February 24, 2017
McMaster knows how national security policy can go wrong. Will that help him?
For a generation after losing the Vietnam War, the American military soothed itself with a “stabbed in the back” narrative: If not for meddling politicians, intrusive journalists and a spineless public, the military would have won the war. In his book, “Dereliction of Duty,” H.R. McMaster (then a young Army major) demolished this palliative myth, carefully using historical evidence to show how military leaders failed their troops and their country by remaining silent — or worse — during the escalation in Southeast Asia. Along with other volumes focused on the conduct of the war, McMaster’s work helped reallocate blamefor America’s failures in Vietnam to those in uniform who deserved their share of culpability.
In the book, McMaster carefully avoided many of the larger questions raised by his scholarship, such as whether military dissent might have altered the course of the Vietnam War — both as a matter of good historical tradecraft and career savvy. This past week, McMaster, now a three-star general and bona fide hero of the first and second wars in Iraq, was tapped by President Trump to be national security adviser. The big questions he didn’t take on in print 20 years ago now loom large for him and the White House: Can an insular and politicized team make effective national security policy? Should military officers speak up when they see policy going off track? Would it make a difference if they did? And how should civilian officials encourage dissent from the Pentagon?
“Dereliction of Duty” painstakingly dissects four major decisions between 1963 and 1965 that led the United States deeper into Vietnam. McMaster shows how military chiefs failed repeatedly to raise dissenting views about escalation, unable to penetrate the inner sanctums of the White House and meaningfully change the course of the war. In one anecdote, McMaster describes how Army Gen. Earle Wheeler told his staff that he planned to object to President Lyndon B. Johnson’s decision in 1965 to send more troops to Vietnam without calling up additional reservists. But when asked directly by Johnson whether he agreed with the move, Wheeler silently nodded and indicated his assent. Dereliction of duty, indeed.
Read the full article at The Washington Post.
More from CNAS
-
ReportsThe Financing of WMD Proliferation (JCE TEST)
The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction is a critical threat facing the international community. Numerous United Nations Security Council Resolutions (UNSCRs) place b...
By Jonathan Brewer
-
PodcastLoren DeJonge Schulman on The Smell of Victory Podcast
On The Smell of Victory Podcast, Bob Hein and Phil Walter sat down with Loren DeJonge Schulman of the Center for a New American Security to discuss the draft. Listen to the f...
By Loren DeJonge Schulman
-
CommentaryThe Mission Creep of Sending Troops To The US-Mexico Border
The current plan to send at least 7,000 active-duty U.S. troops to the southern border for Operation Faithful Patriot undermines Secretary of Defense James Mattis’ entire defe...
By Emma Moore
-
ReportsChanging Tides in the Sea of Goodwill: A Financial Analysis of Veteran-Serving Nonprofits
As the United States enters its 18th year of war since 9/11, the shape of the country’s veteran community is rapidly transforming. The total number of American veterans is shr...
By Douglas McCormick, Emma Moore & Andrew Swick