On Veterans Day last Friday, Dean of the Tucker Foundation and College Chaplain Richard Crocker wrote a letter exhorting "those of us who have been spared the horror of war to remember those who have suffered in it" ("Vox Clamantis," Nov. 11). Indeed, with two painful and costly conflicts in the Middle East finally being brought to a bitter close, the need to reflect on the sacrifices of our armed forces and the evisceration of countless foreign civilian lives is as imperative as ever. Unfortunately, the sad truth is that these wars have had little lasting impact on the collective American psyche. As a general public, we promise to memorialize the courage of veterans and hold our leaders accountable for unjust war. In reality however, the American public is a body that has left the conduct of war to a largely unseen volunteer army, and thus no longer grasps the meaning of armed conflict.
The national civilian population has become increasingly detached from the military that protects it. Starting with the end of the Vietnam War, the American standing army was permanently reconstituted as an all-volunteer force. American males coming of age today must still register for the Selective Service System, but compulsory service has been non-existent for almost four decades and has rarely been entertained as a possibility since. In practical terms, the military is now an institution unto itself. Those who enlist have varying motivations for doing so, but the small size of the armed forces relative to the general population ensures that the broader civilian society has little consciousness of military life or the pains that go along with it.
Some might say that the last decade's roiling public debates over Iraq and Afghanistan, and the proliferation of outward displays of patriotism, serve as proof that Americans as a whole have internalized the struggles of war. But by the 2008 general election, the wars were a veritable non-issue, lost amidst the turmoil of a nation on the brink of profound economic chaos. The final withdrawal of American troops from Iraq in less than two months will likely be met with brief fanfare such matters have long been receding from the national consciousness. Even during the onset of conflict, we consider military action and the subsequent casualties largely in the abstract. A truly visceral emotional involvement in the proceedings of war is left to veterans and the families and friends of those who serve.
It was not always this way. Americans had a sense of ownership over their military in conflicts such as World War II, when our fighting forces truly represented the demographics of the nation. Even in the case of the smaller but nonetheless era-defining Vietnam War, when the draft was altered such that the poor bore a disproportionate burden in fighting, the implications of wartime pervaded the prevailing zeitgeist. Americans were concerned with the prosecution of war because most everyone felt they had a personal stake in the nation's struggles. The experience of Vietnam demonstrated that the government could conduct war only as long as the public saw it as just. For why would a free nation intimately connected to its own military consent to the sacrifice of soldiers merely to prolong the wanton devastation of a foreign nation?
With mandatory conscription a part of the past, the situation now is utterly changed. The public satisfies itself by heaping praise upon those who have been deemed "heroes," while remaining entirely distant from the pain and sacrifice that war implies. The idea of bringing back the draft is obviously contentious, and rightfully so. I for one would vehemently object to participating in a war of aggression with only a veneer of moral justification as was the case with Iraq. But there appears to be no other way to force Americans to share in the trials of war, so that we will truly be motivated to hold our leaders to a rigorous standard in the decision to sacrifice blood and treasure.
Today, the reality is that there exists a mutual distrust between the civilian population and the military. This dissonance is the sad product of a situation in which the nation and military are growing further and further apart. The consequences of the end of mandatory conscription have now come full circle, and we re-evaluate whether an all-volunteer army is good for the nation. A failure to redefine our relationship with the armed forces will only weaken our country in the future.
