Read on Twitter
Jesus I’m tired.
A couple of notes on this. Come for the civ-mil analysis, stay for the grassroots politics. 1/ https://twitter.com/barbarastarrcnn/status/1303029583604781056
A couple of notes on this. Come for the civ-mil analysis, stay for the grassroots politics. 1/ https://twitter.com/barbarastarrcnn/status/1303029583604781056
1. The actual research on the first part of Trump’s claim—that the military prefers war—is *very* mixed and context dependent. Military members *tend* to have a more zero-sum view of the world than civs, and see war as inevitable, rather than avoidable through cooperation. 2/
And bc their job is to prepare for war, they *tend* to prefer solutions that privilege offensive action, initiative, and early response—bc it’s easier to win a war when it’s on your terms instead of the enemy’s. This isn’t wrong, it’s how we *want* them to think. Always ready. 3/
But there’s nothing else a leader hates more than losing men and women in battle—people who were entrusted to their command. They don’t just start wars that could result in dead/wounded/broken families unless it is necessary. So military preferences re:war are complex. 4/
2. Who is supposed to adjudicate this tension? CIVILIANS. Civilians are supposed to give guidance and direction that the military follows, make decisions about war, and oversee mil ops. The trouble is that there’s been no such oversight in the Trump admin. 5/
In a piece that will drop with Foreign Affairs soon, I explain how a *lack of civilian control* has led to an offense-dominant foreign policy, something that I call the new “cult of the offensive” (the old one obv being pre-WW1 coined by Steve VanEvera) 6/
Basically, I argue that mil organizational preferences have created conditions that privilege the offense to the point where we may “sleepwalk” our way into great power war 7/ https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Sleepwalkers.html?id=TE0iZ4U2ZvUC&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button
But the fault here is not with the military trying to start wars for kicks (which again, they don’t). It’s with the lack of *civilian* direction and oversight. The solution is to rebalance control away from career mil toward a more diverse civilian exec branch. 8/
In other words, it’s Trump’s own appointments, and lack of interest/knowledge in foreign policy, that have gotten us into this situation. Too many generals (active & ret), and not enough diversity. 9/
3. Which brings us to the 2d part of the claim—that they start wars for defense contractors. This is flat out wrong, and wasn’t ever intended to be true. Trump is responding to the events of the last week (MilTimes poll, Atlantic, etc) by distancing himself from senior mil. 10/
“Mattis is a Democrat”
“I know more about ISIS than the generals”
“McRaven—Hillary supporter”
Standard from Trump’s playbook. Attack and claim they are your partisan enemies. 11/
“I know more about ISIS than the generals”
“McRaven—Hillary supporter”
Standard from Trump’s playbook. Attack and claim they are your partisan enemies. 11/
4. But it’s unlikely to work, because while his support with enlisted is higher than the senior officer corps, it’s still *not that high*. Unfavorables>>Favorables. So Trump’s claim that the soldiers love him isn’t really true. 12/ https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2020/08/31/as-trumps-popularity-slips-in-latest-military-times-poll-more-troops-say-theyll-vote-for-biden/
(Here comes the grassroots politics).
It’s one of the reasons why veterans this election cycle are more vocal than ever. Bc ppl assume, like Trump, that vets/mil==GOP. And so if they don’t speak loudly, someone (Trump) will speak for them. 13/
It’s one of the reasons why veterans this election cycle are more vocal than ever. Bc ppl assume, like Trump, that vets/mil==GOP. And so if they don’t speak loudly, someone (Trump) will speak for them. 13/
Its why I’m working hard with @Vets4Biden and mil families even down here in deep red Alabama. Because silence in this case means to tilt the other way.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/alvetsforjoe/?ref=share
14/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/alvetsforjoe/?ref=share
14/
And so there’s fight going on rn that’s ugly to those of us who study civ-mil and believe in the importance of non-partisan military. But also potentially necessary if we want to restore the idea that the military is not a political monolith, and thus represents America. 15/
I don’t have the answers here, but I do know that Trump’s approach (attack & demean) is flat wrong. And I’ll fight hard within the legal bounds to make sure that every vet/mil-fam has the opportunity to make their voice heard. /FIN
