Why Loyalty Matters in the Military

On “Civil-Military Relations”

Article Review

A part of learning history is understanding who is making what argument or claim about a subject. What is the strength of the argument and how does the author support the argument with evidence.

In the article review, you will identify the thesis or primary argument made by the author. You will identify the main arguments stated in the first or second paragraph and found in the body of the article with evidence.

Thesis: The thesis of this article is that “civil-military relations should not be taken for granted. They really are important, will remain intensely scrutinized, and are much more about relationships than rules.”[footnoteRef:1] [1: Dempsey, Martin E. "Civil-Military Relations." Strategic Studies Quarterly 15, no. 2 (2021), 6.]

Main Arguments by Author:

· The first main argument of the author is that “civil-military relations seem…to be best measured in the willingness of senior leaders—civilian and military—to do the hard work necessary to achieve a common understanding of two important factors impacting national security decisions in a political environment. These factors are the loyalty question and the hidden hand of culture.”[footnoteRef:2] [2: Dempsey, Martin E. "Civil-Military Relations." Strategic Studies Quarterly 15, no. 2 (2021), 6.]

· Loyalty is the first issue that crosses the minds of civil and military leaders when they meet with one another.

· Culture is the next issue that impacts relations, as military culture has a profound influence on the way the military addresses challenges.[footnoteRef:3] [3: Dempsey, Martin E. "Civil-Military Relations." Strategic Studies Quarterly 15, no. 2 (2021), 9.]

Who is the author? Academic/work background? Other writings?

The author of the work is Martin Dempsey, US General (retired) and 18th Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Obviously, he has a highly impressive military background, having risen through the ranks to general and then to serve atop the highest military group in the US, the Joint Chiefs. Dempsey has also written numerous other books, such as Redefining the Modern Military: The Intersection of Profession and Ethics,[footnoteRef:4] and No Time for Spectators: The Lessons that Mattered Most from West Point to the West Wing.[footnoteRef:5] He has also written numerous articles for military publications. [4: Dempsey, Martin E. Redefining the modern military: The intersection of profession and ethics. Naval Institute Press, 2018.] [5: Dempsey, Martin E. No time for spectators: The lessons that mattered most from West Point to the West Wing. Tom Rath, 2020.]

General reflection about the article. How does it relate to your understanding of the role of the U.S. Military? Did the author make a clear argument and provide adequate evidence. Would you recommend this article? Why or why not?

The article discusses two important factors that affect the relationship between civilian and military leaders: the loyalty question and the hidden hand of culture. The loyalty question refers to the concerns that both civilian and military leaders have about each other's loyalty to their respective institutions and superiors. This question is always present in their interactions and must be addressed through transparency and consistency in their relationship.

The hidden hand of culture refers to the unique culture of the military that influences the way military leaders approach problems and make decisions. Military leaders are trained to prioritize the mission's objectives and then work backward to find the best course of action within acceptable boundaries of risk and resources. This approach can sometimes create tension with civilian leaders who prioritize creating opportunities and preserving options for those who hold political power.

The article provides insights into the challenges that civilian and military leaders face when working together and the importance of addressing the loyalty question and understanding each other's culture. The author shares his own experience in building a positive relationship with President Obama based on shared understanding of loyalty and transparency. Ultimately, the article offers a valuable perspective on the complexities of civil-military relations and the need for open and honest communication between the two groups.

The author presents a clear argument on the factors that affect the relationship between civilian and military leaders. The article is well-organized, and the author provides adequate evidence through personal experiences and observations to support their claims.

The author's personal experience in building a positive relationship with President Obama based on shared understanding of loyalty and transparency is a valuable example that adds credibility to the article's argument. The author's insights into the hidden hand of culture in the military and its impact on decision-making are also relevant and well-supported.

Overall, I would recommend this article to readers interested in civil-military relations and the challenges that arise when working together. In my view, the article offers a unique perspective from a former military leader and provides practical insights for improving civil-military relationships.

The way I see it is this: The U.S. Military's role is to defend the country and its interests against external threats, provide humanitarian assistance, and support national security objectives as directed by the government. The military operates under civilian control, and civilian leaders are responsible for making decisions about the use of military force.