Further Reflections on Veteran’s Day
We recently “celebrated” Veteran’s Day. Yet, I wonder if our society today truly understand the meaning of military commitment and the men and women who have served our country under the Stars and Stripes. Sometimes, I think not. Moreover, has our society changed from the days in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks when patriotic fervor drove our motivations? Mostly, I think yes. So, in our remembrances perhaps we ought to contemplate, “What are the implications of these trends for the nature of civil-military relations and our society in the future?”
Veterans are different. Whether they have been to war or not, they have experience life otherwise than those who remained in mainstream American society. This quotation from CS Lewis elegantly describes the military experience:
“All that we fear from all the kinds of adversity, severally, is collected together in the life of a soldier on active service. Like sickness, it threatens pain and death. Like poverty, it threatens ill lodging, cold, heat, thirst, and hunger. Like slavery, it threatens toil, humiliation, injustice, and arbitrary rule. Like exile, it separates you from all you love. Like the gallies, it imprisons you at close quarters with uncongenial companions. It threatens every temporal evil-every evil except dishonor and final perdition…”
They develop an intimacy of relationships that cannot be fathomed by those who have not experienced it. How do you describe the love of another person so great that you would sacrifice your life for them…without even thinking about it (and they for you).
In addition to the trauma (both mental and physical) that many experienced, perhaps their transition “out” at the end of their commitment is most poignant. They lose their “tribe.” (a distinctive or close-knit group with a shared culture and dialect, typically having a recognized leader). This defines a military organization, particularly small units where interactions are “up close and personal.” Regardless of race, creed, color, or previous social-economic background, they become part of a “whole” shaped by the sum of their collective experiences, very often dangerous (even deadly) and physically and mentally trying.
We all need meaning in our lives, and that is context-based. In their previous environment veterans were recognized as members of the team, a key part of the efficient operation of the organization. As “civilians,” they may be just a cog in the machine, a fungible part, easy to replace. It is no longer a world of meritocracy. Prejudices based on superficial characteristics reappear. Character and merit are often outweighed by office politics.
What must this soldier (airman, sailor or marine) think of this country for which they sacrificed? True, people say “Thank you for your service” when they get their free meal or military discount at the store. But all too often that has become a rote response (like “Bless you” when you sneeze). As the immediacy of the recent 20-years of war recedes, our interest in the military likewise fades.
There has been a significant (and not positive) change in our society. Set against a backdrop of increasing tension and conflict in the world, public confidence in the armed forces (and the political leadership which commands them) appears to be waning.
The world has once again proven its hostility towards the principles in which we believe (or should believe). Rusia went to war against Ukraine, with broader security impact on NATO. China is resurgent. Iran is fomenting trouble in the Middle East.
At a time when it is becoming increasingly more important, the military is struggling. There has been a generational shift in the opinion of “service” in the military. A poll by Echelon Insights found that 72 percent of those asked would not be willing to volunteer to serve in the armed forces were America to enter a major conflict. Last year, the military collectively fell well below their recruiting goals. In effect, the military is becoming more isolated. Moreover, the Services have begun to lose their edge as recruiting standards are lowered.
When the mass of society will not serve, how representative are our armed forces of the broader culture in our country? Even as the military has become more diverse, it has come under fire for the perceived attitudes of some of its members. An Associated Press investigation found that despite new rules, racism and extremism remain an ongoing concern in the military.
In response, The Department of Defense has updated its screening of recruits and is looking at how to prepare retiring troops from being targeted by extremist organizations. They have also begun incorporating DEI (diversity, equity, and Inclusion) programs into its policies. I believe strongly in the concepts those words represent, but I also believe the implementation is divisive and detrimental. The alternative concept of MEI (merit, excellence and intelligence) ought not be incompatible and represents critical characteristics of a competent fighting force. The current philosophical conflict potentially undermines our ability to rebuild the military force at a critical time of escalating threats.
Regardless of the veracity of the perceptions, the more closed the military becomes, the greater the chances are that the attitudes and mores will differ from the country it was created to defend. Our nation is becoming increasingly more stratified. This is a dangerous trend.
The problems have been exacerbated by the breakdown of other “social contracts” that bind the country together. Above all else, we need to find a way to rebuild a culture that has stronger ties between employees and employers, between government and the governed, and critically the military and society.
This is key to rebuilding the bonds that will allow not just veterans, but all the citizenry find a productive place in society where they feel they “belong.” Until we crack this code, everything we do will simply be putting band-aides on the problem.
