All services have had to adjust to new management requirements in the Department of Defense and to such changes as the increasing emphasis on country team coordination in foreign countries. When we shift from analysis of needed skills (tactics and techniques) to the larger view of the military profession there has been a range of thought. Few will quarrel with West Point's motto-Duty, Honor, Country-as expressing the basic values of the profession. But how do we today implement the old values? There are statements of distinguished and knowledgeable individuals on the subject. That of Mr. Lovett accepting the Thayer Award for his life of distinguished service has been cited earlier. I have also collected and attached to this paper some statements of civilian and military leaders who have observed the troublesome present problems of the military profession, to include President Johnson, President Kennedy, President Eisenhower, General Taylor, the most recent Board of Visitors of the Military Academy chaired by General J. Lawton Collins, and others. These distinguished citizens, with very great consistency, have stressed the increasing complexity of the military profession, and show a considerable consensus in defining the complexities and ways of dealing with them. The corollary is that the leadership of the military profession, including the U.S. Congress, recognize the nature of these new complexities and adjust to handle them well in the national interest. One of the major instruments of adjustment is the march of time. The longer officers live in the new milieu, the more most of them adjust. Old dogs may not easily learn new tricks. But the old order retires and a new order mans the leadership positions. To illustrate from personal experience, I entered an Army in which many regular officers thought it was unmilitary to vote (some did not know their state of residence); now we have a vigorous program to encourage voting by members of the armed forces and everyone has to record his state of residence. A related method of adjustment is the rising confidence of the officer corps that it can handle the problems of the changed situation without sacrificing that which is worth preserving. This increased expertise and understanding comes in part by duress and evolutionary drift, but at least equally from conscious action. For instance, the modern military profession, while retaining strong faith in "military judgment", is increasingly a planning and programming profession while continuing to emphasize decision and action. Progressively, the military profession is implementing carefully designed programs of command and staff organization and relationships, of schooling and of policy guidance from both civilian and military leadership-all designed to achieve the transition levered by recent change. The curricula of the war colleges (that of the Army War College shown on the accompanying chart is an example), exchange of staff officers between Defense and State, and the tenor of Mr. Nitze's guidance on selection of admirals are examples of detailed actions. Certainly, systems analysis and related approaches have been a new and jarring note. But, along with asking for some trade-off between quantitative analysis and military judgment, you can bet that the military services are screening their ranks for bright professional officers who will make good systems analysts. Even a couple of years ago there were 61 different courses called logistics, management, etc., included in the military schooling program. The best of middle rank officers are selected for the war colleges; 38 percent of next year's Army War College class will have civilian graduate degrees. Mr. Nitze, in his letter to the selection board of the Navy, seems to be asking even for some Admirals who can communicate persuasively with the best of the so-called defense intellectuals, civilian type. I really do not know whether these people have occasioned as much of a professional "dilemma" as the civilian bureaucracy expanding in step with the military expansion. There is greatly increased emphasis on the value of a power of communication as a trait of officership. "Communication" means "knowing your stuff", as the primary requirement, as well as being able to talk and write clearly and persuasively. My final point on ways of adjustment to the changing times is one of emphasis on the vast schooling system of the military professionfrom Academy, ROTC and OCS; through service schools, technical schools, language schools, war colleges and a large civilian graduate schooling program. The statistic of 12 percent is usually given as the portion of his career spent in school by an officer. The statistic may be low. The school of experience is often not available to our profession until too late, or if available it is an expedient unduly costly in resources, effectiveness, and lives, in comparison to doing the best we can in schooling. I do not want to pretend that there are not differences of view as to what and how much should be taught and how it should be taught. But the schooling system is the arterial system for the flow of adjustment. Its capabilities are strikingly illustrated by the quickness with which the comprehension of "counterinsurgency or "internal defense" was pressed throughout the armed forces, triggered by President Kennedy. V. Continuing and future problems. My fifth and closing topic heading concerns continuing and future problems. As a first point, the reference post for these thoughts is the mission which Senator Jackson gave me: To provide my "comments and reflections on a basic dilemma of the modern military officer-as well as the diplomat-to preserve and conserve the values of his profession with its special duties, disciplines and skills, while opening it up to new influences, to the challenge of fresh ideas, and to the competition of men from other disciplines." I have not, thus far, commented specifically on the Foreign Service although many of their problems are similar to ours-one being that we and they have to devise ways to work more closely together. They also have to adjust to higher authority continually looking over the professional's shoulder by means of electronic communication and the airplane. The advance of technology is not an unmixed blessing. The new problems and requirements of today's military and foreign service professionals have instructive points of symmetry and overlap. Both need unique skills. The diplomat now has increasingly to comprehend operational matters and managerial techniques. The military man, who was more accustomed to such factors and techniques must now become more policy conscious. Both groups must be more cooperative and comprehending. Aloofness and single factor emphasis, undoubtedly thought of once by some professionals as a superior form of feasible isolation, are no longer practical. Both need to recognize and weigh newly important disciplinary fields, the military, the political, various aspects of technology, economics and othersthe impact of our balance of payment on both military operations and day to day diplomacy being an example. In meeting the current needs, the State Department has used schooling somewhat less than the military services. But schools require officer time and the diplomatic personnel problem is very pressing with the expansion of number of sovereign states, the spawning of international meetings, and the vast expansion of our scope and categories of operations abroad. In this new milieu, the Foreign Service has also the problem of continuing from the old ways those values which should endure. This committee's most recent report has commented on the increasing centralization and supervision. The situation seems unlikely to be reversed. The only clearly useful guideline in my mind is that leadership should consciously swim against the tide of this trend. I still know of no better summary statement of the basic values of our military profession than Duty, Honor, Country, West Point's motto which was engraved in even greater depth by General MacArthur's last great address two years ago. The Duty, Honor, Country guidepost has been stated in other ways, e.g., that the individuals should "esteem the performance of public duties as their highest aim". The officer who is fit for the world's fight of today in support of our country's security has to have knowledge and skills combined with the traditional traits of character-and must keep moving intellectually to keep up with the changing times. These values now have to be applied to many complicated tasks and sometimes to confusing situations. The ultimate mission of the professional officer is, as General MacArthur stressed, "to win our wars". Viewed in the context of our national security policy, the necessary military foundation for any effective deterrent and/or sublimited or cold war program is a posture of resolution and capability to prevail if war must come. I have no programs to suggest to you gentlemen nor would it be appropriate for me to suggest any. I do, as a final note, list certain problem areas which will require continual attention and which are unlikely ever to be completely solved. At best they will be eroded by time and effort or replaced by new and more current ones. They are: (a) Recruiting talent in the competitive personnel market place of our society. (b) Retaining, with high morale, a strong professional officer corps. This problem includes considerations of postretirement careers, and continual retraining and updating of officers in active service a subproblem similar to that posed by automation in industry. (c) Orchestrating military policy and power with the other policies and elements of power which serve our society. (d) Providing effective command and managerial arrangements which optimize the return we receive from our budgeted expenditures without forfeiting the "soldier's soul". I do not list schooling as a problem area. The military profession is, at least as much as any profession, on the Dean's List in this area of effort though certainly not always up with the times. Nor do I list the "defense intellectuals", whoever they are. There are many good professional officers who can talk their language, and who also have the skills to do the most professional jobs of managing instruments of It is usual for military professionals to refer to principles of war, INDEX TO SELECTED QUOTATIONS CONCERNING ASPECTS OF MILITARY PROFESSIONALISM 1. Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson-Address to Graduating Class, USMA, 2. President John F. Kennedy-Address to Graduating Class, USMA, June 1962. 5. Admiral Alfred Thayer Mahan (written 1911) quoted in U.S. Naval In- 7. Robert A. Lovett-Address of Acceptance of The Sylvanus Thayer Award, 8. Secretary of the Navy Paul Nitze-Letter to Admiral C. D. Griffin, President 9. Louis Johnson, Asst. Secretary of War-Memorandum to President Roose- 10. General Maxwell D. Taylor, Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff-Address to 11. General Earle G. Wheeler, Chief of Staff, United States Army-Address 13. Major General William F. Train, Commandant, Army War College, in a yet 14. General Earle G. Wheeler, Extract from Remarks made to Army War College, 15. Edward L. Katzenbach, Jr., Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Educa- SELECTED QUOTATIONS CONCERNING ASPECTS OF MILITARY PROFESSIONALISM (Collected by Col. George A. Lincoln) 1. Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson in an address to the Graduat- ... So when you leave this campus you must leave not only with the great sors have carried Old Glory around the world and brought it back without a stain on it. You are going to have to learn and to lead others to learn, to live harmoniously with our allies, and to establish real communication with them. You are going to have to be able to understand their economic and military needs, and do everything you can to fulfill them. You are going to have to help lead all people who genuinely love freedom and know what responsibilities we have.... I have not the slightest doubt that you will go forward and not only protect the security and the national interests of what that flag represents, but you will also see that your wisdom is applied to helping find food for the hungry, and clothes for the naked, and a roof for the unsheltered, and learning for the ignorant, because that's what the masses are hungry for. And while we protect our security from military invasion, let's also insure our future by teaching the ignorant to read and by helping the hungry to obtain food and clothing and a roof over their head; and then the time will come when freedom will dominate the earth. ... 2. President John F. Kennedy in an address to the Graduating Class, U.S. Military Academy, West Point, New York, June 1962. the demands that will be made upon you in the service of your country in the coming months and years will be really more pressing and in many ways more burdensome as well as more challenging than ever before in our history. Your strictly military responsibilities, therefore, will require a versatility and an adaptability never before required in either war or in peace. They may involve the command and control of modern nuclear weapons and modern delivery systems, so complex that only a few scientists can understand their operation, so devastating that their inadvertent use would be of world-wide concern, but so new that their employment and their effects have never been tested in combat conditions. On the other hand, your responsibilities may involve the command of more traditional forces but in less traditional roles: men risking their lives not as combatants but as instructors, or advisers, or as symbols of our nation's commitments. The fact that the United States is not directly at war in these areas in no way diminishes the skill and the courage that will be required, the service to our country which is rendered, or the pain of the casualties which are suffered. You will need to understand the importance of military power and also the limits of military power-to decide what arms should be used to fight and when they should be used to prevent a fight-to determine what represents our vital interests and what interests are only marginal. Above all, you will have a responsibility to deter war as well as to fight it. For the basic problems facing the world today are not susceptible of a final military solution. While we will long require the services and admire the dedication and commitment of the fighting men of this country, neither our strategy nor our psychology as a nation-and certainly not our economy-must become permanently dependent upon an ever-increasing military establishment. Our forces, therefore, must fulfill a broader role as a complement to our diplomacy as an arm of our diplomacy-as a deterrent to our adversaries and as a symbol to our allies of our determination to support them. That is why this academy has seen its curriculum grow and expand in dimension, in substance and in difficulty. That is why you cannot possibly have crowded into these four busy years all of the knowledge and all of the range of experience which you must bring to these subtle and delicate tasks which I have described and that is why you will go to school year after year so you can serve this country to the best of your abilities and your talents. 3. President John F. Kennedy in an address to the Graduating Class, U.S. Air Force Academy, Colorado, June 1963. We live in a world, in short, where the principal problems that we face are not susceptible to military solutions alone. The role of our military power, in essence, is, therefore, to free ourselves and our allies to pursue the goals of freedom without the danger of enemy attack. But we do not have a separate |