FOLLOW US

There is no more patriotic an Editorial Board in any newspaper in America than the USA Herald. We are admittedly biased toward support of our military.  We stand with our troops and respect and honor their service and sacrifice. Yet despite this support, we believe it is time for Congress to act and require an even greater commitment and an elevated standard of behavior from our military’s highest leaders following their service.  Otherwise, questions will arise about the ethics of their eventual advocacy and employment.

Much has been written about the American Military Industrial Complex. It is not our intention here to delve into relationships of war, public policy and profit, but instead the ethics of those who serve our country only to retire and join the self-interested corporations that profit from war and the manufacture and sale of weaponry.

It is unfair and impossible to question the motivation of those that serve in the military.  Regardless of motivation, however, if the result of that service leads to employment immediately following retirement from service with a company that does business with the government, then legitimate questions should be raised about the ethics of such an arrangement.  If action is not taken to restrain or prohibit this practice, myriad questions will arise about decisions made by these leaders, especially those decisions made immediately preceding retirement.  Of course, this is the time when the power of those in question is at its zenith.

The military has long been one of the greatest networking, mentor-protégé type organizations ever established. It only makes sense that good leaders seek to find the best leaders to serve under them and promote their protégés along the way as they themselves are promoted. However, when one’s mentor leaves the military and becomes a highly paid consultant or lobbyist for a company from which their branch of service buys billions of dollars’ worth of goods and services, it amplifies and validates this practice of “cashing-in” as an appropriate one. When that that mentor recruits his protégé to join him at corporate America when the protégé’s service expires, it only perpetuates the potential for corruption and adds to the ethical dilemma for the next generation of leaders.

That very little attention, much less regulation, has been focused on this problem speaks volumes to the respect Americans’ hold for their military leaders.  Yet given the stunning statistics on the revolving door between the military and the industrial complex, Americans would be wise not to have their vision clouded by stars and stripes.