I thought Kevin Corcoran’s recent post “Military Experience and Moral Authority” was excellent. I started to write a comment, which turned out to be too long. So instead it’s this post.
Overall, I agreed with Kevin’s post. I have four comments, only one of which is a disagreement.
First, unless I misunderstand the term, what Kevin discussed is not “moral authority” but intellectual authority. There are moral issues in war–big time–but he didn’t discuss those. He discussed the positive issues: what will happen? what’s true? what’s false? etc.
Second, the post reminds me of a conversation I had with one of my students who came back to visit about 16 or 17 years ago. I had taught him 22 years ago. He had been to Iraq and had come back in one piece. He said that some of his long-time friends told him that they would defer to him on whether the war was right or wrong because he had been there. That IS a moral issue. He told me that he had said in response, “No, I believe in America and I believe in freedom of speech and in people’s right to judge for themselves. So please do judge.”
Third, Omar Bradley is often quoted as saying “Amateurs talk strategy; professionals talk logistics.” A colleague of mine who taught logistics (naturally) had that saying on his door. Logistics can explain and predict a lot.
Fourth, Kevin wrote:
Prior to the invasion, there was a widespread consensus that the Russian military would quickly plow over the Ukrainian armed forces leading to a swift capture of Kyiv. Outside observers drastically underestimated both the resilience of the Ukrainian military and the ineptitude of the Russian military.
I was one of the people who didn’t say that. A UCLA law professor friend on Facebook said the first day, “I give Kyiv 4 days. Does anyone disagree?” I said that I did. He asked, quite reasonably, how long I gave them. I think I answered “Many weeks at least.” What was I thinking? Three things: (1) the substantial size of Ukraine’s military; (2) the Ukrainians “local knowledge” a la Hayek; (3) the Ukrainians’ incentives versus the incentives of the Russian military. Notice what I left out but shouldn’t have: logistics.
READER COMMENTS
Kevin Corcoran
Jun 29 2023 at 10:28am
Good morning David, and thank you for the response and follow up post! To clarify one point – the apparent disagreement is, I think, just a miscommunication. You mentioned your former student who “said that some of his long-time friends told him that they would defer to him on whether the war was right or wrong because he had been there.” That is the phenomenon I meant to describe when in my post I mentioned occasions where “someone suggests to me that by having served in the military, I have gained a special ‘moral authority’ in my opinions on military matters.” That is, I’ve heard that my opinion on the morality of the Iraq war deserves special deference, simply because I was deployed to Iraq. And I reject the heck out of that. To suggest that my conclusions should be evaluated not by engagement with the soundness of my premises, the validity of my inferences, and the correctness of my facts, but instead deferred to based on my “lived experience” (to use the common buzzword) is something I find incredibly condescending – made all the more condescending because the “don’t question people’s lived experience!” crowd seems to think it’s somehow respectful.
David Henderson
Jun 29 2023 at 11:37am
Thanks for clarifying, Kevin.
Monte
Jun 29 2023 at 12:42pm
I find Kevin’s indignation towards people who defer to his moral authority on military matters perplexing. The definition of moral authority is “trustworthiness to make decisions that are right and good.” It seems to me there must be some degree of moral authority gained through military experience, particularly in war. I don’t mean to disparage his attitude so much as I seek to understand it. If someone were to ask my opinion on the morality of war, I would, in all humility, offer it as an unqualified opinion based on my lived experience as a peacetime Marine, but I wouldn’t get offended. I would, however, in the company of a fellow Marine with combat experience like Kevin, be inclined to defer to his opinion on this question.
Dr. Henderson mentioned Omar Bradley. If there was anyone to whom I’d defer as a moral authority on war, it would be him. The following opinions expressed by Bradley, I have to believe, were greatly informed by his wartime experience as a commanding general.
Finally, I would greatly appreciate it if Dr. Henderson could help me understand the difference between legitimate authority (to which I made reference in my comment on Kevin’s post) and intelligent authority.
Semper Fi.
Monte
Jun 29 2023 at 6:00pm
That is to say, the difference between legitimate authority and intellectual authority.
David Henderson
Jun 29 2023 at 7:23pm
I don’t think there is a difference, although I haven’t thought about it much.
I was addressing Kevin’s discussion of moral authority and pointing out that he didn’t give any examples of moral authority. But, as you can see from his comment above, he clarified his point.
Monte
Jun 30 2023 at 1:47am
Thank you. I was of the same opinion, although after drilling down some to find one, I stumbled across the following definitions:
The difference, apparently, being one of coercion vs reasoning.
On the subject of intellectual authority, I found an article containing this little anecdote I thought you might find amusing. In part:
steve
Jun 29 2023 at 3:36pm
Agree with 1 and 2. Your 3rd point is more correct than you think. Logistics is important and Russian logistics is pretty poor. It has made it easier to target their supplies and made it harder for Russia to get supplies to their people.
On #4 those are good points and often discussed by military theory people. Note that those can be overcome as the Germans demonstrated in WW2, at least for a while. If you are really interested I would suggest reading John Boyd, the OODA Loop guy. He had a hierarchy looking at what was needed to win a war and he placed at the top the moral cause/morale of those fighting, basically incentives. Tactics and equipment lagged, but if the discrepancy was large enough incentives could be overcome.
However, a key part you are missing and why a lot of people thought Ukraine would fold early is leadership. I dont think it was predictable that Zelensky and his top leaders would stay rather than runaway like we saw leadership do in Afghanistan. Senior leadership stayed and was surprisingly effective at managing the response. They were aided by the ineptitude of the Russians. (Russian military is way too centralized. Lower level troops are not allowed to make decisions. One of the reasons they keep having generals get killed. US and NATO troops had been training Ukraine troops to emulate the more decentralized decision making of US troops.)
Steve
David Henderson
Jun 29 2023 at 4:46pm
Thanks, Steve. Good comment. I agree that it wasn’t predictable that Zelensky would stay rather than flee. And although I didn’t know that the Russian military was centralized, I figured it was.
steve
Jun 29 2023 at 4:55pm
If you get really bored link goes to non-paywall more detailed explanation.
https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Portals/7/military-review/Archives/English/MilitaryReview_20151231_art015.pdf
Steve
Comments are closed.