Generals Revolt on Rumsfeld - Essay Example

14 September 2007 Generals Revolt on Rumsfeld Strong culture and positive climate are the most important factors in military effectiveness and professional development. Operationally, culture is reinforced through the system of rites and rituals, patterns of communication, the informal organization, expected patterns of behavior and perceptions of the psychological contract. Strategically, culture establishes the values and norms of the Army. Strategic leaders focus on changing and understanding the organizational culture and ensuring that they establish a proper command climate.

Climate can be defined as an individual reception of environment. This perception is based on shared perceptions and values followed by the organization and its members. The task and duty of a military leader is to create positive and supportive culture and climate based on principles, rituals and values of the military organization1. The Revolt of the Generals is a vivid example of how climate and culture caused a breach in the civil-military relations. The Revolt of the Generals is a vivid example of assault on military culture.

Secretary Rumsfeld was accused in "willfully ignoring military advice and initiating the war in Iraq with a force that was too small"2. The generals state that his leadership led to low level of morale and poor climate, poor performance and personal relationships. Following Hustings (2006) culture and climate are important in the Army because connected with team spirit and commitment soldiers. It is possible to say that the Army structure is based on strong military culture supported and reinforced by soldiers and the officers3.

The case of Rumsfeld portrays that a leader's behavior sets the course others follow and determine the values and other measures used to account for group actions. The responsibilities of strategic leaders include identification of a task and the quality of its fulfillment. The group exists to achieve a common purpose or task, and the leader's actions in one area affect both the others; thus successful achievement of the task is essential if the group is to be held together and its members motivated to give their best effort to the job.

There are two opposite views on role and responsibilities of the retired generals and their civil duties. Korb supports the Revolt of the Generals and their commitment to the civil society. He states that retired generals have moral rights to enter the political arena and speak out problems and mismanagement affected the Army. The civil society has a right to know about problems and poor leadership decisions of its generals. On the other hand, Kohn, an expert in this field, suggests that the retired generals violated the professional code of ethics and their military responsibilities4.

Also, Owen underlines that: 'this misreading . has reinforced the belief among officers that they should be advocates of particular policies"5. This Revolt shows that the Army operates in changing environment and that is why there is a constant need for changes and improvements in military culture and climate. Thus, the negative consequences of the Revolt were that it weakened the Department of Defense as an institution by causing a rift in trust between the military and the civilians, weakened the image of military leadership, its operational and strategic decision-making.

Works Cited1. Owens, M. Thomas Rumsfeld, The Generals, and the State of U.S. Military relations. Naval War College Review, 59 (Autumn 2006): 1-10. Viewed 16 September 2007. 2. Hastings, M. Behind the Revolt; The Generals' View: To the Micromanager Goes the Blame. The Washington Post. Washington, D.C.: Apr 26, 2006 A.25. Viewed 16 September 2007.