Military masters in the United States: look from the inside

Military professionals in the United States: a view from the insideCommanding officers of the U.S. armed forces was formed by the English model and formed by the end of the XIX century

Scandal involving the critical performance of South American Lieutenant General Stanley McChrystal to the address of Barack Obama and his next retirement, interested not only the U.S. public, and Russian. After all, in our country, as we know, many people dream to make the Armed Forces in the image of the United States Armed Forces. Not knowing the truth, how were the birth and formation of the caste of military experts of the ocean, as in fact heavily folded and folded her relationship with the political control of the country and countrymen. That is why the editorial staff of "military-industrial complex" has decided to publish a series of articles on the topic.

Prof. military of the priemuschestvenno officer corps, in the Anglo-Saxon model of control of the armed forces, first the United States, Britain, Canada and Australia, occupy a specific, historically distinct place. Some inherent in the Anglo-Saxon officers, including high (generals), corresponding to the features of its position in the system of social relations typical of similar social groups in other states, while others — very original that explains the peculiarities of the development of certain countries in general and the state armies and it is also the mentality of the population, representatives of which, in fact, equipped with military personnel prof

According to European patterns, but with the state specificity

Occupation officer in the modern consciousness of its nature is a product of the XIX century. Coupled with the fact it should be emphasized that the formation of the officer corps as a society of military experts, even in advanced at the time of European countries proceeded at different rates, delays, and sometimes abruptly.

In the west of the research literature to assume that with the rapidly progressed throughout France greatest progress in the development of the officer corps was provided in Prussia. It is here that by reason of the national character of the Germans and the top of the aristocratic tradition and formed the so-called constitutional or legal registration process, in which the lord has been recognized as a military ruler and the head authority in military business. Despite the constantly growing strongly and the impact Prussian bourgeoisie was not in a position to challenge the existing military-aristocratic hierarchy. So Makarov, the army of the country in general and the officer corps that is a long time were beyond the control of the rudiments of democratic institutions. The exception that proves the rule, was a short period in the middle of the XIX century, when the minister of war in some secondary issues was accountable to Parliament, but in the main — the monarch.

In France, the establishment of the officer corps held more difficult due to the protracted revolutionary events at the turn of XVIII-XIX centuries and constant involvement in the political struggle of the command of the army, including the first generals. Yet in the end the French officer corps, albeit with a certain delay, took shape as an independent class, almost all fundamentally similar in terms of the Prussian.

In England, in multiple samples over a number of centuries (from time to time — lucky from time to time — no) involvement of the army in the political struggle culminated in the XIX century by ensuring the primacy of Parliament in all the major issues of the armed forces and the training of officers.

The current British or, as it later became known, the Anglo-Saxon model of the military organization of the country as officers formed a separate social group. This model is a natural way has been moved to the colonies of England, North American first, copied by the founding fathers and the U.S., with some inherited backlog prepyadstviya same as that of the former metropolis, though the final folding contributed to the ending of the XIX century South American state officer corps, the same European swatches.

An important feature of the appearance of the social strata in the U.S. military prof was so called constitutional background that almost all caused by the prospect of mind been shaped South American officers. This unprecedented civilian control over the armed forces in general and their vertex (the generals) viz. If the founding fathers of the United States and the creators of the U.S. Constitution initially did not even think about such a dilemma, as the possibility of release from the custody of military civilian society with universal spirituality of the population in bringing independence by armed struggle, as the separation of the officers in a separate caste of this discrepancy began to emerge more clearly. The leaders of the young country came to the conclusion about the necessity of mandatory separation capabilities in monitoring and control of the armed forces. It was believed that if the federal government is monopolizing power over them, the relative independence of the states would be in danger, if the president monopolizes control of the country's military machine, it will represent a severe threat to legislators in other words Congress. Because control of the military uniform was fragmentizirovan and in a sense, "smeared" between all the institutions of the USA mandatory.

Later the close of professionals has been seen that the degree and quality of civilian control over the military niskolechko not depend on the form of national governance in the state. Even in a country such as the U.S., it would seem from an established mechanism of regulation of internal processes ripoliticheskih emphasizes recognizable American scientist Samuel Huntington, "the military can, in principle," wash away " civilian control and gain greater political influence in the country through the existing democratic universities … Under a totalitarian regime, on the other hand, the power of the military can be reduced to a minimum by incorporating them into appropriate politicized organization, emasculated professional nature and ethics of the officers. " In this regard, with some aspects of the system highlights the actual identity of civilian control and its attendant problems in such antagonistic own municipal government countries like the U.S. and the USSR.

Waves, then tightened, then relaxed, but constantly functioning, civilian control of the military in the U.S. right before the start of the war was the appropriate cool feature of South American society, as well as the desire of individual branches of government to occupy a dominant position in the control and management of public forces. Specificity is a cool war and the consequent high intensity military manufacturers only intensified the struggle for control of this and it's management, sometimes involving her directly in the South American officer corps and in particular the generals.

After the end of ideological confrontation between the superpowers on the base and the recognition of the "undiminished threats to state security" in the aftermath of the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact South American analysts had no choice but to recognize the fact that the complexity of problems of national security are now asking once and ordering civilian control the military on the one hand, and to improve the properties of Prof. latter — on the other.

In principle, the fact of becoming an officer profession with all its att
ributes is one of the major achievements of XIX century. Specifically, from the era of countless wars and conflicts with the role of anti-Napoleonic coalition began the process of self-identification as a separate officers — incomparable with any of the civilians — a social group that (process) actually ended at the turn of XIX-XX centuries. In effect until a certain time has no special training civilian could fully perform the duties of the commander, and that, as practice shows, only short-lived time. Then begins the difficulties associated not only with the knowledge of the missing aspects of military affairs, and with the hardships of the service to which the ordinary civilian, in principle, has not been prepared. But it is paradoxical way niskolechko not contributed to the authority and popularity of the military profession, and on the contrary, it emphasizes the south american Military historian Robert L. Bateman, even relegating military experts to the lowest status in society.

The ideology of the society and the officer corps

In the U.S. military position, the ratio of civilian society to them, especially the military experts and generals were determined and defined priemuschestvenno prevailing in the same society ideology. The peculiarity of the U.S. system of public and state preferences is symbiosis dominant ideology of liberalism here and indisputably perceived by all standards of public limited character, which is reflected in the measured acting for nearly a quarter of the millennium of the U.S. Constitution. From the day or the independence of the United States in 1776, and through critical periods of development of the United States as a country of liberalism and conservatism have been and continue to be a constant in American civil-military relations.

Liberalism as an ideology, the core of which is the individualism emphasizes the innate spiritual and moral dignity of man and yet accept the political, social and economic restrictions imposed on the personal freedom of the individual. Prof. military because of the specificity of the service in a team, a serious military discipline can not disobey group interests and hence formally rejects liberalism as such.

It should be emphasized that after independence, and in fact before the end of 1865 in four civilian war liberalism was not totally the prevailing ideology in the former North American colonies of England. Moreover, he was not even in a depressed state in the southern states, the political situation in which different authorities and the ruthlessness of a much more significant authority in society institutions of coercion, as it should, respectfully, "men in uniform". The victory of the northerners and their dominance is rapidly spreading across the country, accompanied by the spirit of the "liberal entrepreneurship" in the near future become a prerequisite military separation from their limited thinking in a separate group. With all of this standards and business philosophy of liberal individualism and turned into standards and philosophy of civilization, perceived by virtually all the other groups of South American society.

Which developed from the time people neglect to military work could not logically lead to the formation of the so-called military policy of liberalism, in which lay the basis of the idea of isolationism in the international arena and small-sized army unchanged. Moreover, a comprehensive liberalism South American society of that time began to receive new, very antimilitarist form as has become very popular on-site pacifism. The "natural" and "inevitability" of the process were noted South American analyst Arthur Ekirhom, who wrote: "The organized pacifism in Western civilization is a common movement of the middle class, and the United States as an ordinary middle-class country one hundred percent shared pacifist principles."

In a military environment, the word "pacifist" zopoluchilo initially negative, and then swear, offensive value. Prof. military retreat from his own began to take their same country as the "center of individualism and the general commercialization," far from ethical officers. The South American business community is not enough that made for military purposes, are virtually absent from the point of view and not fueled homage to the PATH class. Last loves it.

Specifically, in those years, as a hero — the patron of civilization South American society has become the image does not ask for Prof. soldier and a civilian, liberal in their gaze, by fate and events coerced to wear uniforms. This fact is noted by recognizable at the time the South American historian Uektor Dixon, who wrote: "… all the majestic national heroes of America, perhaps with the exception of George Washington, were liberals, and Prof. fighter as such just quoted."

In this regard, it is noteworthy to highlight another fact. In the middle of numerous areas rich in talents of American literature as a separate antimilitarist is novel. Beginning of this trend in the United States was put on the sensational whole the world of the works of Norman Meyer, "The Naked and the Dead," James Jones "now and for ever" and Herman Wouk "Mutiny on the" Cain ", published at the turn of 40-50-ies of the last century, in the wake of the tragedies of human understanding of how the consequences of wartime atrocities. But catchy in this case, what is in all 3 classics novels stories are added around the confrontation of goodies — liberal intellectuals, by the will of the events donned a military uniform, and their antipodes — autocratic martinet, professor of war, almost openly sympathetic to the totalitarian enemy in war. Of course, sympathy for the military in the South American society and then not increased.

All this has led to the fact that, as warned Huntington, West Liberal society has traditionally been unable to be a support for the military.

Yet these conclusions are presented by some politically tinged exaggeration to build on the historical tradition of the same South American society and take into account the fact underscored by analysts mentioned as the South American second constant in the civil-military relations in the United States, in other words, conservatism, the ideology of those who are committed ingrained , regular, serious observance of customs and traditions.

Certainly, you can not deny the fact that after the war the U.S. civilian in ideological terms the South American military as part of society and society as a whole, in the apt words of Huntington, "began to move in different directions," and that the military masters stubbornly continued not to take liberal values. But with the prevalence of liberalism in the South American society he was not only an ideological trend fringing all aspects of life in this society, on another war would not exist and develop, often without following and even contrary to the liberal standards.

Conservatism, namely, perhaps priemuschestvenno South American, according to the Russian researcher V. Garbuzov, "is a changing phenomenon without annoying … But absorbing the different concepts, theories, and even the psychology of the masses, conservatism had acquired inconsistency, internal heterogeneity and incompleteness of their own theoretical positions … "In all of this all important is that specifically South American conservatism in all its forms and manifestations, committed by the fair The views of some Russian analysts, without being very stiff opposition in the same South American liberalism, shared and continues to share the core values of military ethics, and even said it was one of the manifestations of realism.

Since the birth of the South American conservatism works of the 1st of the most influential founding fathers of the United States Alexander Hamilton (1755-1804) and his followers, also burst and promotion of
this ideology in the late XIX, and then in the middle of the twentieth century in the form of so-called neogamiltonizma principles of military ethics , military thinking and a whole way of life of military experts remained the cornerstone of South American conservatism. All of the following prevailing currents of this ideology, including the "New Right" (60 years) and the "neo-conservatives" (70-80-ies of XX century), as the official ideology of the opposition were in power or another political group in the number of values is always designated the interests of national security and, accordingly, the need for increased military spending, and the means and the full support of military experts. This naturally could not but arouse sympathy in the widest circles of the U.S. military.

Samuel Huntington points to the fact that the main feature of the officer as such was and is the motivation in the sense that it is driven by its own activities in the non-real incentives and rewards, and the love of his own profession, which requires him to devote himself entirely to serving the community and the country, in which a society is formed. And the society with their own hand have to take on a formal or informal commitment to maintain officers in a form sufficient to fulfill its own obligations on its multifunction (company) organized defense, and decent living after retirement.

Naturally officer corps turned into nominally bureaucratic profession and once a bureaucratic company. Within the profession competence levels are different depending on the hierarchical rank (ranks), and within the organization — regardless of the system established posts.

Like this post? Please share to your friends: