"If you flatter him, you betray him."
Secretary Gates has been busy this week...busy reading this world-famous blog! (Clearly the source of all his best ideas.) After pistol whipping the Air Force (and assorted other services), he spoke to the Cadets at West Point yesterday and offered a inspired call for dissent, wrapped in some brilliant bedtime stories from the life of George C. Marshall and a recognition of the complexities of modern warfare.
At the turn of the 21st century, the U.S. armed forces were still organized, trained and equipped to fight large-scale conventional wars, not the long, messy, unconventional operations that proliferated following the collapse of the Soviet Union. The same traditional orientation was true of our procurement procedures, military health care, and more. The current campaign has gone on longer and has been more difficult than anyone expected or prepared for at the start, and so we've had to scramble to position ourselves for success over the long haul, which I believe we're doing.
A drawdown of U.S. forces in Iraq is inevitable over time – the debate you hear in Washington is largely about pacing. But the kind of enemy we face today – violent jihadist networks – will not allow us to remain at peace. What has been called the “Long War” is likely to be many years of persistent, engaged combat all around the world in differing degrees of size and intensity. This generational campaign cannot be wished away or put on a timetable. There are no exit strategies. To paraphrase the Bolshevik Leon Trotsky, we may not be interested in the long war, but the long war is interested in us.
How America's military and civilian leadership grapples with these transcendent issues and dilemmas will determine how, where and when you may be sent into the battle in the years ahead.
In discussing Fox Conner's three axioms, I've raised questions and provided few, if any, answers, and that's the point. It is important that you think about all this, not just at the Academy but throughout your military careers, and come to your own conclusions.
But in order to succeed in the asymmetric battlefields of the 21st century – the dominant combat environment in the decades to come, in my view – our Army will require leaders of uncommon agility, resourcefulness and imagination; leaders willing and able to think and act creatively and decisively in a different kind of world, in a different kind of conflict than we have prepared for for the last six decades.
One thing will remain the same. We will still need men and women in uniform to call things as they see them and tell their subordinates and their superiors alike what they need to hear, not what they want to hear.
[...]
More broadly, if as an officer – listen to me very carefully – if as an officer you don't tell blunt truths or create an environment where candor is encouraged, then you've done yourself and the institution a disservice. This admonition goes back beyond the roots of our own republic. Sir Francis Bacon was a 17th century jurist and philosopher as well as a confidante of the senior minister of England's King James. He gave this advice to a protégé looking to follow in his steps at court: “Remember well the great trust you have undertaken; you are as a continual sentinel, always to stand upon your watch to give [the king] true intelligence. If you flatter him, you betray him.” Remember that. If you flatter him, you betray him.
Charlie has two reactions:
1) Can we please keep Gates on through the next administration? No, seriously. Please?
2) Put your money where your mouth is, Bob. No, seriously. Please. Make the Army safe for the next Yingling.
13 comments:
What do you mean, Abu M? Our Army loves itself some Yingling so much that we're sending him back to The Suck.
And for anyone who wants to read what LTC Yingling wrote that inspired SecDef's speech, click my name.
Full disclosure: Both Gian Gentile and I discussed the work on Mark Grimsley's "Blog Them Out of the Stone Age" site.
I used my nom de guerre there, too, in a series of postings Professor Grimsley termed "A New Generation Gap, Pts 1-4"
Gian was Part 3, and I the nightcap. Gian's analysis stemmed from a Washington Times Op-Ed. Mine simply from too much bile.
While we disagreed on some salient issues, Gian and I agreed that LTC Yingling could have named some names, like I did (while most timidly protecting my own).
"Can we keep him on for another administration?"
I hope not.
While Gates has been a breath of fresh air from Rumsfeld, I personally don't think that he has been strident enough in cleaning house of Rumsfeld's vestigal appointees. Example: Why is Allison Barber still in OSD Public Affairs? Why the f^*) is Pete Geren still Secretary of the Army after serving as an enabler/stooge of Francis Harvey?
My other beef with Gates is that after 1.5 years, he hasn't come in and executed "TC Overide" to save the United States Army from its own leadership. I'm not talking about COIN Doctrine or telling a BCT Commander how to "suck an egg." I AM talking about sitting down Secretary Geren, GEN Casey and CSA Preston and having a "come to Jesus" talk about their organization being culturally adrift. The Army is forging full speed ahead to throw its customs, lineage and unit/branch esprit overboard in a misguided attempt to confer "elite" status on a any CatIV that makes it through Ft. Jackson - wrong, wrong, wrong.
Through botched PR and bizarre "messaging", the Army appears increasingly more out of step with society and those we should be trying to recruit. ACUs at the Georgetown career fair?
Gates is a smart man. He sees the way ADMs Roughead/Mullen and GEN Conway have shepherded their services in trying times. He needs to tell the Army to look in the mirror and fix itself.
While Gates has made some admirable public comments about engaging civil society (see recent speech to AAU below), he hasn't agressively pushed the services to expand their accessions pool. 7 years into a war and the Navy still has no ROTC program in NJ, CT, NH or RI. 7 years into a war and being 3,000+ officers short and the Army hasn't entertained - let a lone executed - a concept of recruiting officers in Detroit, Brooklyn or Jersey City - diverse places with incredible heritage language ability and cultural "reachback".
http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=1228
Consider that Gates said back in January that "Our guys in the east* … are doing a terrific job. They've got the (counter-insurgency] thing down pat."
*referring to east Afghanistan
Down pat? really?
At least it sounds like he has enough integrity to not take money from contractors while doing "objective analysis".
Steve
SNLII:
Thanks for reminding me of that most interesting exchange on Mark G’s blog ref the Yingling piece. However, there was plenty of bile from me as well; perhaps too much so.
But right, the problem with the Yingling piece that you and I agreed on (and an opinion that I still hold) is that to make such a sweeping condemnation of our general officer corps (and I also acknowledge that his critique of the system was spot-on and crucial in starting a national dialogue on the problem) then he needed to give a few examples. Perhaps there were some philosophical differences between he and I; me being a historian and a believer in induction from particulars and he being the political scientist and their fetish for models and deduction; whatever. The bile from me probably came from only a few months back home, still trying to reconcile in my mind losses to accomplishments, and the fact that I thought that there was some implicit hagiography going on it with a handful of general officers.
But the importance of Yingling’s piece can not be overstated. I consider him my friend and wish him the best along with his troopers as he heads off to use SNLII’s words “the suck.” It would be nice to hear from Paul at some point with his views on the recent NY Times piece on retired GOs and the media (although clearly he has more immediate pressing concerns with his battalion)
SNLII; if you get the chance drop me a line at gian.gentile1@gmail.com
gian
that is an OUTSTANDING speech! Thank you for posting...and this reader knows ALL about mandatory lectures ... but its nice when I can read it because I choose to - and this was a worthwhile speech to read.
Thank you.
I agree with Gates' sentiments completely. However it is going to take a tectonic shift in Army culture for his ideas to become reality. I am talking about the equivalent of California breaking off and falling in to the ocean (ie: the HRC building implodes and all records of the Army personnel system are lost: so that we now have to choose leaders based on merit! (not time in service, general's aide status, ball washing etc.).
The Army personnel system chooses leaders based on their ability to please their boss and micro-manage minute details that their bosses check/ evaluate when giving Officer Ratings. (Especially at the Field Grade Officer level and above). With this in mind, very few field grade officers are going to be willing to listen to dissent among the ranks on how to tackle a problem. Under the current army model, there is only one answer: what would my rater and senior rater want me to do or how would they handle this problem. (There are of course exceptional leaders that do not follow this norm, but they are few and far between, and they do not get promoted at the rate of the Courtney Massengale standard).
When you change the personnel system (360 degree reviews, competency testing, reward those who deploy/ do the hard jobs, reward innovation and creative problem solving etc) you will see officers open up to soliciting their ranks for a better way to skin the cat. Until that happens, expect more of the same. Middle and Senior officers dedicated to "Cooperate and Graduate (to the next rank)"
This is the root cause of the massive junior officer exodus in my opinion (yes deployments are the catalyst, but the root problem is leadership)
To hell with 30K bonuses. A buddy of mine who just left the service at 10 years of officer service is getting 140K to go to Iraq for 6 months as a government contractor! He wanted to stay in the military, but the poor leadership drove him out. He has actually considered going back in, but the lack of leadership at the field grade level has led him to "suck it up" and pocket that ridiculous amount of money doing the same job he did in the military. He has said he would gladly give up the money if he could have had more bosses in the military that he respected. He is just not willing to roll the dice again in the Army leadership roulette wheel.
Well, the other mild disagreement we had, Gian, was over a tactical commander's efforts to mitigate IED attacks.
I quoted to you Van Creveld and Enzensberger, and you tossed back some lyrics from Kansas.
I began to harbor grave doubts about certain California Bay Area institutions of higher learning.
Yes, I'm joking.
Hasn't it already been determined that Gates did *not*, in fact, primarily "pistol whip" the USAF?
Anon, it doesn't matter if he did or not. The most satisfying part of this blog is that collectively the bloggers metaphorically and iteratively "pistol whip" the USAF.
Consider it a verbal sort of road rage extended to grown men and women who wear bus driver uniforms and simper about four-month rotations to Kuwait.
Click name for Stars & Stripes report on this.
runescape money runescape gold tibia item tibia gold runescape accounts tibia money runescape gp buy runescape gold tibia gold tibia item buy runescape money runescape items tibia money
Post a Comment