Commander in Chief and the Military Chain of Command
June 24th 2010 10:45
Are you wondering where the President get the authority to be “Commander in Chief”. After listening to the media with the hype about General McChrystal and his staff giving a candid interview to Rolling Stone Magazine it wondered how someone with no military training or knowledge got to be “Commander in Chief. Well, it is the Constitution of the United States. In Article II, section 2 says “The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of impeachment
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.”
(United States Constitution) The language the framers used does give the President constitutional power over the United States Armed Forces. The wording also leaves a couple of things unclear or some questions, like could the President call up the military to use force if he/she believes there is an looming unrest here at home and what might be considered an unrest? This I wonder because there seems to be a great number of rallies, protests and or boycotts where people are gathering to stand up for themselves, is that a looming unrest? That is off the subject because I wanted to explore this topic a little because of General McChrystal comments and the aftermath and where exactly it is written the President was Commander in Chief of the Armed Services. It would seem from reading the little bit that is in the constitution that the President's most significant duty as this Armed Forces Commander in Chief is to protect the United States, her territories and possessions as well as their armed forces and to keep us all safe and free from attack. That answers the question where does the President get the authority to be the Commander and Chief of the Armed Services.
This post also includes the Armed Services Code of Conduct. There are two versions first the Code signed by President Dwight Eisenhower. The Code of Conduct was put into effect in 1955 by an executive order. (Another side comment or definition, An executive order in the US can be issued by the President as the Head of the Executive Branch of the governed. Many Presidents have issued executive orders the practice dates back to 1789. It is important that you know an executive order(s) are legal and do have the full force of law behind them.)
I am an American, fighting in the forces which guard my country and our way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense.
I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they still have the means to resist.
If I am captured I will continue to resist by all means available. I will make every effort to escape and to aid others to escape. I will accept neither parole nor special favors from the enemy.
If I become a prisoner of war, I will keep faith with my fellow prisoners. I will give no information or take part in any action which might be harmful to my comrades. If I am senior, I will take command. If not, I will obey the lawful orders of those appointed over me and will back them up in every way.
When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank, service number, and date of birth. I will evade answering further questions to the utmost of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country and its allies or harmful to their cause.
I will never forget that I am an American, fighting for freedom, responsible for my actions, and dedicated to the principles which made my country free. I will trust in my God and in the United States of America
There is not much difference between the Eisenhower and the Carter signed version of the Armed Forces code of ethics which can be found using this URL: Really Long Link . Obviously the code of conduct does not say anything about not speaking out about the Commander in Chief. So, neither General McChrystal’s comments nor his staffs are out of line according to the Armed Services Code of Conduct.
We will now turn our attention to the Army’s Regulatory Policy and the Paragraph titled the Chain of Command. I also included the Open Door Policy. I included this since most of us remember the Newsweek article from September, 2009 by Evan Thomas. “McChrystal has a disarming, low-key style, free of the bombast and sense of entitlement that can come with four stars. He is polite and gracious, if direct, and he can be funny. At the end of the CUA, an officer brought up the spate of articles appearing in the American press suggesting that McChrystal's request for more troops in Afghanistan was being seriously questioned by policymakers in Washington, including President Obama. McChrystal had sent his chiefs in the Pentagon a secret assessment of the situation in Afghanistan, which he described as "deteriorating" and headed for "failure" unless the Americans sent more troops. The 66-page document had been leaked to Bob Woodward of The Washington Post, setting off a buzz of critical stories in the media. Hawks seized on the report to argue that Obama was going all wobbly, while critics of the war suggested the military was dragging him toward another Vietnam. The controversy caused evident anxiety among McChrystal's commanders at the morning briefing. The officer asked if General McChrystal was feeling the pressure. "I am," McChrystal allowed, and deadpanned, "Money would make me feel better." There were a few laughs as his legal adviser, Col. Rich Gross, gave the general a dollar, but the joke fell a little flat. McChrystal's people want to believe in him, and they want to believe in their mission; they do not want to see McChrystal's judgment questioned—and certainly not his integrity.
At the morning briefing, McChrystal tried to make light of stories in the press quoting Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as saying McChrystal's call for more troops was just one opinion among military experts. "She's absolutely right," said McChrystal to his lieutenants. "There are other experts and they're smarter than me," though, he quipped, "not in this room." The jokes were uncharacteristically lame, as if he was struggling to put a bright face on bad news. Later that evening, eating his one meal of the day (salmon salad, chick-en, strawberry shortcake), McChrystal was clearly troubled—"a bit bothered," as he put it—by the rumors appearing in the media that he might resign over his differences with those unnamed other experts in Washington. "It is my responsibility, my duty—my sacred duty," he said, to tell the unvarnished truth to his leaders, but then to carry out their orders. He would not resign, he said, even if they rejected his advice.´ So where was the respect of office, respect to the man President Obama appointed to do the job and for the well decorated Army General who put forth a plan. You read the information and decide. Do not let the media, or the pundits or other people talking make up your mind for you. Read, process the information and you decide for yourself.
2–1. Chain of command
a. The chain of command assists commanders at all levels to achieve their primary function of accomplishing the
unit’s assigned mission while caring for personnel and property in their charge. A simple and direct chain of command facilitates the transmittal of orders from the highest to the lowest levels in a minimum of time and with the least chance of misinterpretation. The command channel extends upward in the same manner for matters requiring official communication from subordinate to senior.
b. Commanders are responsible for everything their command does or fails to do. However, commanders subdivide responsibility and authority and assign portions of both to various subordinate commanders and staff members. In this way, a proper degree of responsibility becomes inherent in each command echelon. Commanders delegate sufficient authority to Soldiers in the chain of command to accomplish their assigned duties, and commanders may hold these Soldiers responsible for their actions. Commanders who assign responsibility and authority to their subordinates still retain the overall responsibility for the actions of their commands.
c. Proper use of the chain of command is vital to the overall effectiveness of the Army. Commanders must acquaint all their Soldiers with its existence and proper function. Effective communication between senior and subordinate Soldiers within the chain of command is crucial to the proper functioning of all units. Therefore, Soldiers will use the chain of command when communicating issues and problems to their leaders and commanders.
2–2. Open door policies
Commanders will establish an open door policy within their commands. Soldiers are responsible to ensure that the commander is made aware of problems that affect discipline, morale, and mission effectiveness; and an open door policy allows members of the command to present facts, concerns, and problems of a personal or professional nature or other issues that the Soldier has been unable to resolve. The timing, conduct, and specific procedures of the open door policy are determined by the commander. He or she is responsible for ensuring that Soldiers are aware of the command’s open door policy. This wording 2-1 and 2-2 were extracted verbatim from the Army Command Policy.
References:
1. Article II Section 2 of the Constitution Really Long Link
2. Army Command Policy - Really Long Link
3. Philip Cooper. 2002. By Order of The President. University of Kansas Press. Page 116.
4. ^ Presidential Proclamations Project, University of Houston, Political Science Dept., Retrieved 2009-12-07
5.Newsweek article McChrystal Afghan War Request Really Long Link
6. Armed Forces code of ethics URL: Really Long Link
Two things I know for sure Rolling Stone is enjoying all the free publicity this news story has given them and secondly I bet they are going to sell a lot of copies of this issue.
(United States Constitution) The language the framers used does give the President constitutional power over the United States Armed Forces. The wording also leaves a couple of things unclear or some questions, like could the President call up the military to use force if he/she believes there is an looming unrest here at home and what might be considered an unrest? This I wonder because there seems to be a great number of rallies, protests and or boycotts where people are gathering to stand up for themselves, is that a looming unrest? That is off the subject because I wanted to explore this topic a little because of General McChrystal comments and the aftermath and where exactly it is written the President was Commander in Chief of the Armed Services. It would seem from reading the little bit that is in the constitution that the President's most significant duty as this Armed Forces Commander in Chief is to protect the United States, her territories and possessions as well as their armed forces and to keep us all safe and free from attack. That answers the question where does the President get the authority to be the Commander and Chief of the Armed Services.
I am an American, fighting in the forces which guard my country and our way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense.
I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they still have the means to resist.
If I am captured I will continue to resist by all means available. I will make every effort to escape and to aid others to escape. I will accept neither parole nor special favors from the enemy.
If I become a prisoner of war, I will keep faith with my fellow prisoners. I will give no information or take part in any action which might be harmful to my comrades. If I am senior, I will take command. If not, I will obey the lawful orders of those appointed over me and will back them up in every way.
When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank, service number, and date of birth. I will evade answering further questions to the utmost of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country and its allies or harmful to their cause.
I will never forget that I am an American, fighting for freedom, responsible for my actions, and dedicated to the principles which made my country free. I will trust in my God and in the United States of America
There is not much difference between the Eisenhower and the Carter signed version of the Armed Forces code of ethics which can be found using this URL: Really Long Link . Obviously the code of conduct does not say anything about not speaking out about the Commander in Chief. So, neither General McChrystal’s comments nor his staffs are out of line according to the Armed Services Code of Conduct.
We will now turn our attention to the Army’s Regulatory Policy and the Paragraph titled the Chain of Command. I also included the Open Door Policy. I included this since most of us remember the Newsweek article from September, 2009 by Evan Thomas. “McChrystal has a disarming, low-key style, free of the bombast and sense of entitlement that can come with four stars. He is polite and gracious, if direct, and he can be funny. At the end of the CUA, an officer brought up the spate of articles appearing in the American press suggesting that McChrystal's request for more troops in Afghanistan was being seriously questioned by policymakers in Washington, including President Obama. McChrystal had sent his chiefs in the Pentagon a secret assessment of the situation in Afghanistan, which he described as "deteriorating" and headed for "failure" unless the Americans sent more troops. The 66-page document had been leaked to Bob Woodward of The Washington Post, setting off a buzz of critical stories in the media. Hawks seized on the report to argue that Obama was going all wobbly, while critics of the war suggested the military was dragging him toward another Vietnam. The controversy caused evident anxiety among McChrystal's commanders at the morning briefing. The officer asked if General McChrystal was feeling the pressure. "I am," McChrystal allowed, and deadpanned, "Money would make me feel better." There were a few laughs as his legal adviser, Col. Rich Gross, gave the general a dollar, but the joke fell a little flat. McChrystal's people want to believe in him, and they want to believe in their mission; they do not want to see McChrystal's judgment questioned—and certainly not his integrity.
At the morning briefing, McChrystal tried to make light of stories in the press quoting Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as saying McChrystal's call for more troops was just one opinion among military experts. "She's absolutely right," said McChrystal to his lieutenants. "There are other experts and they're smarter than me," though, he quipped, "not in this room." The jokes were uncharacteristically lame, as if he was struggling to put a bright face on bad news. Later that evening, eating his one meal of the day (salmon salad, chick-en, strawberry shortcake), McChrystal was clearly troubled—"a bit bothered," as he put it—by the rumors appearing in the media that he might resign over his differences with those unnamed other experts in Washington. "It is my responsibility, my duty—my sacred duty," he said, to tell the unvarnished truth to his leaders, but then to carry out their orders. He would not resign, he said, even if they rejected his advice.´ So where was the respect of office, respect to the man President Obama appointed to do the job and for the well decorated Army General who put forth a plan. You read the information and decide. Do not let the media, or the pundits or other people talking make up your mind for you. Read, process the information and you decide for yourself.
2–1. Chain of command
a. The chain of command assists commanders at all levels to achieve their primary function of accomplishing the
unit’s assigned mission while caring for personnel and property in their charge. A simple and direct chain of command facilitates the transmittal of orders from the highest to the lowest levels in a minimum of time and with the least chance of misinterpretation. The command channel extends upward in the same manner for matters requiring official communication from subordinate to senior.
b. Commanders are responsible for everything their command does or fails to do. However, commanders subdivide responsibility and authority and assign portions of both to various subordinate commanders and staff members. In this way, a proper degree of responsibility becomes inherent in each command echelon. Commanders delegate sufficient authority to Soldiers in the chain of command to accomplish their assigned duties, and commanders may hold these Soldiers responsible for their actions. Commanders who assign responsibility and authority to their subordinates still retain the overall responsibility for the actions of their commands.
c. Proper use of the chain of command is vital to the overall effectiveness of the Army. Commanders must acquaint all their Soldiers with its existence and proper function. Effective communication between senior and subordinate Soldiers within the chain of command is crucial to the proper functioning of all units. Therefore, Soldiers will use the chain of command when communicating issues and problems to their leaders and commanders.
2–2. Open door policies
Commanders will establish an open door policy within their commands. Soldiers are responsible to ensure that the commander is made aware of problems that affect discipline, morale, and mission effectiveness; and an open door policy allows members of the command to present facts, concerns, and problems of a personal or professional nature or other issues that the Soldier has been unable to resolve. The timing, conduct, and specific procedures of the open door policy are determined by the commander. He or she is responsible for ensuring that Soldiers are aware of the command’s open door policy. This wording 2-1 and 2-2 were extracted verbatim from the Army Command Policy.
References:
1. Article II Section 2 of the Constitution Really Long Link
2. Army Command Policy - Really Long Link
3. Philip Cooper. 2002. By Order of The President. University of Kansas Press. Page 116.
4. ^ Presidential Proclamations Project, University of Houston, Political Science Dept., Retrieved 2009-12-07
5.Newsweek article McChrystal Afghan War Request Really Long Link
6. Armed Forces code of ethics URL: Really Long Link
Two things I know for sure Rolling Stone is enjoying all the free publicity this news story has given them and secondly I bet they are going to sell a lot of copies of this issue.
| 70 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
