Mistakes of Robert McNamara - Essay Example

?Robert McNamara Robert McNamara was the eighth secretary of defense, who served under two administrations. He served under John F Kennedy and later under the administration of Lyndon B. Johnson. He was also the US business executive during his tenure.1 Most notable of his tenure as the secretary of defense is the role he played in the war of Vietnam. He played a paramount role in increasing the US involvement in this war. After the election of President John F. Kennedy in 1960, he appointed him as the secretary of defense, having granted him an option to serve either at the treasury or at the cabinet, where he opted for the cabinet post. 2 The president relied on him very much for advises ranging from the issues of national security to business matters. In 1961, he initiated a program to increase the warfare capability of the US forces, after reviewing the major challenges that were facing the forces. Out of this review, he created two institutions in the defense forces, the Defense Intelligence Agency and the Defense Supply Agency. 3 These institutions were created to enhance the effectiveness on the defense forces to counter the effects of communism. Since the communist wars avoided direct military confrontations and resulted to ambush and guerrilla warfare, the institutions were meant to train and equip the military personnel as well as the US allies on the tactics to counter the communist wars. One such ally was he South Vietnam. The lessons to learn from Robert McNamara on wars can be traced back to the Cuban missile crisis.4 He played a major role helping in the administration and eventual calming of the Cuban crisis. Instead of a counter reaction, which would entail a missile strike, Robert McNamara opted for the blockade option. This was eventually agreed upon as the best method to address the crisis by the then Joint Chief of Staff, through his influence. During his tenure in office, he served to strengthen the forces, through the expansion of the regular armed forces, as well as calling on the reserves to join active duty. 10His was tenure of preparation for war, committing billions of dollars to the military department spending, overseeing the inceptions of millions of nuclear weapons and orchestrating sales of arms in foreign countries. 6 His role in the war dates back to the increase of war advisers in the war of Vietnam, from the 900 that was already there to a tune of 16,000. These advisers in the war of Vietnam were not supposed to engage in active combat, but rather meant to offer training to the army of Vietnam.13 Initially, the US did not play a military role in the Vietnam War. It offered financial and military advise to South Vietnam army in order to resist the re-union that was being sought by the communist North. Active US military combat in the war of Vietnam came into being during the tenure of Robert McNamara as the secretary of defense. He played a greater role in escalating the US involvement in this war. Most notable, is his role in calling upon the congress and the public to support US active combat involvement in the Vietnam war, after some false information that the North Vietnam army had attacked two US destroyers in August 1964.2 Through the advice of Robert McNamara, the president ordered a retaliatory attack on the North Vietnam army bases. This was the first of McNamara’s involvement in fuelling active war. The lesson learnt from this, owing to the fact that he reacted to false information that the North Vietnamese had attacked the US forces, is that his judgment was not right. A second mistake done by Robert McNamara in his war endeavors is the support of the US attack of the South Vietnamese in 1965, after a consideration that together with their Northern allies, they were increasing their military activity.1 The US entered into combat in South Vietnam bombing it in a more devastating manner and started bombing North Vietnam. 10 This is yet another failure by Robert McNamara, since he engaged in the encouragement of the troops to engage in active combat against the republic of Vietnam, not for any good reason, but just because they were observed to be increasing their military activity. There are clear lessons learnt from his role in fuelling the war. The lessons being that he did not take time to rethink about the repercussions of the decisions he made, and that his decisions were hastily made without proper basis. Another of his mistake in war decisions was committing a large number of US troops to the Vietnam War. He had committed a total of 485, 000 troops to Vietnam by the end of 1967, raising this number more, to reach a high of 535,000 troops by June, 1968.3The effect of this action was to intensify the level of fighting in Vietnam and consequently increase the number of troops who died and those who were injured in the war. His other failure in the war is his plan to win the war, by underestimating the capability of the Cong fighters in Vietnam. Through arguing that they were just of a limited number, Robert McNamara, estimated that the US troops were crossing over on them, and winning the war. However, this was a great mistake in his plan. His role in fuelling unnecessary war was even greater in that he overruled the orders and the directions given by the Joint Chief of Staff. 7 This is a clear indication that he did not value other people’s opinions and judgments. He instilled his authority on the troops to learn the war single handedly without valuing the divergent views of others. This action served to increase the number of deaths and injuries incurred by the US troops, since he could not value and incorporate the intelligence information offered, more so if such information was in opposition to the continuation of the war. His failure in decision-making can also be indentified in the 1961 December attack on South Vietnam villagers, bombing them and destroying their crops. This was elicited by the overthrow of a US supported regime in South Vietnam.11 This is the greatest of all mistakes that were done in this war, since bombing the villagers and destroying their crops was in no way appropriate for the retaliation. Although he is credited for having helped avoid a US war with Russia, Robert McNamara was advocating for the bombing of Cuba in 1962. He advised President John F. Kennedy to bomb Cuba in October of that year. This was a dangerous step if the president had given in to it, since it would have erupted a third world war, to include the use of nuclear weapons that would have most certainly destroyed the world. His characteristic lack of consequence consideration is portrayed hear. As the secretary of defense, he established the “no cities strategy,” which meant that if the Soviet Union attacked the US, then the US would retaliate by attacking the military bases of the Soviet Union using nuclear weapons. He also established the Mutual Destruction Plans during the Cold War that would entail the destruction of a 20 to 25% of the Soviet population, as well as half of the industrial capacity of the Union. 4His strategies and plans in terms of war points to a dangerous direction, where if all were implemented, then the destruction that would have been caused is devastating. However, he later happened to realize the mistakes he had done in advocating for wars against other nations, observing that the greatest of all mistakes done was in judgment.8 Consequently, there are major lessons that can be learnt from Robert McNamara’s life and his role in wars, notably the Vietnam War. The first lesson is that there is a need to consider the consequences of any act of war just before indulging into it. As observed, the involvement of the US in active combat by bombing the North and the South Vietnam ended up causing a huge loss to the US society. There were greater toll on deaths of the soldiers and their injuries. There was also a lot of military spending that was incurred during this war. The greatest of all impacts is the moral consequences of the war that had to be dealt with for so long even after its termination.5 Therefore, there is a need to carry out an analysis of the consequences of any war before engaging in it. Most importantly is the fact that the consequences of the war can extend for long even after the physical war and active combat ends, to involve the ethical and moral consequences. This is most significant in that, an individual is held responsible for the consequences even by the generations to come. Thus, wise and thoughtful considerations and critical analysis is necessary before any judgment regarding engagement in wars is concerned. Another lesson learnt is that responsibility to the society should count before anything else when it comes to reaching any decision to do with wars. 13 The US attack on the Vietnamese civilians is what fuelled the Vietnam War to such heights, leaving thousands of US troops dead, many others injured and thousands more succumbing to death later on. Should the US, through the advice of Robert McNamara, have been cautious not to attack, bomb and destroy the Vietnam villagers and their crops, then the war would have hardly had such devastating consequences. More so, if he did not work towards committing more troops to the war in 1967-68, the death toll and the injury caused to the troops would have been minimized. By committing such huge number of troops to the war, he was not socially responsible for their lives. Another lesson to be learnt from the life and actions of Robert McNamara is that all the opinions should count.4 There were diverse opinions that were being offered by the public, the government, and the military leaders. However, Robert McNamara went on to ignore all these opinions, overruling even the guidelines and orders given by the senior military leaders such as the Joint Chief of Staff. In contrast to these, he opted to run the whole war affair by himself, giving instructions on what ought to be done without consultations and without putting the diverse opinions into consideration. The result was the defeat of the US in the Vietnam war, a great loss, and injury to its solders, and a moral battle that he lived to fight for the entire of his life. 10 The relevance of accuracy and getting correct data is another lesson that can be learnt from the life and role of Robert McNamara in wars.11 The decision to attack the North Vietnam military bases in 1964 was based on false information. This served to spark off a war between the US and the Republic of Vietnam, which involved active combat, as opposed to the previous battles that involved financial support of allies and military advises to them. 6 If the US defense had taken ample time to investigate the claims before making a decision to attack North Vietnam, then the war would not have been fought. The need for accuracy is seen in the consequences of the underestimation of the Vietnam’s Cong ability. According to a plan made by Robert McNamara, the US troops would easily crossover the Vietnamese and win the war, since they were limited in number. However, this underrating cost the US a lot in terms of its troops and even financially. Another lesson is the fact that efficiency is paramount in any war. The US troops were not efficient in fighting ambush and guerilla warfare.12 Consequently, the Vietnamese troops ambushed, killed, and injured many of the US troops. The benefits of one’s readiness to re-examine his thought is another lesson that can be learnt. Since the US decided to go into war with Vietnam singlehandedly without the support of its major allies, it ended up losing on the war.9 If the US had re-thought its decision, and decide to consult its allies before going into war, then it would not have suffered he devastating defeat it experienced. The need for empathy of one’s enemy and the need to minimize on the evils done to humanity are some underlying lessons that are learnt from the life and war actions of Robert McNamara. If the US considered bombing the Vietnamese villagers and destroying their crops an unnecessary evil, then it should have refrained from doing it, something that would have helped to avoid the devastating consequences of the war.3 In conclusion, there are many lessons to be learnt from the life and the role of Robert McNamara in wars. A weakness in Judgment is one of the factors that led to the Vietnam War that had a great loss and devastating repercussions on the US society. Such poor decisions can lead to a moral and ethical burden that one has to deal with for a lifetime. Therefore, getting things right the first time is crucial, through consultation and consideration of other parties’ points of view. As a lesson, even though a nation may consider itself superior to its enemy, going to war should always be the last option, after all the other attempts have failed to resolve the issue, since a war has a cost on all the parties involved, regardless of who wins. Works Cited 1Clark, A. Defense policy formation: a comparative analysis of the McNamara era. 19-37. 2Cooper, L. The shadows of history: fifty years behind the scenes of Cold War diplomacy. 17-29. 3Errol, Morris. The Fog of War: Eleven Lessons from the Life of Robert S. McNamara. 2003. DVD. 4Frontline diplomacy [electronic resource]: the Foreign Affairs Oral History Collection of the Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training. 5James, Roherty. Decisions of Robert S. McNamara: a study of the role of the Secretary of Defense. 6Jaya, Baral. The Pentagon and the making of U.S. foreign policy : a case study of Vietnam, 1960-1968. 119-140. 7Kaufmann, William. The McNamara strategy. 56-63. 8McMaster, H. Dereliction of duty: Lyndon Johnson, Robert McNamara, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the lies that led to Vietnam. 9McMaster, H. R. Dereliction of Duty: Lyndon Johnson, Robert McNamara, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Lies That Led to Vietnam. New York: HarperCollins, 1997. 45-78. 10McNamara, Robert S., and Brian Van Demark. In Retrospect: The Tragedy and Lessons of Vietnam. New York: Times, 1995. Print. A12-13. 11McNamara, Robert S., James G. Blight, and Robert K. Brigham. Argument without End: In Search of Answers to the Vietnam Tragedy. New York: Public Affairs, 1999. 56-90. 12Stephen J. Flanagan and James A. Schear. Strategic challenges: America's global security agenda. 13National Archives Website Read More