Senior Military Officers' Integrity and Civilian Control of the Military: A Decline

Public Confidence in Military Wanes

Written by Keith T. Holcomb via RealClearDefense, this article explores the declining public trust in the military. One significant factor contributing to this decline is the politicization of senior military officers. These officers are increasingly willing to compromise their integrity to gain influence and achieve both budgetary and policy goals. They often provide misleading testimony and advice, thus undermining civilian control of the military. In simpler terms, these generals and admirals are not providing full and complete representations of plans, concepts, and assessments to senior civilians in the executive and legislative branches. This deprives them of the unbiased information they need to make constitutionally required decisions.

Politicized Positions and Simplified Narratives

In a time of increasing complexity, simplified, politicized positions have gained significant importance. Senior officers are increasingly trying to manipulate policy-making by intentionally reducing complex reality to simple narratives designed to appeal to partisan audiences.

Integrity: Honesty and Completeness

Integrity, in this context, has two meanings: the common understanding of integrity as honesty and the less common understanding of integrity as the quality of being whole and complete. Senior officers, motivated by the desire to secure the largest possible share of resources for their services, may be tempted to deceive to win budget and policy fights that are central to official Washington. When these strong wills are not properly constrained by higher commitments to integrity and respect for the decision-making province of civilian authorities, generals and admirals can succumb to the temptation to deceive.

Forms of Deception

Deception can take many forms. A senior officer can choose to highlight some information while obscuring, discrediting, or ignoring other information. They can allude to expert knowledge or classified information to undercut or deflect questions that challenge their assertions. They can use the age-old technique of making strawmen of opposing views. In the worst cases, they can engage in or encourage subordinates or cultivated commentators to engage in ad hominem attacks on the messengers of alternate views.

Professional Ethics vs Information Abuse

While the hyper-political environment sees daily evidence of such behaviors, some senior officers have exercised considerable self-discipline and have not let advocacy for a position override respect for the prerogatives of senior civilians. Despite having the leadership persona, verbal skills, and communication staffs to construct one-sided positions and perhaps even succeed in the manipulation of some people, they have worked to develop full and balanced representations of the issues at hand. Their conduct has been a triumph of professional ethics over the abuse of information to achieve their ends.

Declining Trust in the Military

Unfortunately, this admirable conduct is in decline, contributing to decreasing public trust in the military. The American public may not know the specific capabilities of various weapons or the operational implications of various policies. However, constant exposure to spun narratives has trained them to recognize manipulation when they see and hear it. Many resent being manipulated, and their sense that such techniques are being used by the Nation’s most senior officers undermines their trust and confidence in the military. The military was once recognized as a profession culturally apart from the rest of society, but no longer. America’s military, and its senior officers especially, are increasingly viewed as no less cynically self-interested than the rest of the elite class.

Impact on Civilian Decision Makers

The decline of senior officer integrity increasingly impacts civilian decision makers. Not long ago, overbooked national leaders could confidently “repose special trust and confidence” in the senior officers providing assessments and recommendations to them. The disciplined and honorable behaviors of past generations of generals and admirals certainly validated this special trust and confidence. But, with a rise in manipulative narratives, civilian leaders and their staffs are more likely to feel compelled to dig into the details of complex military matters to gain the full and complete picture they need to discharge their responsibilities.

Need for Reform

In short, it is past time for senior officers to forego their increasing addiction to the power opiate of clever narratives and work to present full and balanced representations of the issues at hand. Absent immediate internal reform by the Department of Defense, civilian leaders will increasingly have to turn, just as they have with other federal agencies, to independent investigations to gain a more complete understanding of national security issues.

About the Author

Brigadier General Keith T. Holcomb, (U.S. Marine Corps, ret.), is a former USMC Fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. His last assignment was as Director of the Training and Education Division, U.S. Marine Corps Combat Development Command.

Closing Thoughts

This article raises important questions about the integrity of senior military officers and the impact on civilian control of the military. What are your thoughts on this matter? Do you believe that the decline in public trust in the military is a cause for concern? Please share this article with your friends and engage in a meaningful discussion. Don't forget to sign up for the Daily Briefing, which is available every day at 6pm.