In almost a half century of soldiering or writing about it, I’ve never seen a president attacked so openly by the nation’s fighting forces. Sure, the top brass hated FDR, attacked Truman for firing MacArthur and considered Jimmy Carter, an Annapolis graduate, a turncoat for slashing military spending. But these days the rancor goes right down through the ranks-and grows louder the farther you get from the Pentagon. At the marine command’s formal mess night in Quantico, Va., recently, officers were warned not to make “any inappropriate remarks during the toast to the president of the United States,” and that the toast “was to the office, not the man.” Most raised a glass but refused to drink. One army reserve commander in Wisconsin says griping got so bad that he “actually had to assemble all the officers and enlisted men in my unit and issue an order to knock it off.” There’s no mistaking the Mood. FIRST HILLARY, THEN GENNIFER, NOW us, reads one bumper sticker I spotted.
Bum rap: It’s not all Clinton’s fault. He had hard acts to follow-George Bush is a genuine war hero and Ronald Reagan acted the part on film. Though Reagan never saw war, he also never saw a weapon he didn’t buy. Clinton took office at the end of the cold war, when hundreds of bases have closed and tens of thousands of service members are getting axed. All were volunteers. Many believe Clinton has broken a contract that should have seen them through to retirement. He’s become a whipping boy for all their problems. It’s a bum rap. These trends began in 1989, long before Clinton took office.
But Clinton can be blamed for the current low state of combat readiness. When General Schwarzkopf’s grunts kicked Saddam’s butt in the 100-hour war, the U.S. military was the finest fighting force ever to lace up a pair of boots. Since 1991 this capability has been under heavy assault. Clinton’s defense cuts were made fecklessly. He slashed the defense budget without examining what future missions would be. His administration is “just making cuts, without ensuring the force remains capable,” says a marine lieutenant colonel. He has wasted scarce defense dollars on pork like the unneeded Seawolf submarine, unflyable C-17 cargo aircraft and the accident-prone Osprey helicopter.
No Respect: The troops rightly fear the return of a hollow force. Tanks, ships and aircraft are becoming nonoperational because of a lack of spare parts; unit strengths are far below the red line, and a shortage of training funds prevents units from practicing their skills. Yet the operations tempo has increased since the cold war ended, and our forces are committed all over the world with new missions in Africa, Latin America and the Mideast, while troops are scheduled to be on their way to the Balkans.
Clinton’s campaign promise to allow homosexuals to serve openly in the forces has become the lightning rod for this discontent. More than any other issue, it has alienated the warrior class, the roughly 20 percent of the force that actually do the fighting-and for whom the military is a calling, not the 8-5 deal it represents for rear-echelon “clerks and jerks.” I’m personally so opposed to having gays openly serve in the military that I wrote Clinton and told him that if it happens he should be impeached. An army PFC says, “He’s got no respect for us. The gay thing just rubs our face in it.” So does Defense Secretary Les Aspin’s order permitting women to fly combat aircraft. “Clinton must stop the social experiments,” says a navy lieutenant. “The military is a life-and-death business, not an equal-opportunity employer.”
Clinton’s military pay freeze is another slap. An army major said, “This is one more sign that Clinton doesn’t care.” Service studies show that during the past 10 years, military pay has fallen behind the private sector by almost 20 percent. About 20,000 enlisted personnel are eligible for food stamps, and about 80 percent of the force earn less than $30,000 per year.
Clinton’s advisers, from Aspin down, don’t get high grades from the officer corps. Few close advisers have ever worn a uniform, and only a few White House staff members have military experience. But the major problem is two cultures at crosspurposes. Facing off are the stiff-necked, archconservative, morally absolute warriors, especially the older career personnel, and the White House living-in-the-’90s Yuppies who embrace diversity. The military is antidiversity. It believes in order and uniformity because teamwork, cohesion and discipline win wars.
In the big scheme of things, what the military thinks of Clinton doesn’t matter. Captains, sergeants and grunts take the objectives and win our battles. Lincoln and FDR won their wars without military fan clubs, and while Nixon was hated down on Vietnam’s bloody fields, his warriors never stopped slugging in a bad war they knew they could not win. When the commander in chief orders them, our troops will salute and move out. Clinton has no place to go but up in the eyes of his troops, and he may already be heading that way. “Clinton is trying to close the gap and I think we should cut him some slack,” says one army captain. The turnaround could be his decision to face down the pro-intervention crowd and refuse to jump into Bosnia with force.
If President Clinton means what he says about repairing his relations with the military, there are easy steps he can take. He should never wear military gear or salute (he always looks down, as if he were ashamed). He should replace retired Adm. William Crowe with a leader who knows the smell of gunpowder. He should scrap the photo ops with warriors on the South Lawn and the speeches at the military academies. Spend a day with a ranger company, a submarine crew, a fighter squadron and a fleet-marine rifle company on operations, and talk to the warriors, their sergeants and company officers. They’ll eat up this type of attention, pay him back with respect and loyalty. Clinton could also work more closely with the top brass. They use up about 20 percent of America’s budget and are responsible for its security. Clinton should attend their war games as he does economic conferences. That way he’ll see that the brass are not windup soldiers, but thoughtful and smart patriots. And they’ll see that he is no dummy, and really cares about his forces.
Clinton could quickly win points by taking another look at the pay freeze. But his best chance to show his intentions is in his pick for armed forces chief of staff. To the troops, Gen. Colin Powell’s impending retirement is like losing a guardian saint. They trust him and know that he’d die before he put them in harm’s way. He must be replaced by a similarly heroic, straight-shooting, bright leader. The only real inspirational soldier in the active ranks who meets this standard is Marine Corps Gen. Joe Hoar. And if Clinton is truly serious about maintaining America’s fighting strength, he will re-examine the issues of gays in the military and women in combat. To admit he was wrong on the gays would give Clinton Janet Reno-style credibility.
In turn, the officer corps-from general to lieutenant-must stop grousing and badmouthing Clinton. If they can’t soldier under him, they must resign. A lieutenant general told me, “If I told you what I thought about Clinton, I’d have to quit. He’s my boss and I’m going to support him and turn things around.” Clinton has shown he can be the Comeback Kid. He’s a quick study-and should be able to pull out of his nose dive with his military.
