Civil Military Relations Who Will Fight The Next War Analysis
Essay about the article ‘Civil-military relations – Who will fight the next war?’
The article ‘Civil-military relations – Who will fight the next war?’ was published in `The Economist’, a British weekly newspaper, on 24 October 2015.
The principal theme of the article is the shortage of young people joining the American armed forces as a result of the gap between the Army and the American population. Refer to this situation; the author describes the causes of the decline of the number of recruits, which altogether can be divided into two main reasons: The ineligibility and the reluctance of the young people aged 17-21. In Addition, he pictures the procedure of recruiting in a critical and ridiculous way and mentions the consequences, which …show more content…
In the USA, education is very expensive and for a vast majority of companies a high level of education is a requirement for an appointment. The armed forces provide many programs in which they offer to pay the education and other perks for young recruits if they decide for a career at the military. It will be an easy chance for many young people without vocational alternatives and often with a criminal past. In this context, I criticize that the Army advertise their program as a new product. They entice young persons by founding hope and rarely make clear what the disadvantages are. In my opinion in a long-term view the Army will be full of young people, with an insecure background, whose situation is used by the Army for their interest. That will be a doubtful circumstance, that should be questioned in an ethical …show more content…
I think the reintroduce of the draft should not be the solution for the lack of recruits albeit it could be a possibility to deploy good-educated, healthy, young people. The draft is an obligation and therefore in my opinion an intervention in the liberty rights of young persons. Nevertheless, the alternative should not be to increase the perks and advertise to get more volunteers because this strategy pushes young people to become recruits because of another motive.
My recommendation is to improve the reputation of the armed force by making it more transparent and close to the people. They should maintain the perks they offer, but they should disclose what the whole consequences are for the young people when they decide to join up. Especially the Army should prepare them fighting at the front and when they come back support them consistently when they are physically and mentally broken. But this seems to be a sad concept. That is why for me the most important thing is, that instead of being concerned about recruiting people for their armed forces, governments should make it a clear priority to not engage in wars or even prevent
The article ‘Civil-military relations – Who will fight the next war?’ was published in `The Economist’, a British weekly newspaper, on 24 October 2015.
The principal theme of the article is the shortage of young people joining the American armed forces as a result of the gap between the Army and the American population. Refer to this situation; the author describes the causes of the decline of the number of recruits, which altogether can be divided into two main reasons: The ineligibility and the reluctance of the young people aged 17-21. In Addition, he pictures the procedure of recruiting in a critical and ridiculous way and mentions the consequences, which …show more content…
In the USA, education is very expensive and for a vast majority of companies a high level of education is a requirement for an appointment. The armed forces provide many programs in which they offer to pay the education and other perks for young recruits if they decide for a career at the military. It will be an easy chance for many young people without vocational alternatives and often with a criminal past. In this context, I criticize that the Army advertise their program as a new product. They entice young persons by founding hope and rarely make clear what the disadvantages are. In my opinion in a long-term view the Army will be full of young people, with an insecure background, whose situation is used by the Army for their interest. That will be a doubtful circumstance, that should be questioned in an ethical …show more content…
I think the reintroduce of the draft should not be the solution for the lack of recruits albeit it could be a possibility to deploy good-educated, healthy, young people. The draft is an obligation and therefore in my opinion an intervention in the liberty rights of young persons. Nevertheless, the alternative should not be to increase the perks and advertise to get more volunteers because this strategy pushes young people to become recruits because of another motive.
My recommendation is to improve the reputation of the armed force by making it more transparent and close to the people. They should maintain the perks they offer, but they should disclose what the whole consequences are for the young people when they decide to join up. Especially the Army should prepare them fighting at the front and when they come back support them consistently when they are physically and mentally broken. But this seems to be a sad concept. That is why for me the most important thing is, that instead of being concerned about recruiting people for their armed forces, governments should make it a clear priority to not engage in wars or even prevent