Importance of Military Discipline and Accountability of Equipment in the Army - Essay Example

Importance of military discipline and accountability of equipment in the army The military is the most disciplined force known following commands without question. Being in charge of securing the country against external aggression, there is a need for total control over the military by the commanders; failure to which leads to serious consequences for the country. It is coordination that keeps things moving in the right direction without diverting the attention of the people involved. Accountability of equipment is also necessary to ensure they are in good condition and are accessible whenever needed as this makes sure that the weapons are not put into wrong use. The military uses various sophisticated weapons and equipments that need to be accounted for to avoid misuse. Registering weapons before leaving the armory is a practice that is aimed at ensuring accountability in the part of the military officers. Through this, the use of any bullet or any other form of weapon will have to be accounted for to ensure that the gun has been used for the correct purpose. First of all, coordination in preparation and during war is important in winning a war meaning that it is ineffective war strategy. Any little misunderstanding between the commander and the officers may cost the lives of many officers and possible loss of the battle. The rule of the army is ‘follow command first and ask questions later’ where in most cases officers do not ask the questions as they only focus on executing orders. Though this may sound inhuman, it has ensured success in many battles undertaken by the army. Avoiding questions first ensures that action is taken to tackle the enemy before anything else. Discussing a command gives the enemy a chance to prepare and probably act faster, thus giving the enemy an upper hand in the battle. Moreover, the language of communication is also restricted to the specific force concerned. Discipline is not only following command, but also maintaining the secrets of the force. Allowing the enemy access to the secret communication of the military is a great offence that can cause the country a lot. Thus secrecy in the part of the military officers is relevant to establishing a strong military force. Furthermore, in the past the military has been associated with malpractices in the society that have created a rift between the society and the military. The American society in the past was faced with unpleasant scenes where some military officers were involved in anti social practices. Military officers in the past have been involved in rape and other scandals that have tainted the societal view of the army. This has served to divert the public attention from the role of the military in protecting the society and instead view them as an enemy to the people. The way to restore confidence of the public in the military is to ensure discipline in the force. This cuts across personal character and handling their duties as military officers (Lepper, 1998). Accountability on the part of individual officers for their action will ensure each of them is careful about their actions and is aware of the consequences of their actions. Officers involved in scandals ought to undergo disciplinary actions, thus being a lesson to others intending to engage in misconduct. This will help regain the confidence of the society in the military and acceptance of the financing of the military through public funds. The formation of uniform code of military justice was occasioned by the spread in indiscipline in the military especially before and after the World War II. Military justice was meant to address disciplinary issues in the military through giving both the commander and the accused officer equal chances to be heard (Lepper, 1998). The commander therefore did not have the final say in punishing an officer but the case was handled more like a civil case with both sides given fair hearing before any judgment is made. Furthermore, military discipline in training does not only focus on commands following but also high morals, skills and goodwill of the military officers to enable them blend well with the society. These attributes can well be attained through off war training. Thus, engaging in war is not the only test for military superiority but is just part of the many tests that any military can undergo for it to be declared superior. With the skills, the military will be able to handle the situation at hand professionally. The moral standards ensure that they conduct themselves in a morally acceptable manner while the will to serve will see the officers engage in activities voluntarily and helping when needed from the heart and not as a must do duty. Military values in the 21st century are changing with the changing situations that the military has to encounter. The officers have to be trust worth (Lepper, 1998). Trust that the men at war will do the right thing, no matter how unpopular it is with professional competence, integrity and courage. Those entrusted to handle weapons and weapon carrying aircrafts and earth movers should be trust worth to make the right moves at the required time. Acting for the sake o it is not expected especially when handling the very destructive weapons. Trust is also reflected in the person’s moral values. If they can be trusted to follow command on weapon handling, the military should also be trusted to safeguard personal respect for example avoiding having affairs with married people. The disciplined rules demand that the officers should not be having affairs with married people to uphold good morals within the disciplined forces (Lepper, 1998). This builds an all round person who can be trusted with both small and big things not only at war but also out in the society. If one cannot be trusted with another person’s wife or husband, then how can they be trusted with weapons that can destroy masses? The point of intersection between laws and values is where trust lies implying that trust is the bond between the law and the moral values of the military thus it is an essential part of any military officer. With trust, the officers can themselves co-exist in the barracks and military camps without fear of the weapon the other officer is possessing. The military officers are responsible both directly and indirectly for the equipments of the military. All the property of the military within the base is under the entire military to protect in that no destruction should occur to such property; this is the joint responsibility of them all. The direct responsibility of the officers comes in when they sign for equipment and it is handed over to them. Unless issued with a valid shortage annex, the officer is responsible for all the components supposed to be in the equipment. The components of the equipment are usually listed in the hand receipt that the officer signs before receiving the equipment thus anything missing from the equipment should be reported before taking possession of the item (Lepper, 1998). The valid shortage annex contains the list of components missing from the equipment, thus relieving the officer from the responsibility of the specific items. Accountability of the officers for the military equipment ensures that the military has enough equipment for war any time. Lack of accountability creates confusion during war, with finger pointing occurring for the lack of enough equipment to handle the war. The main goal of accountability is to care for, proper use and safeguarding military property. Thus, accountability for equipment is the key to a successful military able to handle any war situation. Discipline and accountability do not only apply to junior officers, but also the commanders are supposed to be disciplined. The commanders have authority to give orders to the junior officers, but within the power allocated to them by the law. During war, all commanders should be accountable for the members of their command force as they are the ones giving the orders. The commanders should be able to trace the whereabouts of all officers under their command thus preventing loss of lives. Sending officers to the war front should be done with a lot of supervision and follow up on the war activities to ensure no lives are lost in the battlefield. The commander should be in a position to trace all his officers and send reinforcement when need be, thus ensuring the safety of all officers in the army at war. The use of a weapon within a certain commanding force is also under the control of the commander in charge. Accountability for the issue of command to fire or any other action involving the use of the weapon should be adhered to. Clear reasons for issuing the command should be given to the relevant authority thus ensuring that the use of the weapon was necessary and was not just an act to show off their military equipment. This will ensure that there are enough weapons and equipment to continue with war before asking for more equipment. Moreover, financing the war equipments is quite expensive, thus accountability will ensure no misuse occurs and as a result the taxpayer’s revenue is spared from unnecessary expense. This helps the government cut down the cost of maintaining the country’s army. Among the wars that brought the world attention to the military accountability of various countries is the First World War. This war saw the rise and fall of many countries depending with their ability to handle the enemy. Germany, who had accumulated so much weapon to it thought it was superior and was fast to engage in war expecting to win. However, the country had overestimated its military strength, thus with the entry of America into the war and taking a position against Germany saw Germany loose the battle. With Germany having accumulated a lot of weapons and trained its military, it went into war to test its military strength and instead of coming out as a strong world power to reckon with, it ended up losing the war and bearing the most blame for the war. Among the recommendations of the First World War review was the disarmament of Germany to avoid occurrence of another war. This shows lack of accountability in the part of the Germany military to engage in war using sophisticated weapons, thus provoking other nations to join in the war leading to the First World War. Recent cases of bazaar shootings experienced in different parts of the world may be associated directly and indirectly to lack of accountability. Where military officers have used their weapons to harm the public is a total misuse of the weapons allocated to them. This goes against the expectation of the military discipline standards as this tends to violate the rights of the public. Therefore, discipline in the force will help avoid such cases of gross misuse of weapons. Disciplinary actions against the officer concerned will see the reduction if not elimination of such incidences. The involvement of some military officers in mistreating members of the public whenever there is a military operation is also not acceptable. Discipline in the forces will see the individual members account for their actions instead of holding the whole force accountable for their actions (Lepper, 1998). With discipline, officers will avoid engaging in antisocial activities, hence influencing the society to be more habitable. Conclusion Discipline and accountability of equipment in the military is relevant to establishing a successful military force. Discipline ensures that the officers are responsible for their actions and do not misuse their position military members to break the law by mistreating the members of the public whenever there is a military operation (Lepper, 1998). The picture of a merciless military that are known for beating up the people and raping women can be corrected through instilling discipline in the force. Accountability for equipment is also necessary for a successful military. With accountability comes the collective responsibility and the individual responsibility of the army. Individual officers are responsible for the military equipment in their possession while the whole military is responsible safeguarding all military equipment. This ensures that the army has enough weapons to handle any war eventuality when necessary. References Lepper S. J. (1998). Military discipline and accountability: traditional approaches or new standards for a new millennium.Retrieved on 17 November 2014 from www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA443465 Read More