Wednesday, June 3, 2020

A Former Chairman Of The Joint Chiefs Speaks Out - Updated








Somewhat lost in the news was an article in the Atlantic by Mike Mullen. It’s extraordinary for a former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to speak out against a sitting president. But Mullen did just that.⁣ ⁣ “It sickened me yesterday to see security personnel—including members of the National Guard—forcibly and violently clear a path through Lafayette Square to accommodate the president's visit outside St. John's Church,” he wrote.⁣ ⁣ "...We must ensure that African Americans—indeed, all Americans—are given the same rights under the Constitution, the same justice under the law, and the same consideration we give to members of our own family. Our fellow citizens are not the enemy, and must never become so.⁣ ⁣ Too many foreign and domestic policy choices have become militarized; too many military missions have become politicized.⁣ ⁣ This is not the time for stunts. This is the time for leadership."⁣ ⁣ Please read his entire statement at: theatlantic.com⁣ ⁣ This photograph was made prior to the bill signing for the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Repeal Act of 2010, a change in the law that had previously banned openly gay, lesbian and bisexual men and women from serving openly in the U.S. Armed Forces. Mullen, who helped initiate the change, said at the time, “Our people sacrifice a lot for their country, including their lives. None of them should have to sacrifice their integrity as well.”⁣ ⁣ ⁣ ⁣ ⁣
A post shared by Pete Souza (@petesouza) on



photo credit Dave Angerer/Getty

This is Admiral Mullen's article, titled "I Can't Remain Silent," in its entirety:

It sickened me yesterday to see security personnel—including members of the National Guard—forcibly and violently clear a path through Lafayette Square to accommodate the president's visit outside St. John's Church. I have to date been reticent to speak out on issues surrounding President Trump's leadership, but we are at an inflection point, and the events of the past few weeks have made it impossible to remain silent.

Whatever Trump's goal in conducting his visit, he laid bare his disdain for the rights of peaceful protest in this country, gave succor to the leaders of other countries who take comfort in our domestic strife, and risked further politicizing the men and women of our armed forces.

There was little good in the stunt.

While no one should ever condone the violence, vandalism, and looting that has exploded across our city streets, neither should anyone lose sight of the larger and deeper concerns about institutional racism that have ignited this rage.

As a white man, I cannot claim perfect understanding of the fear and anger that African Americans feel today. But as someone who has been around for a while, I know enough—and I’ve seen enough—to understand that those feelings are real and that they are all too painfully founded.

We must, as citizens, address head-on the issue of police brutality and sustained injustices against the African American community. We must, as citizens, support and defend the right—indeed, the solemn obligation—to peacefully assemble and to be heard. These are not mutually exclusive pursuits.

And neither of these pursuits will be made easier or safer by an overly aggressive use of our military, active duty or National Guard. The United States has a long and, to be fair, sometimes troubled history of using the armed forces to enforce domestic laws. The issue for us today is not whether this authority exists, but whether it will be wisely administered.

I remain confident in the professionalism of our men and women in uniform. They will serve with skill and with compassion. They will obey lawful orders. But I am less confident in the soundness of the orders they will be given by this commander in chief, and I am not convinced that the conditions on our streets, as bad as they are, have risen to the level that justifies a heavy reliance on military troops. Certainly, we have not crossed the threshold that would make it appropriate to invoke the provisions of the Insurrection Act.

Furthermore, I am deeply worried that as they execute their orders, the members of our military will be co-opted for political purposes.

Even in the midst of the carnage we are witnessing, we must endeavor to see American cities and towns as our homes and our neighborhoods. They are not “battle spaces” to be dominated, and must never become so.

We must ensure that African Americans—indeed, all Americans—are given the same rights under the Constitution, the same justice under the law, and the same consideration we give to members of our own family. Our fellow citizens are not the enemy, and must never become so.

Too many foreign and domestic policy choices have become militarized; too many military missions have become politicized.

This is not the time for stunts. This is the time for leadership.


An update on Wednesday evening. Former Secretary of Defense James Mattis has also issued a statement: 

In Union There Is Strength

I have watched this week's unfolding events, angry and appalled. The words "Equal Justice Under Law" are carved in the pediment of the United States Supreme Court. This is precisely what protesters are rightly demanding. It is a wholesome and unifying demand—one that all of us should be able to get behind. We must not be distracted by a small number of lawbreakers. The protests are defined by tens of thousands of people of conscience who are insisting that we live up to our values—our values as people and our values as a nation.

When I joined the military, some 50 years ago, I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution. Never did I dream that troops taking that same oath would be ordered under any circumstance to violate the Constitutional rights of their fellow citizens—much less to provide a bizarre photo op for the elected commander-in-chief, with military leadership standing alongside.

We must reject any thinking of our cities as a "battlespace" that our uniformed military is called upon to "dominate." At home, we should use our military only when requested to do so, on very rare occasions, by state governors. Militarizing our response, as we witnessed in Washington, D.C., sets up a conflict—a false conflict— between the military and civilian society. It erodes the moral ground that ensures a trusted bond between men and women in uniform and the society they are sworn to protect, and of which they themselves are a part.

Keeping public order rests with civilian state and local leaders w
ho best understand their communities and are answerable to them.

James Madison wrote in Federalist 14 that "America united with a handful of troops, or without a single soldier, exhibits a more forbidding posture to foreign ambition than America disunited, with a hundred thousand veterans ready for combat." We do not need to militarize our response to protests. We need to unite around a common purpose. And it starts by guaranteeing that all of us are equal before the law.

Instructions given by the military departments to our troops before the Normandy invasion reminded soldiers that "The Nazi slogan for destroying us...was 'Divide and Conquer.' Our American answer is 'In Union there is Strength.'" We must summon that unity to surmount this crisis—confident that we are better than our politics.

Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try. Instead he tries to divide us. We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership. We can unite without him, drawing on the strengths inherent in our civil society. This will not be easy, as the past few days have shown, but we owe it to our fellow citizens; to past generations that bled to defend our promise; and to our children.

We can come through this trying time stronger, and with a renewed sense of purpose and respect for one another. The pandemic has shown us that it is not only our troops who are willing to offer the ultimate sacrifice for the safety of the community. Americans in hospitals, grocery stores, post offices, and elsewhere have put their lives on the line in order to serve their fellow citizens and their country. We know that we are better than the abuse of executive authority that we witnessed in Lafayette Square. We must reject and hold accountable those in office who would make a mockery of our Constitution. At the same time, we must remember Lincoln's "better angels," and listen to them, as we work to unite.

Only by adopting a new path—which means, in truth, returning to the original path of our founding ideals—will we again be a country admired and respected at home and abroad.

James Mattis



And a word from Tom Nichols:



Update #2: From the current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff:

Image


Update #3 on Wednesday June 4. Jonathan Bernstein weighs in on General Mattis's message:

It's hard to get across what a big deal it is that former Defense Secretary James Mattis has not only publicly criticized President Donald Trump, but done so in extremely strong terms. In a statement issued Wednesday, Mattis talked about “those in office who would make a mockery of our Constitution,” and said that “We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership.” He added that Trump was engaged in a “deliberate attempt” to “divide us,” something he says no other president in his lifetime has done. (For the record, Mattis is 69, so he’s talking about everyone since Harry Truman.)

I’m not sure that we’ve ever had a former cabinet secretary criticize a president he or she served this harshly, and certainly not one who was still in office and up for re-election. It’s all the more striking coming from a retired general, a group that tends to be relatively hesitant to jump into politics. Nor is Mattis standing alone. Trump’s conduct this week — in particular his militarized response to what still amounts to a lot of peaceful protest and a small amount of criminal activity — has also been denounced by former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen and even some of those currently in office.

Mattis’s criticism probably won’t directly affect public opinion; there just aren’t a lot of people who pay close enough attention to the news to hear what he said and who are also open to changing their minds. But it will still prove consequential. Although some Republicans will join Trump in denouncing Mattis, others will hesitate or be even less inclined to defend the president’s actions than they had been (and most hadn’t exactly been leaping to the microphones to support him in any event). Democrats were already going to condemn Trump, but they’ll likely do so more harshly now. And those who aren’t aligned with either party may well feel that a “neutral” stance now requires more criticism of the president, given that it’s not just protesters who are judging him harshly.

Meanwhile, the list of Donald Trump’s terrible personnel choices according to Donald Trump gets one name longer, as the president reacted predictably by bashing Mattis. That list now includes a defense secretary, a secretary of state, an attorney general, at least one national security adviser and at least two White House chiefs of staff. Again, there are very few people who are otherwise undecided about Trump who would be swayed by what an awful job — according to Trump himself — he has done appointing people for the most important positions in government. But it’s a remarkable record nonetheless.
(This is the column in its entirety.)

No comments: