Weekly Recon - Lost China Sea, Commander-in-Chief

Good Saturday morning and welcome to Weekly Recon. On this day in 1918, the new Army Air Service (forerunner of the U.S. Air Force) was organized. In 1955, the prototype of the F-105 Thunder Chief made its maiden flight, better known as the “Thud,” was the Air Force’s war-horse in Vietnam. Then in 1962, President John F. Kennedy announced that missile bases had been discovered in Cuba and they had the potential to attack the United States with nuclear warheads.

Perhaps the most troubling aspect of Duterte’s visit with China was his tacit agreement to explore oil and gas deposits off the coast of the Philippines. While on the surface this may not seem like much, but it falls in stark contrast to the Philippines initiating UNCLOS ruling on China’s claims in the South China Sea.  While not yet approved by the Philippine Congress, such a move could have dire consequences for not only the Philippines but the entire region.

Commander-in-Chief – The Presidential Election is just over two weeks away and at stake is the next Commander of the United States Military.  While national security has taken the back burner to issues regarding Donald Trump’s indiscretions and Hillary Clinton’s emails, the state of the U.S. military and the way forward has been lost.  To perhaps make matters worse, current and former service members are either very much a part of this election cycle or seek to divorce themselves from the political process.

Prior to the Democratic and Republican Conventions this summer, recently retired general officers entered the fray by either endorsing or even campaigning for both major party candidates.  For Hillary Clinton, retired Marine General John Allen not only endorsed Hillary but was a prime-time speaker at the Democratic Convention, along with several other retired military members. Prior to that, retired Lieutenant General Michael Flynn had long been campaigning for Donald Trump as a prominent national security advisor. This quickly drew the ire of many other retired senior military officers, not least of which, retired General Martin Dempsey who declared that military officers do not belong at political conventions.  Dempsey brings up a salient point that even brings into question the laws governing political participation by both active and retired military members. 

Lawfare recently pointed out that participation by retirees must not implicate an endorsement by the armed services, which both Generals have danced a fine line around. General Dempsey has hit a cord with many in the military to the point that an active duty Major in the Army even declared recently that Officers should refrain from voting in the Presidential election and simply be prepared to carry out the orders of the Commander-in-Chief. This is unlikely to be followed by the vast majority of military members and veterans but does highlight the need for the military's perception of being apolitical.  Although this doesn’t limit military members as a voting bloc.

Recent polling of military members shows that Trump and Johnson maintain a slight lead among voting military members, but belies the most worrisome belief that military members don’t like any of the choices for Commander-in-Chief. Polls by the Military Times in September suggest that a vast majority of the military are either “dissatisfied” or “very dissatisfied” with either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton.  What does this mean for the next Commander-in-Chief and what challenges will this present for not only the military but the one that will be in Command?

SEND RCD YOUR INPUT: Please send your tips, suggestions, and feedback to editors@realcleardefense.com.  Make sure to follow us on Twitter at @RCDefense