Role of the Military in Worldwide Governance I

Over the years I've come into contact with several countries' military and have read up on the topic, too.  It is related to this background that I begin a rumination on the military, particularly, the US military.

The Issue at hand

Today's military is very skilled.  Remember the days when a young man was conscripted when he was drunk and didn't care what he did?  Nowadays, industry and business are recruiting members of the military, since they are so technologically advanced as able to improve industrial practices significantly.  Was not the Internet an advance born out of military technology?

If you've witnessed the testimonies of our recent Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, you are aware of, not only their technical expertise, but their political savvy.  It causes me to question our heritage since the days of the cave men that places the leader of the government, e.g., The President, as the Chief of the country's military.  Military top brass can certainly and independently, have political opinions, e.g., whether to go to war, and should be given the platform to publicly express them.

When I was visiting Ottawa, Canada a few years ago, I met military high echelon from African countries.  I discovered my initial reasons to think that the African Union concept should become a reality were well-founded, since it has indeed sought to bring about a stable environment throughout that Continent by bold actions.

Be it noted, too, that despots like Hussein in Iraq, Hitler in Germany, always relied on their own loyal military--in Germany,  the SS and Gestapo--to carry out their wishes against their opposition or their victims, circumventing or even superseding the established military.

The paradigm of the military is that body of dedicated and trained soldiers whose purpose is to protect and save the country from invasion from foreign countries.  Just as the paradigm of the police is that institutional arm of local and state government concerned to protect and preserve the law-abiding citizens within its jurisdiction from harm and injury from those who would perpetrate hostile and un-lawful acts.

Note that the Egyptian military recently intervened in the political arena in order to oust the President and his government (actions I highly approve of).  It did so, as it claimed, to save the country from autocratic rule that would not recognize and respect those groups who disagreed with it.  The military has promised to re-institute a democratically-elected government, but one which acknowledges the rights and privileges of all Egyptians and promises to reform state institutions including the judiciary.  Moreover, saving the country implies placing it on sound economic ground through policies and directives that promote trade, reduce governmental deficit, and so forth.  This the military intends to promote.  In sum, it would not allow the country to drift into economic chaos!

The Egyptian intervention into the political arena reminds me of what the Turkish military has found  necessary to do in times of civil governmental floundering during recent past centuries.  Even today, we find the anger of its citizenry rising against the current President, who would insinuate himself in matters of local affairs, demanding his edicts be followed even if whimsical.

Admiring the Turkish model of an independent military, not beholden to the state's political structure, I have argued that the US military be its own political force for the good of the US citizenry; but not only this, I have pressed that, because of the US military's especial technological and strategic planning capabilities, the US military should become a vital force in the policy-making of worldwide governance.  Being that it has bases and other installations in over 170 countries around the globe, I believe that it is in position to lead on in an international basis to preserve world peace and foster international commerce and trade through mechanisms of influence and might.