I have noted, since late last week at least, a common theme amongst many who would come to Donald Rumsefeld’s defense (be they pundits or members of government) in the face of calls by several retired generals for Rumsfeld’s resignation. That defense has been something along the lines of the fact that we have long had a tradition of (and, I would note, a legal structure that requires) civilian control of the military, and therefore there is something untoward about these critiques.
Let me say that I am a vehement proponent of civilian control of the military and, indeed, of as apolitical military (especially in the officer corps) as is possible.
However, deploying the “civilian control of the military” card in this context is a non sequitur, because the generals in question are retired, and therefore are civilians and are exercising their rights as such to critique the sitting government. It may go against normal protocol for this to happen (although it isn’t as if ex-generals are always silent after they leave the service), but the critiques in question have nothing to do with the lack of civilian control of the military.
Now, if sitting generals were calling for Rumsfeld’s ouster, then one might have a point.
At any rate: regardless of one’s position on Rumsfeld’s continued employment, the issue at hand has precious little to do with challenges to civilian control of the military.
(And it is also true that by pointing to the critics and calling into question whether or not they have the right to criticize wholly ignores the basic question, which is about whether Rumsfeld should remain in office or not.)
Sphere: Related Content
April 16th, 2006 at 10:30 pm
Christ snatched ultimate victory from seeming defeat.
I just got an in-law free house. Christ’s victory remains just a tad more impressive.
My in-laws were very nice and all, but their presence was so all-encompassing, we actually missed Easter Services getting them to the airport. My better half …
April 17th, 2006 at 6:44 am
[...] on the “Civilian Control” Argument
By Dr. Steven Taylor @ 6:42 am
Yesterday, I noted my critique of the notion that having retired generals voice their opinions equals a threat [...]
April 17th, 2006 at 11:15 am
[...] total community. And he goes on to bolster the point I have been making for two days now (here and here) that the idea of retired generals speaking out politically is not that radical: Retired general [...]
April 17th, 2006 at 2:27 pm
Outspoken Retired Generals and Civilian Control, Redux
Kevin Drum, reflecting on the recent spate of retired generals speaking out both both for and against Donald Rumsfeld’s being replaced as SECDEF, remarks, “Regardless of whether or not we agree with the generals’ criticism, I think it…
April 17th, 2006 at 6:12 pm
Bottom up Monitoring in the Defense Department: The Generals (Ret.) v. Rumsfeld
James Joyner summarizes the blogosphere arguments on the retired generals attacking Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld:Kevin Drum, reflecting on the recent spate of retired generals speaking out both both for and against Donald Rumsfeld’s being rep…