DOCSLIB.ORG

Jaimie Orr Breakout Session I How Roosevelt Is Used to Teach Grand

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Jaimie Orr Breakout Session I How Roosevelt Is Used to Teach Grand Breakout Session I How Roosevelt is Used to Teach Grand Strategy Speaker: Jaimie Orr The National War College School of Practice… Teaching College… NWC Mission Educate future leaders of the Armed Forces, Department of State, and other civilian agencies for high-level policy, command and staff responsibilities by conducting a senior-level course of study in national security strategy. NWC Accreditation Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff Middle States Commission on Higher Education Process for Accreditation of Joint Education (PAJE) – Master’s Degree – JPME II In The Beginning “The National War College is concerned with grand strategy and the utilization of resources necessary to implement that strategy. Its graduates will exercise a great influence on the formulation of national and foreign policy in both peace and war.” Lieutenant General Leonard T. Gerow, USA Report Recommending Creation of NWC, 1945 “Every aspect of the program is not only conducive to freedom of thought and uninhibited expression, but has also been intentionally planned to furnish a forum for the dissemination and evaluation of new ideas.” Vice Admiral Harry W. Hill “Opening address to first class” National War College, 3 Sep 1946 Around Half of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Omar Bradley Arthur Radford Nathan Lyman Lemnitzer Maxwell D. Taylor Earle Wheeler Thomas H. 1949-1953 1953-1957 Twining 1957- 1960-1962 1962-1964 1964-1970 Moorer 1970- 1960 1974 George S. Brown David C. Jones John William Vessey Jr. William J. Crowe Colin Powell David E. Jeremiah John 1974-1978 1978-1982 1982-1985 1985-1989 1989-1993 1993-1993 Shalikashvili 1993-1997 Hugh Shelton Richard Myers Peter Pace Michael Mullen Martin Dempsey Joseph Dunford 2015- 1997-2001 2001-2005 2005-2007 2007-2011 2011-2015 Present How Has NWC Contributed to National Strategy 1947 – NWC Vice-Commandant George Kennan develops the Containment Doctrine 1953 – President Eisenhower conducts Project SOLARIUM at NWC 1989 – NWC grad Colin Powell coins Powell Doctrine 1990 – NWC grad Brent Scowcroft coins New World Order vision as National Security Advisor 2001 – Former NWC professor Paul Wolfowitz is a key contributor to the Bush-43 Doctrine 2017 – NWC grad James Mattis lays out “Great Power Competition” National Defense Strategy NWC Educational Approach • Small group seminar – 13 students/1 faculty • Joint/Interagency/International • 2 Army; 2 Air Force; 2 Navy; 1 Marine/Coast Guard/1 State Department; 3 Other Civilian Agency; 2 International Fellows • Active Learning • Socratic discussion • Analysis of classical theory and emerging concepts • Development of analytical frameworks • Critique of selected historical cases • Assessment of selected strategic environments • Application of “scenario planning” methodology to envision alternate futures • Individual and group problem-solving exercises • Written/oral communication of analyses/problem solutions • “In the field” strategic analysis/assessment • “Contact hours” (i.e., in-classroom time) limited to 13/week • Rigorous assessment against well-defined performance outcomes NWC Class of 2020 Non-DOD Civilian 35 Army 43 DOD Civilian 21 Air Force Int’l 43 Fellows 33 Marines Navy 16 13 Coast Guard 2 Total = 206 Common Curriculum Required Additional American of all NWC Students Student Requirements 6000: Strategic Leader Foundation 6600: National Security Strategy 6210: Statecraft I: Historical Practicum (all US Students) Perspective Electives (US Students required 6310: Statecraft II: Modern Era to take 3) 6500: Global Context 6400: Domestic Context Additional International Student Requirements 6920: Applications in Strategy (all International Fellows) 6921: Individual Strategy Research Project (all International Fellows) 6047: American Studies I 6048: American Studies II What is Strategic Logic? • A method for thinking through complex strategic problems • 3D: Non-Linear & Non-Sequential • All elements influenced by assumptions Strategic leadership converts a strategy into success Strategic Logic – The Sources Analyze the Strategic Situation Analyze the Strategic Situation Define the Ends Define the Ends Determine the Means Formulate the Ways Assess the Risks/Costs Answers the question: “What is the condition we want to create?” • Linkage of National Interests & Ends • Political Aim • Specific Objectives Analyze the Strategic Situation Determine the Means Define the Ends Determine the Means Formulate the Ways Assess the Risks/Costs Answers the question: “What are the resources needed or available?” • Elements of Power • Institutions and Actors • Instruments of power • Interrelationship of Means • Employing/Developing Means Analyze the Strategic Situation Formulate the Ways Define the Ends Determine the Means Formulate the Ways Assess the Risks/Costs Answers the question: “How should resources be used?” • Fundamental Strategic Approaches WAYS • Modes of Action Modes of Action (examples) Fundamental Direct Indirect • Matching Institutions and Strategic Unilateral Multilateral Approaches Sequential Cumulative Actual Prospective Actors Observe Proactive Reactive Accommodate Overt Covert Strategic • Orchestration Shape Persuade Orchestration Concept Enable Instrument Prioritize Induce Specific & Sequence Coerce Institution Coordinate Subdue Balance Packages Objectives Integrate Subordinate Eradicate Strategies Strategic Logic—Assessments: Costs and Risks Answers the question: “Is this strategy viable?” WAYS • Risks to and from a strategy • Costs of strategy ENDS MEANS • Iterative (re)assessment and course COSTS corrections RISKS • Red-Teaming Evaluating Strategy – “ilities” Test • DESIRABLE: Interest of sufficient value; benefits worth the likely cost; success improves strategic position • SUITABLE: Aim serves interests; lines of effort will have Rumelt’s Kernel Test desired effects; orchestrated w/other strategies • Diagnosis • FEASIBLE: Sufficient means are available or attainable • Guiding Policy • SUSTAINABLE: Means available for the duration required to achieve success • Coherent Actions • ACCEPTABLE: Able to sustain public support; sufficiently consistent wi/international law and norms The Independent Strategy Research Project Analyzing Case Studies Using the Elements of Strategic Logic Roosevelt’s Grand Strategy • Strategic Context: • International Context • Global Context • U.S. National Interests • Threats or Opportunities to Interests • Strategic problem • Political Aim / Grand Strategic Objective • Supporting Objectives (ends) • Subordinate Objectives and Instruments (ways/means) Roosevelt’s Grand Strategy • Strategic Context: • USA had been focused on internal stability and continental expansion • Protected during this time by Royal Navy and European Powers’ involvement on European Continent • Technology now allows European powers greater ability to act in Western hemisphere • Continued prosperity of USA depends on further commercial expansion and broader security from external threats • U.S. National Interests: • Security from direct or indirect external attack • Prosperity of our nation and all its citizens • Protecting the American “way of life” and Values • Perceived Threats to those interests: • Expansion of European powers into Western hemisphere • Unchecked Rise of Japan and Russia in the Pacific Rim Roosevelt’s Grand Strategy • Strategic Problem: • Expansion of European Powers into the Caribbean and South America and the growth of Russia and Japan as military powers bordering the Pacific, present a continuing threat to American security, prosperity, and way of life. • Political Aim / Grand Strategic Objective: • Establish the United States as a global power with an increased sphere of influence and regional hegemony • Supporting Objectives: • Build a Navy capable of projecting US influence and protecting US national interests on a par with other great powers. • Establish a diplomatic leadership role for the United States among other great powers • Ensure continued US economic expansion • Establish and align executive power in relation to government and the private sector to ensure a just prosperity. Other Subordinate Objectives • Completion of canal linking Atlantic and Pacific Oceans • This subordinate objective advances supporting objectives 1 & 3 • Facilitate a mediated end to conflict between Russia and Japan • This subordinate objective advances subordinate objective 2 • Key: To have the seminar identify and evaluate other subordinate objectives that were undertaken in order to accomplish the political aim. Criteria for Evaluating the Elements of Strategic Logic in the Case Study • Was there a tight fit between the perceived threat and a national security interest? Was this articulated in a coherent and concise problem statement that guided the process in settling on a political aim? • Did the formulation of the problem statement take into account the target's (or opponent's) interests, perceived threats to those interests, motivations, and capabilities? • Did the political aim effectively address the threat to the national security interest? Criteria for Evaluating the Elements of Strategic Logic in the Case Study • Which instruments were used in the strategy? • Which institutions/actors wielded the instruments and why? For each subordinate objective, identify the means/ways package employed. • In this particular context, were the strengths and limitations of each instrument evident? What were they? • Was the selection and employment taken as a whole (ways) effective for the achievement of the subordinate objectives
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Position of Secretary of Defense: Statutory Restrictions and Civilian-Military Relations
    The Position of Secretary of Defense: Statutory Restrictions and Civilian-Military Relations Updated January 6, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R44725 Position of Secretary of Defense: Statutory Restrictions and Civilian-Military Relations Summary The position of Secretary of Defense is unique within the United States government; it is one of two civilian positions within the military chain of command, although unlike the President, the Secretary of Defense is not elected. Section 113 of the United States Code states that the Secretary of Defense is to be “appointed from civilian life by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.” The section goes on to elaborate a key mechanism by which civilian control of the armed forces is maintained: A person may not be appointed as Secretary of Defense within seven years after relief from active duty as a commissioned officer of a regular component of an armed force. The proposed nomination of General (Ret.) Lloyd Austin, United States Army, who retired from the military in 2016, to be Secretary of Defense may lead both houses of Congress to consider whether and how to suspend, change, or remove that provision. This provision was originally contained in the 1947 National Security Act (P.L. 80-253), which mandated that 10 years pass between the time an officer is relieved from active duty and when he or she could be appointed to the office of the Secretary of Defense. In 2007, Section 903 of the FY2008 National Defense Authorization Act (P.L. 110-181), Congress changed the period of time that must elapse between relief from active duty and appointment to the position of Secretary of Defense to seven years.
    [Show full text]
  • SPRING 2017 MESSAGE from the CHAIRMAN Greetings to All USAWC Graduates and Foundation Friends
    SPRING 2017 MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIRMAN Greetings to all USAWC graduates and Foundation friends, On behalf of our Foundation Board of Trustees, it is a privilege to share Chairman of the Board this magazine with you containing the latest news of our Foundation LTG (Ret) Thomas G. Rhame and of the U.S. Army War College (USAWC) and its graduates. Vice Chairman of the Board Our Spring Board meeting in Tampa in March was very productive as we Mr. Frank C. Sullivan planned our 2018 support to the College. We remain very appreciative Trustees and impressed with the professionalism and vision of MG Bill Rapp, LTG (Ret) Richard F. Timmons (President Emeritus) RES ’04 & 50th Commandant as he helps us understand the needs of MG (Ret) William F. Burns (President Emeritus) the College going forward. With his excellent stewardship of our Foundation support across Mrs. Charlotte H. Watts (Trustee Emerita) more than 20 programs, he has helped advance the ability of our very successful public/ Dr. Elihu Rose (Trustee Emeritus) Mr. Russell T. Bundy (Foundation Advisor) private partnership to provide the margin of excellence for the College and its grads. We also LTG (Ret) Dennis L. Benchoff thank so many of you who came to our USAWC Alumni Dinner in Tampa on March 15, Mr. Steven H. Biondolillo 2017 (feature and photos on page 7). Special thanks to GEN Joseph L. Votel III, RES ’01, Mr. Hans L. Christensen and GEN Raymond A. Th omas III, RES ’00, for hosting us at the Central and Special Ms. Jo B. Dutcher Operations Commands at MacDill AFB on March 17th.
    [Show full text]
  • Panama Treaty 9 77
    Collection: Office of the Chief of Staff Files Series: Hamilton Jordan's Confidential Files Folder: Panama Canal Treaty 9/77 Container: 36 Folder Citation: Office of the Chief of Staff Files, Hamilton Jordan's Confidential Files, Panama Canal Treaty 9/77, Container 36 NATIONAL ARCHIVES ANO RECORDSSe'RVIC'E ~~7'",,!:.;, WITHDRAWAL SHEET (PRESIDENTIALLlBR~~IESj FORM OF CORRESPONDENTS OR TITLE DATE RESTRICTION DOCUMENT caDle American Imbassy Panama to Secretary of State '/27/77 memo Panama Canal treaty negotiations (S PP.) ca. '/27 A memo aicE Inderfurth to IJ '1'/77 A memo Elmer T. Irooks to ZI '1'/77 A ..,b thomson to 3C ..... ~~ I} ~tI~o '/2'/7~ ...... - ----"------,----,---,-,-,---,- ----'-1---'"--''' FILE LOCATION Chief of Staff (Jordan)/lox , of • (org.)/Panama Canal Treaty~Sept. 1'77 RESTRICTION CODES (A) Closed by Executive Order 12065 governing access to national security information. I B) Closed by statute or by the agency which originated the document. IC) Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in the donor's deed of gift. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION GSA FORM 7122 (REV. 1-81) MEMORANDUM THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINCTO!': MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT FROM: HAMILTON JORDAN 1-1.9. DATE: AUGUST 30, 1977 SUBJECT: PANAMA CANAL ENDORSEMENTS 1. The AFL-CIO Executive Council officially adopted :::::',:-·· :.... ·;;h~i: -: a strong statement in favor of the new Panama .~'",. , .:.; Canal Treaties today. Mr. Meany, in a press con­ ference afterwards, said that the resolution "means full support, using whatever influence we have on Fi· Members of Congress - it certainly means lobbying." In addition, we have a commitment from John Williams, ...... President of the Panama Canal Pilots Association, and from Al Walsh of the Canal Zone AFL-CIO, to testify q~11 ~llli, at Senate hearings that the employee provisions / -~ ...
    [Show full text]
  • George Washington and George Marshall: Some Reflections on the American Military Tradition” Don Higginbotham, 1984
    'The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the US Air Force, Department of Defense or the US Government.'" USAFA Harmon Memorial Lecture #26 “George Washington and George Marshall: Some Reflections on the American Military Tradition” Don Higginbotham, 1984 Though this is my second visit to the Air Force Academy, it is my first opportunity to present an address. I have had more exposure in this regard to one of your sister institutions: West Point. I must be careful not to speak of you as army men and women; but if I forget it will not be out of partiality. Gen. George Marshall at times was amused and at other times irritated by the partiality shown for the Navy by President Franklin Roosevelt, whom you may recall loved the sea and had been assistant secretary of the navy in the Wilson administration. On one occasion Marshall had had enough and pleaded good humoredly, "At least, Mr. President, stop speaking of the Army as 'they' and the Navy as ‘us’!” The title of this lecture suggests the obvious: that I consider it informative and instructive to look at certain similarities of experience and attitude shared by George Washington and George Marshall. In so doing, I want to speculate on their place in the American military tradition. These introductory remarks sound as though I am searching for relevance, and that is the case. No doubt at times historians, to say nothing of their readers, wish that the contemporary world would get lost so as to leave them unfettered to delve into the past for its own sake.
    [Show full text]
  • Notable Alumni in the Military
    Notable Alumni in the Military UNION IN THE WORLD James Bascom III ‘96, military Kevin Frederick ’80, colonel, U.S. intelligence officer in the U.S. Army; Marine Corps; Chief of Staff for NATO headed an interagency group that Regional Command Southwest in developed the security plan for the Helmand Province, Afghanistan trial of Saddam Hussein. Deputy director of the Trans-Sahara Security Robert Gilston ’41, first lieutenant Symposium, which taught civil military in the U.S. Army; served in General relations and counter-terrorism to Patton’s 3rd Army, 4th Armored West African colonels and generals; Division in WWII, as well as in the principal intelligence officer for the 37th Tank Battalion as platoon leader international zone in Baghdad and company commander. Received the Purple Heart during the Battle of Daniel Butterfield 1849, colonel in the the Bulge and a second Purple Heart U.S. Army during the Civil War; led with cluster during a mission to rescue the first Union regiment into Virginia. American POWs from the Germans Served as chief of staff to Generals Hooker and Meade and developed Henry Wager Halleck 1837, Civil War the army’s system of corps badges. General; served as general-in-chief of Best known for composing “Taps,” the all U.S. armies in the early part of the renowned lights-out bugle call, in 1862 Civil War (before Ulysses Grant) Gregory Clark ’87, lieutenant colonel, Jordanna Mallach ’00, captain, Vermont U.S. Air Force; pilot (flew Secretary of Army National Guard; military State Colin Powell) decorations include the Bronze Star Medal, Army Achievement Medal with Joseph Clearfield ’93, lieutenant colonel, two oak leaf clusters, National Defense U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Michael W. Johnson Senior Defense Research Analyst
    Michael W. Johnson Senior Defense Research Analyst The RAND Corporation [email protected] 1200 S. Hayes St. (703) 413-1100 ext 5269 Arlington, VA 22202 cell: (703) 568-9146 SUMMARY Former Army strategic plans and policy officer with expertise in military strategy, risk assessment, Joint campaign planning, combat operations in Afghanistan, military transformation, doctrine and force development. Served for eight years in the Pentagon on the Joint Staff and the Army Staff. Key assignments include special assistant for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Joint Staff J-5 Strategy Division, speechwriter for the Army Vice Chief of Staff; HQDA G-3/5/7 Army Transformation Office, and operational planner at U.S. Third Army (CFLCC) and I Corps. EDUCATION National Security Seminar XXI 2009 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Masters of Military Art and Science (Theater Operations) 2001 U.S. Army School of Advanced Military Studies Masters of Military Art and Science (Strategy) 2000 U.S. Army Command and General Staff College Masters of Arts (International Policy Studies) 1998 Monterey Institute of International Studies German 1997 Defense Language Institute Bachelor of Science (European Foreign Area Studies) 1988 United States Military Academy, West Point PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Senior Defense Research Analyst, RAND Corporation 2012 – present Options for Aligning the Army Service Component Commands (HQDA G-3/5/7) Analytical Support for Preparing the Army Budget (HQDA G-8) Analytical Support for the 2013 Quadrennial Defense Review (HQDA
    [Show full text]
  • Contributions of Immigrants to the United States Armed Forces
    S. HRG. 109–884 CONTRIBUTIONS OF IMMIGRANTS TO THE UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION JULY 10, 2006 Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services ( U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 35–222 PDF WASHINGTON : 2007 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:36 May 11, 2007 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 C:\DOCS\35222.TXT SARMSER2 PsN: JUNEB COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES JOHN WARNER, Virginia, Chairman JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona CARL LEVIN, Michigan JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts PAT ROBERTS, Kansas ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine JACK REED, Rhode Island JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii JAMES M. TALENT, Missouri BILL NELSON, Florida SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia E. BENJAMIN NELSON, Nebraska LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina MARK DAYTON, Minnesota ELIZABETH DOLE, North Carolina EVAN BAYH, Indiana JOHN CORNYN, Texas HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York JOHN THUNE, South Dakota CHARLES S. ABELL, Staff Director RICHARD D. DEBOBES, Democratic Staff Director (II) VerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:36 May 11, 2007 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 0486 Sfmt 0486 C:\DOCS\35222.TXT SARMSER2 PsN: JUNEB C O N T E N T S CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF WITNESSES CONTRIBUTIONS OF IMMIGRANTS TO THE UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES JULY 10, 2006 Page Martinez, Senator Mel, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The United States Atomic Army, 1956-1960 Dissertation
    INTIMIDATING THE WORLD: THE UNITED STATES ATOMIC ARMY, 1956-1960 DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Paul C. Jussel, B.A., M.M.A.S., M.S.S. * * * * * The Ohio State University 2004 Dissertation Committee Approved by Professor Allan R. Millett, Advisor Professor John R. Guilmartin __________________ Professor William R. Childs Advisor Department of History ABSTRACT The atomic bomb created a new military dynamic for the world in 1945. The bomb, if used properly, could replace the artillery fires and air-delivered bombs used to defeat the concentrated force of an enemy. The weapon provided the U.S. with an unparalleled advantage over the rest of the world, until the Soviet Union developed its own bomb by 1949 and symmetry in warfare returned. Soon, theories of warfare changed to reflect the belief that the best way to avoid the effects of the bomb was through dispersion of forces. Eventually, the American Army reorganized its divisions from the traditional three-unit organization to a new five-unit organization, dubbed pentomic by its Chief of Staff, General Maxwell D. Taylor. While atomic weapons certainly had an effect on Taylor’s reasoning to adopt the pentomic organization, the idea was not new in 1956; the Army hierarchy had been wrestling with restructuring since the end of World War II. Though the Korean War derailed the Army’s plans for the early fifties, it returned to the forefront under the Eisenhower Administration. The driving force behind reorganization in 1952 was not ii only the reoriented and reduced defense budget, but also the Army’s inroads to the atomic club, formerly the domain of only the Air Force and the Navy.
    [Show full text]
  • DEPARTMENT of DEFENSE the Pentagon 20301±1155, Phone (703) 545±6700 Fax (703) 695±3362/693±2161
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE The Pentagon 20301±1155, phone (703) 545±6700 fax (703) 695±3362/693±2161, www.dtic.dla.mil/defenselink WILLIAM S. COHEN, Secretary of Defense; nominated by President William Clinton; confirmed by the U.S. Senate and took the oath of office on January 24, 1997; born August 28, 1940; B.A. in Latin from Bowdoin College; LL.B. cum laude from Boston University Law School; served three terms in the House of Representatives from Maine's Second Congres- sional District (1973±79) and three terms in the U.S. Senate for the State of Maine (1979± 97). JOHN WHITE, Deputy Secretary of Defense, nominated by President William Clinton; confirmed by the U.S. Senate and sworn in on June 22, 1995; M.A. and Ph.D. in economics from the Maxwell Graduate School at Syracuse University, and a B.S. in industrial and labor relations from Cornell University; most recently served as the chairman of the Commis- sion on Roles and Missions for the Armed Forces; served as director of the Center for Business and Government at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University; general manager of the Integration and Systems Products Division and vice president of the Eastman Kodak Company (1988±92); CEO and chairman of the board of Interactive Systems Corporation (1981±88); deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget (1978±81); Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manpower, Reserve Affairs and Logistics (1977± 78); senior vice president, Rand Corporation (1968±77). OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY Pentagon, Room 3E880, 20301±1000, phone (703) 695±5261, fax (703) 697±9080 Secretary of Defense.ÐWilliam S.
    [Show full text]
  • A COUNTRY at WAR the ORIGIN, EVOLUTION, and FUTURE of CIVIL-MILITARY RELATIONS in the UNITED STATES by Joseph Luis Harper Viñas
    A COUNTRY AT WAR THE ORIGIN, EVOLUTION, AND FUTURE OF CIVIL-MILITARY RELATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES by Joseph Luis Harper Viñas A thesis submitted to Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Government Baltimore, Maryland December 2018 © 2018 Joseph Luis Harper Viñas All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT The purpose of this research is to study the erosion of civil-military relations in the United States in order to determine whether it affects national security. The overall construct is regarding civil-military relations, not only between civilian and military government officials, but also those relationships with the citizenry in the United States. In order to study this, civil-military relations will be looked at through three different lenses. First of all, it is important to learn about the origins of civil-military relations in the United States and what the Founding Fathers thought of these relations. In order to do this, a look at the separation of powers between the Executive and Legislative branches of government will be examined, as well as what the Founding Fathers felt regarding having a standing army in the United States during times of peace. The second point regarding these relations will be studied by looking at the evolution of civil-military relations with regards to the civil-military gap. Accession numbers provided by the Department of Defense will be analyzed in order to determine if the US military is representative of its citizens. Accession numbers from the post-Vietnam all volunteer force up until recent times will be used.
    [Show full text]
  • Navy and Marine Corps Opposition to the Goldwater Nichols Act of 1986
    Navy and Marine Corps Opposition to the Goldwater Nichols Act of 1986 A thesis presented to the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of Ohio University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts Steven T. Wills June 2012 © 2012 Steven T. Wills. All Rights Reserved. 2 This thesis titled Navy and Marine Corps Opposition to the Goldwtaer Nichols Act of 1986 by STEVEN T. WILLS has been approved for the Department of History and the College of Arts and Sciences by Ingo Traushweizer Assistant Professor of History Howard Dewald Interim Dean, College of Arts and Sciences 3 ABSTRACT WILLS, STEVEN T., M.A., June 2012, History Navy and Marine Corps Opposition to the Goldwater Nichols Act of 1986 Director of Thesis: Ingo Traushweizer The Goldwater Nichols Act of 1986 was the most comprehensive defense reorganization legislation in a generation. It has governed the way the United States has organized, planned, and conducted military operations for the last twenty five years. It passed the Senate and House of Representatives with margins of victory reserved for birthday and holiday resolutions. It is praised throughout the U.S. defense establishment as a universal good. Despite this, it engendered a strong opposition movement organized primarily by Navy Secretary John F. Lehman but also included members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, prominent Senators and Congressman, and President Reagan's Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger. This essay will examine the forty year background of defense reform movements leading to the Goldwater Nichols Act, the fight from 1982 to 1986 by supporters and opponents of the proposed legislation and its twenty-five year legacy that may not be as positive as the claims made by the Department of Defense suggest.
    [Show full text]
  • 17814 Hon. George Radanovich Hon. Doug Bereuter Hon
    17814 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS September 24, 2001 ourselves now is a breakdown of our soli- purposes the evening of September 21, 2001, General Shelton also commanded the 3rd darity, which must be absolute. Racism and and unfortunately missed several roll call Battalion, 60th Infantry Division at Ft. Lewis, hate are characteristics of terrorists, not of in- votes on H.R. 2926, the Air Transportation Washington; serving as the assistant chief of dividuals who treasure freedom. Safety and System Stabilization Act. Had this staff for operations for the 9th Infantry Divi- I urge my colleagues to join me in encour- Member been present, this Member would sion; commanded the 1st Brigade of the 82nd aging unity with our fellow Arab and Muslim have voted in the following ways: Airborne Division at Ft. Bragg, North Carolina; Americans and all Americans, who share our 1. Rollcall Number 345—‘‘aye’’ on the Rule served in Ft. Drum, NY as the 10th Mountain commitment to freedom and democracy. Unity, (H. Res. 242) to allow same day consideration Division’s Chief of Staff; as the assistant divi- not hatred, will provide our nation with clarity of legislation to preserve the continued viability sion commander of the 101st Airborne; and needed to prevail. of the United States air transportation system; commanded the Special Operations Com- As Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said, 2. Rollcall Number 346—‘‘aye’’ on the Rule mand. ‘‘Through our scientific genius, we have made (H. Res. 244) for H.R. 2926; A testament to General Shelton’s excep- of this world a neighborhood; now, through our 3.
    [Show full text]