has changed. So Mr. Cohen’s paranoid delusions of a military that is increasingly influential in politics are absurd. There are no reserved seats for military members in the legislature. In fact, fewer members of Congress have had military service under their belts than ever before. What Mr. Cohen is really saying is that he’s upset that the public agrees with an expert that he disagrees with.

  Point Two: Really more to the heart of the matter, who is more likely to be knowledgeable about military strategy: General McChrystal or President Obama? And who is more likely to know about politics? I think the answers to these questions are clear. The American people aren’t saying that they want McChrystal and Obama to switch places. They are saying they think McChrystal is better qualified than Obama to know what the best course of action is. To expect otherwise is stupid.

  Point Three: Mr. Cohen is blatantly wrong about military direction of military operations being a “recipe for unceasing and perpetual military conflict.” There is much greater reason to suspect that it is political considerations that protract wars, not military ones. The only logical assumption in considering Gen. McChrystal’s request for higher troop levels is that he thinks higher troop levels are required to be effective. The President’s refusal isn’t even plausibly rooted in some twisted assertion along the lines of, “No, no, General. You’re mistaken. Less is more.” Instead, Obama’s refusal is based on a political calculation: What are the American people willing to spend, in blood and treasure, on this war? What are the chances of success? What is success worth? And while the President attempts to surf the waves of public opinion, overmatched American soldiers in Afghanistan die. Mr. Cohen’s assertion nakedly bears the markings of an Ivory Tower on a completely different planet from Afghanistan’s battlefields. This is a war we are in. The President has called it one of necessity. His main concern should be to win it.
• 
  Barak November 14, 2009 at 7:22 pm

  Andrew,

  These are good points and I agree with a number of them, especially the last one that Obama is probably more reluctant to increase troop levels than McChrystal, due, in part, to domestic political calculations. This raises the crucial point. Isn’t the military supposed to be subordinate to the president? I believe this is what is bothering Cohen. I think he is saying that delegating to the Generals brings them directly into politics and thus weakens the chain of command.