Quantcast
Connect with us

Trump and the problem with pardons

Published

on

As a veteran, I was astonished by the recent news that President Trump may be considering pardons for U.S. military members accused or convicted of war crimes. But as a scholar who studies the U.S. military and combat ethics, I understand even more clearly the harmful long-term impact such pardons can have on the military.

My research, along with my military experience, shows that these pardons can potentially corrode the U.S. military’s culture of ethics and respect for the law of war, with effects lasting for decades.

Brotherhood and war crimes

During my military career, I saw up close U.S. service members’ powerful sense of brotherhood and duty.

Despite this, many war crimes prosecutions of U.S. service members in Iraq and Afghanistan started with reports from fellow soldiers. Similarly, despite the strong bonds within the SEAL community, U.S. Navy SEALs reported the alleged atrocities of their platoon chief, Edward Gallagher – one of the service members Trump is considering pardoning.

In such cases, U.S. service members have often been motivated by a belief that reporting such violations is important for both the integrity and mission of U.S. military.

ADVERTISEMENT

Their sense of duty was more important than even the bonds of brotherhood. This fact is what makes the President’s consideration of pardons so shocking.

A checkered past

It took years for the military to learn that hurting civilians harms both the mission and the sense of duty and honor within U.S. military culture.

During the Vietnam War, many U.S. troops viewed the Vietnamese civilians as supporters of the enemy, leading to massive atrocities, including the infamous massacre of hundreds of civilians at My Lai.

ADVERTISEMENT

U.S. Army commanders learned the hard way that these atrocities contributed to greater indiscipline and a loss of professionalism within the U.S. military. It took the military a generation to recover.

Because of this, the U.S. military drastically shifted focus after Vietnam, creating, among other initiatives, the Department of Defense Law of War program to transform U.S. military culture.

The program emphasized ethics and compliance with the law of war in training and compliance with the Geneva Conventions in enforcement of military rules and laws.

ADVERTISEMENT

A culture transformed

In my research, I’ve had the opportunity to view up close the impact of this training in ethics and the law of war.

My surveys of Army cadets and officers show that, despite a number of notable incidents, this training overall produces greater respect both for the law of war and for civilians on the battlefield.

Such a focus can have powerful effects on combatants: Intensive training in combat ethics and the law of war can lead military members to prioritize the protection of civilians.

ADVERTISEMENT

Military operations require, above all else, discipline to do the most difficult acts in the most difficult settings. Soldiers who harm civilians not only violate that discipline, they violate the trust and respect of their officers, commanders and fellow soldiers as well.

Just as importantly, as American soldiers learned in Iraq and Afghanistan, such indiscipline turns civilians against the U.S. military, hurting its ability to win wars.

It is for these reasons that many veterans and commanders have so strongly opposed the president’s pardon plans. Military ethics and military effectiveness both demand discipline, adherence to the military’s rules of engagement, and abidance of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

ADVERTISEMENT

The wisdom of a lieutenant

At one notable point during my field research, I observed how West Point brings officer graduates back to share combat leadership lessons with soon-to-be-commissioned senior cadets.

I listened to one Army lieutenant, recently returned from Iraq, sum up his hard-earned wisdom: “It all starts with shooting the dogs. If you don’t step in with discipline then, you’ve lost your troops when they want to do much, much worse.” The lieutenant had learned in combat that discipline required a commitment to military rules and law for all violations, big and small.

Presidential pardons for U.S. troops involved in war crimes, prior to or following court martial, is a signal from the military’s commander-in-chief that it is now okay to “shoot the dogs” – along with doing much, much worse.The Conversation

ADVERTISEMENT

Andrew Bell, Assistant Professor of International Studies, Indiana University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected]. Send news tips to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Trump asked right-wing conspiracy theorist congressman to help him pick his next Director of National Intelligence

Published

on

On Monday, Politico reported that President Donald Trump is consulting with Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) about who he should consider to replace Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats.

Nunes has led the Republican side of the House Intelligence Committee since 2015 and chaired the committee for four years, despite having no professional qualifications of any kind for that role. Since 2017, he has been known for his stunts and conspiracy theories intended to discredit the Russia investigation and throw suspicion on anyone who looks into Trump's conduct.

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Conservative newspaper hilariously trolls Trump about his failure to build any new border wall

Published

on

Donald Trump on the US-Mexico Border

The conservative Washington Examiner trolled President Donald Trump for his failure to construct any new border barricade during his 30 months in office.

On Monday, Trump lashed out at the media on Twitter for not giving him positive coverage for his wall, which he erroneously claimed would be paid for by Mexico.

The Examiner replied to Trump on Twitter, posting an article headlined, "Trump has not built a single mile of new border fence after 30 months in office."

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

Here’s how a new study implies the Supreme Court has killed 16,000 people since 2012

Published

on

A new paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research looked into the effects of the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion to people below 138 percent of the poverty line, which has seen nearly 15 million people enrolled in participating states. The results were encouraging: the mortality rate for near-elderly adults has dropped over 9 percent in the four years for which data is available.

But while this is cause for celebration, The Atlantic staff writer Annie Lowrey offered a darker take on the implications of these numbers:

Continue Reading
 
 
 

Copyright © 2019 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 | Masthead | Privacy Policy | For corrections or concerns, please email [email protected]

Join Me. Try Raw Story Investigates for $1. Invest in Journalism. Escape Ads.
close-image