Brookings: Rep. Mac Thornberry reminiscing on his years in the Armed Services Committee, Congress

The title of his talk "Congress and defense policy" was introduced by Mike O'Hanlon of Brookings on Mondaay, March 2, 2020 at the Brookings.

Though Representative Thornberry presented much to reflect upon and mull over, I picked up on two points he raised and will discuss herein.  He's obviously done a lot of thinking on the topic assigned him.

1.  The military is a-political. 

That does not mean, the military doesn't have a culture of its own.  He pointed out that the F35 is packed with an intelligence system that is super-armed with knowledge and capabilities of a full-scale combat-ready planning system for any ontoward event.  That it is housed in a fighter-plane bespeaks the Air Force's culture that casts its fighting and planning capacities within its flying orientation to prepare a though-going defense of the country.

But he also pointed out that as a branch of the military, it is a-political--neither Democratic nor Republican in a political arena.  This feature has long been established in Turkey in years past, as the mechanism whereby when a particular government could no longer function in an administrative capacity, the military would step in, temporarily, before another government could be formed.  Be it noted that the Egyptian government in power a few decades ago was replaced through military intervention.  Then too, several other countries, e.g., in Africa, have used the military to act as interim government from time to time.

2.  It is prudent that military alliances establish an institutional organization lasting over time that guards and protects its member states. 

One that comes to mind because of its many years in service is the African Union that intervenes in political conditions of unrest, extending its area of service to the entire continent of Africa.  NATO provides the same degree of protection to the countries of Europe, but is also supported by the United States.

Along this line, the OAS--Organization of American States--could establish a military arm to handle political disputes in countries of the Americas.  Something like NATO, only in this hemisphere, might be called upon to cope with political stalemates, as in Venezuela, today.

With countries in the region of Indo-China and Japan becoming involved in increased international trade the world over, some new institution, a-poliitical in orientation, could serve the security needs of  protection and promote the cause of peace in situations of political unrest arising in that region of the world.