Professional soldiers regard war as normal. The best of them adopt codes of honor that define things that you can do and not do in time of war.
Most of us Americans, during most of our history, have not regarded war as normal. Our major wars have been fought against enemies we regarded as either outside the bounds of civilization, like the Indians, or evil, like the Nazis.
We believed that war is inherently bad and that, in fighting against evil, the means that brings about the surest and quickest victory is the most moral.
That was the justification for General William T. Sherman’s march through Georgia and General Phil Sheridan’s devastation of the Shenandoah Valley during the Civil War. The chivalrous Southern generals were shocked (although they didn’t extend their chivalry to black troops). Sherman’s reply was the war is hell, and there is no way to refine it.
The same kind of thinking was the justification for the Allied bombing of the cities of Germany and Japan, culminating with the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I remember that era, and I don’t think American public opinion then would have tolerated any limitation on the use of force.
But now the United States is in a different situation. Our government is committed to open-ended war without any path to victory or any definition of victory beyond avoiding humiliating defeat.
We justified Sherman’s March and the bombing of Dresden and Hiroshima because these were extraordinary situations, after which we could get back to normal.
Now torture, assassination, invasions and subversion of foreign countries are normal, which our government justifies by saying that we Americans are the embodiment of democracy, freedom and the rule of law, and so our enemies by definition are enemies of democracy and freedom and are outside the accepted rules of war.
Insurgents fighting in Afghanistan, Syria and other countries against U.S. and U.S.-backed forces say that, because they are fighting for liberation of their homelands, rules do not apply to them, either.
I don’t foresee us Americans adopting battlefield rules of engagement that cost American lives, nor submitting to the jurisdiction of international agencies such as the International Criminal Court, while we still seek worldwide military supremacy.
My hope is that American leaders can renounce the ambition for the USA to be the world’s only superpower, while that is still a matter of choice, and accept a role as a normal nation among others.
LINKS
Double Standards and the Rules-based Order by Paul Robinson for IRRUSSIANALITY.
Bolton and the ICC by peteybee for Pete’s Politics and Variety.
Tags: Rule of law, Rules of war
Leave a Reply