Doc7505
Diamond Member
- Feb 16, 2016
- 15,628
- 27,487
- 2,430
Our Rotten Military Promotion System
15 Apr 2-023 ~~ By Stuart SchellerA Marine sniper serving during the Afghanistan evacuation recently gave testimony to the House Foreign Affairs Committee on the Afghanistan evacuation. His pain was palpable. A revelation worth examining was his identification of the possible suicide bomber prior to the incident. After the sniper, Sgt Vargas-Andrews, confirmed the target with multiple agencies, he asked his Battalion Commander, LtCol Whited, for permission to shoot. The answer from Whited, one in which Vargas-Andrews said he’ll never forget, was, “I don’t know.”
Not found in the media or Congressional testimony is that Whited, a former peer of mine, corroborated this version of events in his formal statement for the military’s investigation. When speaking to the investigating officer, General Curtis, on 5 October 2021, Whited stated, “[We had] a description of a person of interest. We watched him for hours… It bothers me still that we lost track of him, and never heard anything back from higher about him.”
The obvious indecision in Kabul on 26 August 2021 has a much deeper undercurrent. Since World War II, the American military promotion system hasn’t evolved with the needs of today’s challenging security environment. Current military professionals are conditioned, above all else, to please superiors for continued advancement. Said another way, when promotion is the mission, it will always be more important than troop welfare. “I don’t know” is another way of saying, “The risk to force isn’t as great as the risk to my career.”
~Snip~
The underlying reason for this “I don’t know” or “I was just following the orders I was given” culture is the current promotion system. In every branch of service, officer promotions are based solely on subjective evaluations from a boss. While most people want to believe that military commanders evaluate subordinates based strictly on occupational performance, anyone who has served knows that impressing a boss for a top evaluation requires substantially more finesse than job performance. Military professionals are hyper aware that during some critical billets, it only takes one bad evaluation to end a career. Thus, the secret to a military career is more about pleasing a boss, than demonstrating objective performance.
~Snip~
If the military builds a true performance-based system, it is more likely the leaders of the organization will be empowered by their judgment than by the assessments and opinions of their superiors. Hopefully, the next Sgt. Vargas-Andrews never receives the answer, “I don’t know.” Performers make decisions. People pleasers and rule followers wait for the answer from a superior.
Can the military incentivize performance over career progression? I believe it can, but leadership must fundamentally change the system of incentives prioritizing career progression over junior service member’s sacrifices. This starts with new leadership demonstrating the same courage expected from the troops on the ground.
Commentary:
"Can the military incentivize performance over career progression?" Not as long as the domestic political agenda of the Commander in Chief influences the actions and directions of the US Military. Above the rank of Colonel, at least, subscription to the internal politics of the military is the only path for advancement.
Regarding the Clinton era 'feminization', aka 'gender norming', aka 'equivalent training' as an example of this: Walter E. Williams, wrote, "Officers who insist that females be held accountable to the same high standards as males are seen by higher brass as obstructionist and risk their careers."
Those who disagreed either left the service or were passed over for promotions and had to leave the service. Those who went along or stayed silent received promotions in the normal advancement of their careers. As they advanced they guided newer Officers. Now we have version 2.0 in the Woke Military Politicization.
The best example that can be made is General Mark Milley, whom can be said to have followed the described scenario of advancement.
