« Previous · Home · Next »
The Military and the Constitution
By John
Hey, so Small Wars Journal doesn't have a monopoly on deep-minded strategic thinkers/bloggers. We just have to import ours, har. This bit comes from Colonel Hank Foresman, a VMI alumn (of course), currently serving as Chief of Transformation Third Army Operational Maneuver Future Plans.
Colonel Hank Foresman
Many of us in the United States military have not given much thought to what our Oath of Office means. We begin that oath by swearing or affirming that we “will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that [we] will bear true faith and allegiance to the same,” we then swear that we “will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over. . .so help [us] God.” Unlike many militaries our allegiances is not to the Head of Government, but rather to the fundamental law of our nation, The Constitution of the United States.
So what does that Constitution say about the military. It says very little, but by reading what it does say, it is clear, that it was the founders intent, nee their desire that whilst declaring the President the Commander-in-Chief, they clearly intended that the Congress would be the dominate branch in administration of the Armed Forces. Congress was given first and foremost the power to declare war. Whilst formal declaration of wars have ceased to be fashionable, clearly the intent of the founders was that prior to the commitment of the Armed Forces of the United States that the Congress of the United States would give their assent. So why is this power given to the Congress and not the President. For a very simple reason the founders of our nation were well aware of the misadventures, which had occurred under the prerogatives of a nations sovereign. They understood the lessons of a common shared history, a history that had seen Royal government ignore the desires and weal of the Parliament, to fight wars without the assent of Parliament and to demand later that Parliament pay for his adventures. The founders sought to ensure that they alone, as the representatives of the citizens of the United States would commit the United States Armed Forces.
But more importantly the Constitution gave to the Congress the responsibility for funding the Armed Forces but restricting that funding to a two-year period without additional authorization. This is important point as it clearly highlights the understanding of the founders that no Army can long exist or function without appropriations from the public treasury. By giving Congress alone the power of the purse, the founders provided a check on the Executive, to prevent the person occupying that position from commitment of the Armed Forces of the United States to adventures without the assent of Congress.
Since the end of World War II, the United States has committed troops in harms way numerous times without a declaration of war to Korea, Lebanon, Dominican Republic, Vietnam, Thailand, Cambodia, Lebanon, Grenada, Panama, Liberation of Kuwait, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq. Some of these adventures have gone better than others, however they all have one thing in common, without a declaration of war, the people of the United States have questioned the wisdom of these adventures.
By failing to secure the assent of the representatives of the People, and in turn the people of our nation, our national leadership has failed to develop a consensus for action. What is striking about each instances of the commitment of American Armed Forces is that while some have ended well, it can be argued that our nation image both at home and abroad has been damaged by the failure of our national leadership to build a national consensus.
So why is this discussion important to the military, for the simple reason, as members of the military we are asked to do the heavy lifting for our nation. We should expect our political leaders to have the same allegiances to the spirit of the Constitution that we in the military have. We obey orders and carry out the order of the political leadership. If we disagree with those orders we can resign our commission if an officer, or get out of the military when our enlistment ends if an enlisted soldier. We are apolitical, we do not comment on the actions of our political leaders; likewise our political leaders ought not to use the military as a prop for their own political actions.
When we read about the statements of a political leader from the Congress making a statement we disagree with, we must remember that Congress is the representatives of the people and their statement reflect the sentiments of the citizens of our nation. Today we are engaged in fighting a war that is not popular, a war in which the citizens of our nation are questioning the wisdom of the President to engage in such an adventure. This is a political fight, we have no interest is the outcome, for our allegiances is to the Constitution, and if the constitutional process determines we will stay we salute and carry out our mission; if however the constitutional process determines we will leave, we must also salute and carry out the mission given to us. To paraphrase a line from Blazing Saddles, as members of the armed forces we are but a small pawn in the game of politics.
Colonel Hank Foresman
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://op-for.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1221
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Military and the Constitution:
» Pink So What + Download from Pink So What + Download
This is an awesome song!! [Read More]
Comments
Commissioned officers, unlike enlisted service members, do not swear/affirm allegiance to the President or other officers. In my opinion, this is incredibly important. Think about it - we took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, not the chain of command, not politicians; the oath does not even mention the people they represent.
I believe that this is important because military officers are not “but a small pawn in the game of politics”. I believe that our military officers are the custodians of the Constitution and must be above politics and the emotions of the population.
I personally do not believe that “this is a political fight….” I believe our Iraq policy (creating democracy) has failed, however Al Qaeda is a real enemy and they have chosen to make Iraq their decisive point in this war. I have been privy to our enemy’s intent and it is ambitious. Before 9/11/2001, I would not have believed any terrorist group could significantly harm our nation. However, today I believe that the threat to our country, our Constitution, is genuine.
Finally, I will share my belief that this conflict will last for generations, in one form or another. Furthermore, that I pray that our military officers hold true to their oath and not simply surrender to being pawns in a political game.
Respectfully,
Eli Wahesh (VMI’96)
What did a “Declaration of War mean” at the time the Constitution was written? My understanding was that a declaration of war was required under international law to wage war against a country which you recognize except in defense of your own country or a third country that you recognize. Is that correct?
Did we have a declaration of war against the Barbary Pirates? Is a specific formulation required to make a congressional declaration a declaration of war. Is the WWII formula “A state of war exists . . .” used in other wars, particularly before? Is the Declaration of Independence, with almost no mention of war, a declaration of war? Are the more recent congressional authorizations of military action? If not what are the distinctions?
I keep hearing people say “If this was a real war . . .”. I believe it is.
The first undeclared war by the US was the "Quasi War" with France. The Barbary Pirates was the second.
Of the over 175 US military interventions into Central America since 1840, only two had declarations of war. Mexican-American and Spanish-American.
There are only 9 declarations of war in US history.
This is the oath I swore in August,1964. It doesn't say anything about Congress. Only the President of the US of America.
l/cpl;Trani,ML USMC(R)
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.
Doc Stora, fascinating points. Haven't heard it framed like that before, but... then again, we generally don't get too constitutional round these parts.
Leave that to the deep thinkers like Col Foresman.
Post a comment
Potential comment conditions listed here. Oh, and you may use basic HTML for formatting.
Hey, so Small Wars Journal doesn't have a monopoly on deep-minded strategic thinkers/bloggers. We just have to import ours, har.
Outsourcing, yea? Thanks for the plug and best to a fine, fine blog!
BTW, tomorrow is Arrr day, har.
Dave D.
Small Wars Journal