Military Review English Edition March-April 2014 | Page 58

If any curriculum should include ethics, it is
that of the senior U.S. and partner-nation military
leaders attending the SSCs. Given the current environment of persistent conflict and ever-increasing
lethality, and the security forces deployed to defend
against it, a strong foundation in ethics is essential.
Moreover, the unique reach of SSC programs to
senior military leaders of the United States and
its international partners allows those leaders to
communicate with the policy makers of their home
countries and build trust through mutual understanding of ethical conduct.2

Foundational Arguments
Tension exists between the efficient accomplishment of missions and conformity with fundamental
social values, and between personal morality and
that of the military profession. What is the “right”
thing to do? Ethics mediates this constant tension;
choices often must be made between imperfect
solutions when there is no time for the luxury of
reflection. Ethics education edifies soldiers (soldier,
in this discussion, refers to all military personnel)
who are not ethics specialists, inducing them to
develop professionalism, self-control, and “moral
intuition.”3
Individual leaders exercise discretionary judgment many times a day, making decisions requiring
high moral distinction. Overcoming the fear to act,
making ethical decisions, and having the internal
fortitude to take action decisively count when the
everyday activity of the military profession wields
the power of life and death. It follows that the moral
character of individual students requires advancement during their professional development at
SSCs so they develop the capability to act ethically
when events demand.4 Moving moral sensitivity to
the point where the individual leader possesses the
courage to act upon it is peremptory.5 This calls for
the enhancement of the leader’s “self-sustaining
capacity to be a moral actor [even] in the absence of
social sanctions or reinforcements.”6 The objective
of the SSCs is to influence students to internalize
ethics so they wield their ordained power in a legal
and ethical manner.
British statesman and writer John Morley said,
“No man can climb out beyond the limitations of
his own character.”7 The demand therefore follows
for forearming students with a predisposition for
56

ethical decision making by enhancing their ability to recognize and process ethical dilemmas and
execute prudent behavior in response to them.8 The
development of ethical habits of mind is essential to
equip the individual leader to react professionally
to rapidly changing technology and tactics and to
foster trust within military organizations and alliances with partner forces.9 Ethics is a cornerstone of
honorable service and esprit de corps, and a defense
against brutalization.10

Ethics Educates the “Why”
Ethics provides the essential “why,” the sense, to
our rules. Understanding why provides the motivation to adopt rules, including those that guide ethical direction. Ethics education introduces students
to potential issues, alerts them to issues they may
not have considered, and provides direction as to
how issues should be confronted. While it cannot
present all possibilities, ethics education offers a
methodology for dealing with ethical challenges
when encountered. The more leaders understand,
the more they integrate teachings into their own
self-guidance system and avoid the mistakes of
others. An ethical foundation supports risk management, so critical to both the exercise of foreign
policy and effective prosecution of missions.
To provide ethics education is to appreciate that
the behavior of soldiers begins with the environment created by their leaders. There is no better way
to inculcate ethics in organizations than through the
education of their leaders. Even their minor decisions are closely observed and treated as precedent,
reverberating down the chain of command. In military organizations in particular, the more senior the
commander, the wider the influence exerted and
its resulting perversion, should the influence be
flawed. Military authority exerts tremendous power
on an individual’s ethical perception, which often
propagates the lure of being close to power. There
is the tendency to get into lock-step with what the
inner circle, the focus of power, is doing, for the
psychological need to become part of the in-group
and also for career advancement.11 This is not just
the action of a young officer scrambling for recognition, but also senior military officers who seek the
recogniti ۈو