Does the Army Have a Future? Deterrence and Civil-Military Relations in the Post-Vietnam Era
Abstract
In the October 1973 issue of "Foreign Affairs," Louis Halle concluded that war between great powers had lost its former legitimacy and therefore did not have a future. If Halle is correct, sizeable numbers of our citizenry may legitimately ask whether the Army has a future; that is, to question the justification for expensive large-standing conventional ground forces during an era of competition for resources, nuclear deterrence, and post-Vietnam aversion to U.S. participation in limited wars. This mood, coupled with a trend toward a more ingrown and socially isolated Army, could result in civil-military tensions that would serve neither the nation nor the Army's interests. This essay addresses the major sources of these potential tensions and offers some solutions to ameliorate them. In summary, technology, strategic deterrence, the legacies of Vietnam, and changing attitudes toward the use of military force have combined in the minds of many Americans to make the possibility of future war rather remote. In this environment, it is inevitable that the utility of a sizeable peacetime conventional Army will come under sharp scrutiny. To maintain a force capable of performing a role for both deterrence and uncertainty will require mutual understanding that can only result from a socially integrated Army and an enlightened, broad-gauged officer corps. The present trend toward a more narrow conception of professionalism and insularity must be arrested, or a deterioration in civil-military relations may result that could, indeed, call into question the future of the Army-and the nation.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- Sep 01, 1978
- Accession Number
- ADA511039
Entities
People
- Alfred H. Paddock Jr.
Organizations
- United States Army War College