US Military Ethics

Abstract

The US Army has to a large extent been implicated with many ethical issues. These ethical issues have tarnished the army’s image considerably. The soldiers as well as the civilian army personnel have continued to engage in unethical activities against their oaths of service. It si therefore apparent that the present measures being used to curb the unethical conduct is not working. This calls alternative methods: this document suggests the incorporation of a comprehensive ethics curriculum in the academy in addition to the teaching of positive ethics to all new soldiers.

Thesis

The US Army progressively more faces the daunting challenge of the unethical personnel conduct and which must be stopped to avoid any more reputational damage.

Introduction

Presently on a very regular basis news headlines are marred with instances of US military unethical conduct. This has changed the viewpoints of many regarding the military personnel. Formerly regarded as the mainly disciplined force, the military is now an ‘undisciplined force’. This document presents   instances of military unethical situations as well as military views on ethics along ways of instilling new soldiers with ethical values.

How military views ethics

Within the military professional goals, rules as well as situations offer the context along with criteria for deciding what is ethically wrong or right. The decision making moments for the military personnel is crowded with signals originating from rule-based obligations, goal-based aspirations as well as situation based demands. To start with rule based obligations offer the primary criterion regarding ethical judgments. Within the military there are set standards for deterring what is the right thing to be done. Additionally the military has an obligation to honoring constitutional justice, the civil law as well as social along with ethnic norms. Acting outside the set rules is considered unethical. This rule based approach towards ethically theory introduces the standard criterion for the determination of things that are right or wrong. Military personnel live under an obligation sense aligned with a sturdy order base, discipline and obedience (Neill, 2000).

The second view for military ethical actions is the goal based aspirations; in addition to using rules, goals are also used to decide which decisions and actions are ethical. The right decision or action here is determined by its capability to attain the desired objective (Snider, Oh, & Toner, 2009). Thus if the personnel fails to attain a certain expected goal both morally and physically then this qualifies to be an unethical issue. Thus the personnel require to ask themselves questions such as what objective should I seek or what is good? The third way of evaluating ethical issues is the situation based decision; here the military personnel require asking themselves questions such as what is appropriate to this circumstance or rather what is fitting? Since each situation is exclusive the judgments are normally relative to the issue at hand. The situations that soldiers ought to make ethical decisions possess a similarity regarding what rules or goals to be applied (ROBINSON, 2007). 

Illustrations of ethical violations and their punishments

The US Department of Defense in 2013 updated the ethical failure encyclopedia. The encyclopedia contains very numerous cases of unethical issues that the department has experienced (U.S. Department of Defense, 2013). The encyclopedia shows how the army perceives or views ethics. Among the mainly unethical issues will be discussed: to start with, one offshore safety inspector located a majority of the state’s equipment was in dire need of repairs in order to attain safety standards. The safety inspector decided to refer or award his brother-in-law the business of repairing the items.  This process of awarding the business was not competitive, it was unethically biased. As a matter of fact the brother-in-law in return for every referral secured the inspector an evening with a woman of dubious morals. This clearly a very unethical issue conducted within the military and which tarnishes the military’s image (Ingersoll, 2013).

Secondly, two civilian staffs within a military depot as well as the contractor’s government sales manager got convicted on varying conspiracy along with bribery charges for planning to defraud the state under numerous contracts to acquire cash along with merchandise. These staffs were part of a bigger scheme within which they utilized government funds to buy laptops as well as recycled computer parts from the sales manager at exaggerated prices, and later splitting he overcharged monies between themselves.  The court extended a 3 years probation in addition to paying a restitution fee of $30,000: the second employee received a sentence of 22 months as well as 3 years probation in addition to paying a restitution fee of $18,000 (Ingersoll, 2013).

Thirdly; a Sergeant At-Arms who is usually the chief purchasing agent within the senate recommended that the senate required buying as well as installing a telephone system from AT&T at a price of $219,000. After only three weeks he participated in a tour funded by AT&T for $2,700 which was Washington-Honolulu round trip (U.S. Department of Defense, 2013). The sergeant pleaded guilty in 1992 November to a single misdemeanor count which involved violating 18USC 203, he received a one year sentence of monitored probation in addition to paying $2,700 restitution fee along with a civil fine of $5,000. Fourthly; a civilian employee within the US army pleaded guilty of violating the conflict interest statute. He was awarded a one year sentence along with a $1,000 fine. This civilian employee had previously taken part in administration of contracts which a involved a company he owned stocks. This personal participation as a government employee concerning matters which impacted on his financial interests is a breach of law. He employee had also failed to disclose the personal financial he had with the company (Ingersoll, 2013).

Fifthly an active duty sailor within the navy repeatedly used a government credit card to purchase personal items. She decided to go on a widespread theft conduct in order to make “test runs” and which went unnoticed. This prompted her to join with another co-conspirator to even carry out bigger theft plans (Snider & Shine, 2014). Their new plan was to purchase laptop computers as well as plasma televisions using the same government card and later resold the items for profit purposes (U.S. Department of Defense, 2013). The scam was huge that the navy auditors detected the scheme after the government had been defrauded over $363,243. In total the sailor had using the government card allocated to her purchased about 162 notebook computers, 22 digital cameras, 65 big screen televisions, home theatre systems, camcorders and computer monitors. The sixth case involves six members which were stationed within the US were charged after defrauding the government through schemes involving marrying Russian women. This was done in an effort obtain military benefits. The six service members afterwards filed bogus basic allowance for housing or BAH as well as family separation allowance or FSA claims regarding their absent wives; this resulting in defrauding the government approximately of over $234,000. Further investigations revealed that the service members had never lived together with their ‘married wives’. The entire six members underwent a court-martial and received reduction of ranks as well as paying restitution which equaled the amounts of money which was received fraudulently (Ingersoll, 2013).

The seventh case involved a military officer who had successfully faked his death so to end an affair. The narrative involved a Navy Commander who had met a woman on an online dating site, the relationship grew but the officer failed to tell the lady that he had a wife as well as kids. After about six months the Commander required to end the relationship and thus he decided to send his lover a fictitious email informing her of his death (U.S. Department of Defense, 2013). He then relocated for a new assignment to Connecticut. In an eighth unethical circumstance a previous chief procurement Air Force officer who was accountable for the awarding contracts amounting to billions asked Boeing executives to award her daughter as well as son-in-law positions within Boeing. Additionally, when the officer retired the same company awarded her a position. Afterwards during a criminal investigation, the company admitted having engaged in corruption charges and conflict of interest as well as other unrelated violations. These corruption charges led to Boeing being fined a total of $615 million. The previous Air Force Procurement officer discussed issues regarding a potential job with the company whilst Boeing was competing for a $20 billion contract which was to entail leasing a tanker aircraft. The federal ethics rule demand that staffs should refrain themselves from engaging in issue regarding firms with which they may be seeking employment positions (Ingersoll, 2013).

Implementing ethical values to new soldiers

It is apparent that the military has numerous instances of unethical conduct and despite the strict rules as well as regulations placed within the military the ethical issues still persist. Thus it is clear that rules as well as regulations will never solve the ethics problem. The US Military has adopted the zero tolerance policy towards ethics which seems no to work very. This calls for a comprehensive model of inculcating ethics into the soldiers. The mainly efficient method is through training; the incorporation of ethics in training programs of new soldiers will assist in equipping soldiers with codes of conduct that to large extent will assist in dealing with the ethical issues (ROBINSON, 2007).

Moral leadership training is a very effectual program which can be incorporated in the military’s training program. Moral leadership training in many areas has been viewed as a useful model of developing high moral standards. The ethics training require undergoing revision persistently to cope the ever evolving ethical viewpoints. The military by itself is a community which owing to the nature of its operations demands values as well as standards along with ethical guidelines regarding how to live as well as operate.  The US military requires developing a program which involves planning for the adoption of ethics training; this entails self assessment, training, leadership as well as reviews and updates (Snider & Shine, 2014). Self assessment entails evaluating what is presently in place. This can be achieved through asking question such as, to what extent is ethics incorporated in training presently?  In what ways is it delivered? What is the structure of the program and how well is it structured? How well as the recruits receiving he instructions? Does a code of ethics exist? How often is the code of ethics updated? The above questions will assist determine how well ethical training at the training level is being conducted. With the presently rampant ethical issues it is clear that the present ethical conduct training is not accomplishing much. The code of ethics being used may be obsolete or un-matches the present times (ROBINSON, 2007).

Thus military academy curriculum requires incorporating ethical training as well as moral leadership training to equip new recruits with skills which will enable them make ethical decisions in future (Snider & Shine, 2014). Indeed the zero tolerance rules regarding ethics   in the military is malfunctioning. It is only through ethical academic knowledge that military personnel may be able to absorb and practice ethical decision making throughout their careers. In order to efficiently show the recruits the consequences unethical decision making, cases such as the ones discussed above should be used as examples.  Thus the new soldiers will join the force with complete awareness of what unethical situations are as well their punishments (Snider, Oh, & Toner, 2009).

The Chaplain Corps role in ethical training for new soldiers

The Chaplain Corps is concerned with the links between the Army institution needs as well as the needs of an individual soldier. Chaplain Corps are normally proponents of moral leadership training in the Army and under the commander’s authority the Chaplain should conduct training to the recruits. Thus in addition to the normal ethics training in the military academy the Chaplain Corps may implement an ethical training program which matches he needs of the army institution.    Moral leadership training should be seen as the process through which the recruits are influenced through providing them with purpose, motivation to complete a mission as well as an individual’s ethical conduct (Snider & Shine, 2014). 

Chaplains offer the professional Army ethics and supports character development from religious orientation point of view. This makes the Chaplain a very unique individual within the military. The fact that chaplains stresses on character development makes them invaluable in the ethical training of recruits.  Every chaplain is required to own a master’s degree prior to joining the army. Most importantly most chaplains usually own theology graduate degrees where ethics is normally a primary component.  This makes chaplains effective ethics practitioners as well as of moral education that offers important practical experience. Whether an individual believes in Supreme Being or not it is essential that ethical training involves a religious viewpoint (ROBINSON, 2007).  

Impacts of Positive ethics on Army Values  

Positive ethics refers to conducting oneself in a morally accepted way in their workplace. Positive ethics supports the adoption and following of the codes of ethics. Within the US military positive ethics will go a long way towards promoting the army values. To begin with loyalty within the army refers to holding true faith as well as commitment to the US constitution and towards the army institution as well as to other fellow soldiers. Holding true faith entails believing in along with devoting oneself to something or someone. Thus a loyal soldier supports the leadership in addition to standing up for his colleagues. Positive ethics will direct the officer in addition to reminding of their loyal duty towards their country and the institution. The scandals the US army experiences portrays the disloyalty of the members to the service and this is where positive ethics comes in (Patton, 2009). 

 A second army value is duty; which refers to an officer carrying out their tasks fully and diligently. Duty also refers to the ability to achieve tasks as a component of a team (ROBINSON, 2007). The fact that the US army involves a combination of numerous tasks, missions and responsibilities means that positive ethics is a core component in their success. Positive ethics in duty demands that an army personnel fulfills their obligation by avoiding the temptation of taking shortcuts which may weaken the integrity of the institution. In all unethical issues the component of failing to perform ones duty correctly is the most prevalent issue. Most personnel are lured by temptations of greed and corruption thus failing to deliver their duties correctly (Patton, 2009).

The third army value is respect; this entails treating individuals as they ought to be treated. The US Army Soldier’s Code states that a soldier must treat other individuals with dignity as well as respect whilst anticipating others to reciprocate (Snider & Shine, 2014). Positive ethics will definitely support soldiers respect values: more so positive ethics will assist a soldier improve self respect, which demands that personnel should put forth their best effort. Positive ethics seeks to enhance a selfless service by any soldier. Soldiers are said to engage in selfish conduct when they place their needs before those of the army institution and the country. Selfless service means that a soldier performs his job loyally devoid of expected gain or recognition. Positive ethics demands that an individual puts forth a little more effort as well as endurance in performing their tasks (Patton, 2009).

The fourth value in the army is that of integrity, which a point doing what is legally and morally right (ROBINSON, 2007). Positive ethics directs personnel in performing duties without deceiving others or the institution. Integrity is usually a quality one develops in through adherence to positive ethics. Thus the more integrity motivated decisions an individual makes the more they inculcate positive ethics in their jobs. Honor requires that a soldier lives up to the Army’s values. Positive ethics requires a soldier to develop the tendency of being honorable as well as solidifying that tendency with all decisions their make. Honor as a matter of fact encompasses practicing all the other army values. Thus positive ethics through its promotion of all the other army values fosters the adoption of the honor value (Patton, 2009).

The sixth US Army value is personal courage; this value involves facing fear, adversity or danger both physically and morally. Though personal courage has for long been associated with physical courage it also entails the moral courage (Snider & Shine, 2014). Positive ethics requires a soldier to practice courage in rejecting the temptation to doing the wrong thing. For instance, the ability of a procurement army personnel in rejecting a bribe aimed at influencing them, to award the company in question a contract amounts to personal courage. Personal courage plays a big part in ensuring that attaining positive ethics in the workplace. Additionally facing moral fear entails making the right decision though the rest of the personnel do not approve it. This especially is geared towards the army leaders who persistently make demanding decisions affecting all the officers. Thus army’s personnel can practice personal courage through standing up for as well as acting on the things they know are honorable. The inculcation of positive ethics to the army personnel will promote and enhance the attainment of the army values (Patton, 2009). 

Once a soldier is faced with an ethical dilemma either knowingly or unknowingly the most honorable thing to do is report to their superior. Once a soldier voluntarily forwards information well in advance their punishment may be reduced and may amount to decreased sentencing or a smaller figure of restitution fee.  

Conclusion

Ethical concerns within the US military have become rampant. These issues are tarnishing the image of the whole military institution; soldiers along with other civilian military employees are continuously being ensnared engaging in unethical situations. This document has suggested that in order to better instill ethical as well as moral values to the personnel effectual and comprehensive moral leadership and ethical training must be included within the military academy curriculum. With regard to civilian military personnel before an individual is hired they require undergo a thorough training regarding military ethics.

References

Ingersoll, G. (2013). 18 Outrageous Military Ethics Violations – Business Insider. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/18-outrageous-military-ethics-violations-2013-7?op=1

Neill, D. (2000). ETHICS AND THE MILITARY CORPORATION. Retrieved from http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo1/no1/doc/27-40-eng.pdf

Patton, G. (2009). ARMY VALUES. Retrieved from http://www.mc.edu/rotc/files/6213/1471/7258/MSL_201_L02a_Army_Values.pdf

ROBINSON, P. (2007). Ethics Training and Development in the Military. Retrieved from http://strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/parameters/Articles/07spring/robinson.pdf

Snider, D., & Shine, A. (2014). A SOLDIER’S MORALITY, RELIGION, AND OUR PROFESSIONAL ETHIC: DOES THE ARMY’S CULTURE FACILITATE INTEGRATION, CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT, AND TRUST IN THE PROFESSION? Retrieved from http://www.cgscfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Shine-Snider-ArmyCulture.pdf

Snider, D., Oh, P., & Toner, K. (2009). THE ARMY’S PROFESSIONAL MILITARY ETHIC IN AN ERA OF PERSISTENT CONFLICT. Retrieved from http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/PUB895.pdf

U.S. Department of Defense. (2013). Encyclopedia of Ethical Failure (Updated July 2013) | Full Text Reports… Retrieved from http://fulltextreports.com/2013/07/22/encyclopedia-of-ethical-failure-updated-july-2013/