This 2019 War on the Rocks article argues that while obedience is generally essential in the military, blind obedience can be detrimental. It emphasizes the importance of fostering a culture where subordinates possess the judgment and moral courage to disobey unlawful, unethical, or strategically unsound orders. The piece uses historical examples, such as the My Lai Massacre, to illustrate the dangers of unquestioning obedience and highlights the responsibility of leaders to create an environment that encourages dissent when necessary. Ultimately, it advocates for a balance between obedience and independent, critical thinking within the military chain of command to ensure ethical conduct and mission success.
The 2019 War on the Rocks article, "When Not to Obey Orders," delves into the complex and often fraught ethical landscape surrounding obedience in military contexts, specifically examining the delicate balance between adherence to the chain of command and the imperative to uphold morality and legality. The author, John M. Fowler, meticulously dissects the intricacies of military obedience, arguing that while adherence to orders is generally paramount for maintaining order and discipline within the armed forces, there exist crucial situations where disobedience becomes not only permissible but morally obligatory.
Fowler commences by establishing the foundational importance of obedience within the military structure, highlighting its role in ensuring effective execution of operations and cohesive action in often chaotic and high-stakes environments. He underscores the concept of the military as a hierarchical organization, emphasizing the necessity of clear lines of authority and the expectation that subordinates will comply with directives from their superiors. However, the author meticulously clarifies that this obedience is not – and should not be – absolute.
The core of Fowler’s argument revolves around the concept of unlawful orders. He asserts that military personnel are bound by a higher duty to adhere to the principles of justice and legality, and therefore, they are obligated to refuse orders that violate international law, domestic law, or ethical norms. He expands upon this by providing illustrative examples, such as orders that involve the commission of war crimes, crimes against humanity, or other egregious violations of human rights.
The article further explores the nuanced challenges inherent in identifying unlawful orders. Fowler acknowledges that in the heat of battle or under intense pressure, discerning the legality and morality of an order can be exceedingly difficult. He elaborates on the potential for ambiguous wording, conflicting information, and the inherent stress of military operations to cloud judgment. To navigate this complexity, Fowler proposes a framework for evaluating orders, encouraging personnel to consider factors such as the order's clarity, its potential consequences, and its alignment with established legal and ethical principles. He emphasizes the importance of seeking clarification from superiors when doubt arises and consulting with legal advisors or other trusted resources whenever possible.
Furthermore, Fowler examines the potential ramifications of disobeying an unlawful order, recognizing the inherent risks involved in challenging authority within a hierarchical system. He acknowledges the possibility of facing disciplinary action, social ostracism, and even legal repercussions. However, he underscores the overriding moral imperative to uphold the law and one's conscience, arguing that the potential personal costs should not deter individuals from fulfilling their ethical obligations.
In conclusion, "When Not to Obey Orders" presents a comprehensive and nuanced analysis of the complex relationship between obedience and morality within the military context. While acknowledging the vital role of obedience in maintaining military effectiveness, the article powerfully argues that the obligation to uphold legality and ethics ultimately supersedes blind adherence to orders. It provides a valuable framework for navigating the challenging moral dilemmas that military personnel may encounter, emphasizing the importance of critical thinking, ethical reflection, and the courage to resist unlawful commands.
Summary of Comments ( 57 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43071286
HN users discuss the complexities of disobedience in the military, emphasizing the difficulty of discerning lawful from unlawful orders in real-time, high-stress situations. Some highlight the importance of clear, pre-established guidelines and training to equip soldiers for these scenarios. Others point out the potential consequences of disobedience, even when justified, and the burden of proof placed on the individual. The inherent power imbalance in the military structure and the potential for abuse are also touched upon, with one commenter suggesting the necessity of strong legal protections for whistleblowers and those who refuse unlawful orders. Several commenters offer personal anecdotes or historical examples to illustrate the nuances and challenges involved in military disobedience. Finally, some question the practicality of the proposed framework in the linked article, arguing that it doesn't adequately address the pressure and fear often present in combat situations.
The Hacker News post titled "When Not to Obey Orders (2019)" linking to a War on the Rocks article has generated a moderate number of comments, exploring various aspects of obeying and disobeying orders, particularly in military contexts. While not an overwhelming discussion, several comments provide interesting perspectives.
Several commenters delve into the complexities and nuances of disobedience. One points out the importance of distinguishing between illegal orders, which should never be obeyed, and bad orders, where the decision to disobey is more complex and depends on potential consequences. This commenter emphasizes the idea of "right of refusal" for unlawful orders, highlighting that this doesn't equate to a right of resistance or rebellion. Another commenter builds upon this, discussing the difficulty in identifying illegal orders in the fog of war, particularly due to the "law of armed conflict" being a multifaceted and often subjective area.
One thread discusses the practical aspects of disobedience, emphasizing the importance of documentation and reporting in cases where an order is deemed unlawful or unethical. This involves meticulously recording the order, the rationale for disobedience, and any subsequent actions taken. The thread also touches upon the potential personal risks associated with disobedience, even when justified, and the importance of understanding these risks beforehand.
Another commenter reflects on the historical precedence of military disobedience, particularly within the German military during World War II. They mention the lack of widespread resistance to obviously immoral orders, despite the known legal and ethical justifications for disobedience. This raises questions about the effectiveness of theoretical frameworks for disobedience when confronted with real-world pressures and consequences.
A shorter but thought-provoking comment questions the premise that obedience is the default expectation in military structures. It suggests that initiative and independent judgment, within certain bounds, are also crucial military virtues and that blind obedience is not the only desired characteristic.
While there are fewer comments than some more popular Hacker News posts, those present offer a substantial discussion around the complexities of obedience, disobedience, and the ethical dilemmas inherent in following orders, especially within the military context. The discussion primarily revolves around legality, practicalities, historical examples, and the balance between obedience and independent judgment.