I wrote a lot during the Trump Administration about how his speeches and policies and such were a frequent challenge to good civil-military relations (here, here, here) and not just me (see this and this). He delegated too much to the military, he didn't take responsibility when things went awry, he tried to make the military an ally in his partisan activities, and on and on.
Well, deja vu. Trump went to Arlington Cemetery, presumably to do some cleanup work after once again trashing those wounded or killed in service of their country when he talked about the Presidential Medal of Freedom being equal to or superior to the Congressional Medal of Honor. As it turns out, there are laws prohibiting the use of Arlington Cemetery for political ads. The staff there confronted Trump's team, saying that they could not pose for pictures. They pushed the staffer aside, took the pics (thumbs up at a cemetery?), and now the Army, which administers the cemetery is in a difficult spot.
The Army could have remained silent, which would have been a way to duck the controversy but would have made the Army look as if it were complicit. Instead, the Army issued a "rebuke" as the journalists put it. The Army stood behind the staffer who would not press charges for fear of being subject to Trumpist political violence. So, instead of being viewed as complicit, the army will be viewed as being too woke and siding with the Democrats.
This is the politicization that folks (me, among others) have been yammering about. Michael Robinson, in his book, argues that even if an actor stands still, it can be seen as moving towards or away from other political actors as those others move and take positions that change the perspectives on where the first actor stands. The Army was damned either way, as the reality around it shifted, putting it either closer to Trump or closer to his adversaries, even if the Army did not move at all.
This cemetery-gate is just the latest example of this. And, yes, if Trump becomes President, he would likely sack the Army Chief of Staff for letting the Army issue this statement and try to put into that position and the other key military spots supplicants who would be more inclined to support Trump even if he breaks laws and traditions and norms.
To be absolutely clear, the US military has no role in deciding who wins the election. It is our job to vote against Trump to prevent further challenges to the norms of civil-military relations that largely keep the military out of partisan battles. While there are many reasons to vote against Trump and for Kamala Harris, including the fact that Trump has no sense of decency as this episode reminds us, taking civil-military relations off of the front page is a good one, even if that were not as helpful for us civ-mil scholars who seek grant money.
And, yes, this whole episode makes Kamala Harris's convention speech all the more on target:
1 comment:
Had that staffer been a male, I wonder if they would have physically pushed him aside as they did the woman.
No empathy
Post a Comment