Military Establishment Takes Three Whacks at Robert Gates
Robert Gates, who left his role as defense secretary this summer, has drawn criticism from members of the military establishment for allegedly lacking long-term vision, allowing military leaders to usurp civilian control and inadequately briefing and preparing the president for war. (more)
Robert Gates, who left his role as defense secretary this summer, has drawn criticism from members of the military establishment for allegedly lacking long-term vision, allowing military leaders to usurp civilian control and inadequately briefing and preparing the president for war.
The author of the attack, Bernard I. Finel, is a senior fellow at the American Security Project, a military think tank where he directs research on counterterrorism and defense policy. Articles like his are important because they allow us to see some of what the managers of America’s empire are saying to one another. –ARK
WAIT, BEFORE YOU GO…Armed Forces Journal:
First, a defense secretary needs to manage the department effectively. This is not simply a matter of prevailing in bureaucratic battles, but rather in charting a course for the department that balances ends and means, that ensures that long-term risks are addressed as well as managing short-term challenges. One fundamental element is allocating and managing the defense budget to ensure resources are wisely expended to address the entire portfolio of risks the U.S. military might need to engage.
Second, a secretary, as the person most directly responsible for ensuring civilian control of the military, must manage civil-military relations. This involves both ensuring that military expertise is tapped to support civilian decision-making, but also that civilian control of the military remains unchallenged. It is the secretary’s responsibility, in short, to ensure that there is a solid working relationship between the military and civilian policymakers, and also to ensure that civilian control is robust.
Third, a secretary must provide sound and balanced advice to the president about military options and operations. This requires not only an ability to be responsive to the needs and desires of the president and his staff but also an ability to interject forcefully to ensure that decisions about the use of force be made with a full appreciation of both the opportunities and limitations inherent in the use of the military instrument.
In all three of these core areas, Gates was largely ineffective.
If you're reading this, you probably already know that non-profit, independent journalism is under threat worldwide. Independent news sites are overshadowed by larger heavily funded mainstream media that inundate us with hype and noise that barely scratch the surface. We believe that our readers deserve to know the full story. Truthdig writers bravely dig beneath the headlines to give you thought-provoking, investigative reporting and analysis that tells you what’s really happening and who’s rolling up their sleeves to do something about it.
Like you, we believe a well-informed public that doesn’t have blind faith in the status quo can help change the world. Your contribution of as little as $5 monthly or $35 annually will make you a groundbreaking member and lays the foundation of our work.
The American armed forces pose a danger to human survival in many ways.
The vice president warns of global danger and tells of support as he addresses the most diverse class to graduate the U.S. Military Academy.
God help us if the president figures out the National Guard can legally be deployed for law enforcement purposes inside the U.S.
If the Senate version of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2019 also includes Rep. Keith Ellison's bipartisan amendment, Congress could send a clear message to Donald Trump.
Four members of the Army killed a former comrade and his teenaged girlfriend to keep secret the plans of the anarchist group they had formed, prosecutors in Georgia say.
There are currently no responses to this article.
Be the first to respond.