This paper argues that the U.S. Army is definitively a profession, grounded in three primary criteria: the provision of specialized expert training in fields unavailable elsewhere, the delivery of essential services that only the military can perform, and the maintenance of public trust through ethical standards and professional leadership. The paper addresses the threat posed by private military contractors to Army professionalism and advocates for a renewed commitment to the "Profession of Arms" model, which integrates military-technical, human development, moral-ethical, and political-cultural expertise. The analysis emphasizes that trust and ethics form the cornerstone of Army professionalism.
Since the United States committed to maintaining a standing army, the profession of arms has been built into the system. However, factors like all-volunteer service and the lack of a designated agency to address matters of professionalism directly have led to questions about whether the United States Army is truly a profession. Several factors underscore the fact that the Army is a profession, including its nature, structure, and function within the United States. The criteria of membership are clearly articulated in Army documents and doctrine. Moreover, there is a pressing need to redefine the nature of Army service and leadership as fully professional in light of the threat posed by private mercenary enterprises.
The Army is unquestionably a profession and must remain one for ethical reasons. The core professional functions of the Army include developing expertise in key areas of strategic specialization, anticipating the hybrid threats of the future, and protecting the ethical codes under which the Army operates. Trust and ethics are the primary criteria of professionalism in the Profession of Arms.
The Army is a profession because it trains personnel in areas of expertise with broad applications within the military institution and in the private sector. One of the defining features of a "profession" is the emphasis on "uniquely expert work." Army personnel are trained to be effective and develop mastery. Moreover, Army professionals "require years of study and practice before they are capable of expert work," upon which society depends. Within the Army framework, professionals are trained for years and develop areas of specialization that would be inaccessible in any other sector.
Only within the United States Army can soldiers receive the level of expertise in areas as diverse as strategic analysis, engineering, and political theory. These specialized competencies represent the foundation upon which military professionalism rests, distinguishing Army personnel as subject-matter experts in fields critical to national security and defense operations.
Another core feature of a profession is the provision of services that are essential and cannot be provided by any other means. Just as a patient needs a doctor to perform surgery, a citizen needs the Army to accomplish specific goals. Ensuring the welfare of the nation and protecting its boundaries are core goals that demand skillful responses. No Army function is arbitrary. Rather, tight budgets and resource constraints, coupled with rapidly emerging new threats, ensure that every single Army function has a direct purpose, function, and procedure.
Because of its emphasis on professionalism and training, the Army stands prepared for the hybrid threats of the future, including cyberterrorism and transnational terrorism. The Army trains personnel who are uniquely skilled in specific areas of expertise that, when combined, create a potent professional unit capable of responding to complex, multifaceted security challenges.
Professionalism entails gaining and maintaining public trust, which is why the Army must remain committed to its core ethical goals and prove accountability. One of the primary reasons why the professionalism of the Army is sacrosanct is the threat of encroachment by private military contractors. Private military contractors are "morally problematic" because "the continued use of mercenaries harms the professional soldiers fighting alongside them by undermining the profession of arms." Private military contractors do not operate under the same ethical framework or legal umbrella as the Army, and there is a lack of both accountability and transparency when private contractors are used.
By contrast, the American public entrusts the Army to carry out combat duties. Trust is based in part on professionalism and a commitment to certain standards of operation. Professions "earn the trust of the society because of effective and ethical application of their expertise." The presence of clear ethical standards, institutional oversight, and legal accountability distinguish the Army as a legitimate profession from organizations driven primarily by profit motives.
Finally, the Army develops moral leaders that retain public trust and ensure the professional delivery of service. Leadership, structure, and organizational framework are cornerstones of professionalism. All professions represent themselves with organizations that serve as vehicles for professional honesty, professional progress, and ongoing professional leadership. One of the primary concerns for the Profession of Arms in the future will be self-reflection on Army leadership.
Because there has been an overemphasis on bureaucracy, there has been a corresponding lack of attention paid to educational development and leadership. As a result, the concept of Army as career has declined in its efficacy, and there is a need to bolster the conscientious training of personnel. Bureaucracy is integral to the Army's structure, which is why it is important to provide institutional support for the development of future leaders.
Reframing the Army as a Profession of Arms allows for the development of a comprehensive expertise framework that includes military-technical expertise, human development expertise, moral-ethical expertise, and political-cultural expertise. A more organized approach to professional standards enhances the Army's commitment to its core objectives and ensures that leadership development receives the same rigor applied to operational training.
A shift toward the Profession of Arms model helps rejuvenate the Army's ethical commitments and solidifies public trust. The Army is a profession because it trains experts in fields that are singularly important and unparalleled. Moreover, the Army is a profession because of the provision of necessary services by experts in their fields. The Army is a profession because it has earned and continues to earn public trust through continual progress, improvement, and professional development. The Profession of Arms is therefore an emblem of integrity and honor.
You’re 89% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.