Only a small percentage of Americans serve in uniform, and the strongest predictor of military service is having a family member who served. That self-perpetuating cycle, Gen. Stanley McChrystal told the New York Times, is creating a separation between soldiers and society that carries real dangers for democracy.
"It's not healthy to have a military caste grow up," McChrystal said in a conversation with columnist David French on the NYT podcast "The Opinions," as "Hvylya" reports. The general acknowledged that the professional military has been "largely professional and apolitical and all the good things," but warned that the incentive structure quietly pushes toward conflict.
"People who are professional soldiers have a reason to want conflict," McChrystal said. "It gives you a chance to work your craft and promotions. They wouldn't even really think about it directly, but you become incentivized for the kinds of military actions that give that opportunity. Plus, it increases defense budgets." The observation was not an accusation - McChrystal described it as an unconscious dynamic built into the system itself.
The second danger, he argued, is politicization. McChrystal noted that in the current environment, generals have been fired for not fitting the political profile of the administration. "You start to shape that military, and it starts to maybe align with a certain political leaning," McChrystal said. He recalled that during his own service, military peers never discussed their political views. That norm, he warned, is now under pressure.
French shared the concern and noted that the civilian-military divide could lead to an excessive willingness to use force. McChrystal agreed and pointed to the ultimate risk: "After a while, it starts to think of itself, as we've seen in some countries, as the guardians of the republic or of the nation."
Previously, "Hvylya" examined how Ulysses Grant's handling of a civil-military crisis may offer lessons for today's Pentagon leadership.