I have harped on this subject in previous blogs, that Presidents sometimes are blamed for things that really were not their doing.....sort of. The President, like all good CEOs, Generals, and Head Football Coaches, have to rely heavily on their advisors for them to make proper decisions. The football coaches have assistant coaches and coordinators that give them advice, the generals have colonels and majors to give them advice, or information that allow them to make the right decisions. The CEO of a large corporation is no different, that is why a good football coach has to be like a CEO and vice versa!
Dwight D. Eisenhower was perhaps less appreciated President that we have had in the modern era. He was, in the opinion some historians, a lot better than the news media generally gave him credit. Some of his detractors portrayed him as a "do-nothing" sort of a President who spent most of his time on the golf course and let his cabinet and staff run the country. Well.....he did, sort of. That is because he was an excellent leader, a CEO who knew how to lead by allowing his able staff to do the work! Ike's talent to manage a difficult group of people, people with different agendas and giant egos, was recognized early on in the war and that is why he was appointed as the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe. He was successful, perhaps more so than he is given credit, in keeping all of those generals and admirals from squabbling and concentrate on winning the war.
Ike carried over this skill to civilian life and as President when he was elected in 1953. He ended the war in Korea, without giving up the store! No, he was not able to attain complete victory. But he recognized immediately that there was no possibility to accomplish that goal without risking a Third World War, and he knew that was not an option. So he ended the war the best way that he could, without betraying our ally, South Korea. He also refused to involve us in Indochina (Vietnam) when the French were fighting there. He agreed to provide air transport for supplies and French paratroops, but refused to send bombers as French requested. After the French lost and the country was divided, Ike allowed "advisors" to be sent to South Vietnam, but only a very small contingent. Other than a very small commitment of Army Special Forces, which he knew he could pull out any time without problems, there was no U.S. commitment. At that time, most in America did not even know that we had troops in Indochina!
Despite dire warnings from some about the so-called "domino theory" of communist take-over of the world, Ike refused to commit U.S. troops in Vietnam. He firmly believed that a ground war with U.S. commitment such as the one that took place in Korea would end badly. As long as he was the President, there would be no U.S. commitment of large scale troops in any war in Asia. Ike was adamant about his belief in staying out of a war in Asia. On several occasions, going back as far as his time as Supreme Allied Commander in Europe during World War Two, Ike was heard to say that what he feared most was the influence and control of government by the military industrial complex, the large business interests that profit from making war material. During his time as President he was heard again to repeat this sentiment, and of course, he was constantly approached and badgered by the military industrial complex to make political decisions that would favor their cause, i.e., involve U.S. in wars!
Being a politician that he was (a good General or an Admiral has to be a politician as well!) since his days as a General, Ike had to have some in his administration who were from the military industrial complex. But, they did not carry quite the clout that they would have liked and he did not allow them to sway his decision making. Ike had experience dealing with them since his time as a General. Guess what happened after Ike left the office? The much revered ("lionized" by some) JFK surrounded himself with military industrial complex interest individuals. I know JFK is considered almost a holy figure in some quarters, but, he was a human being with human failings as everyone knows, and unfortunately he listened to some of the whisperings of the military industrial complex interest groups. Our involvement in Southeast Asia escalated rapidly and would have ended up where it did even if JFK had not been assassinated in 1963. JFK had approved a coupe against the South Vietnamese President and it was carried out in the same month that JFK died! The reason? So that we could have more control over how the war was carried out! Everyone knows about the disastrous "Bay of Pigs Invasion" and subsequent several attempts to assassinate Fidel Castro, all approved by JFK! So, JFK was not above ordering assassinations and overthrowing of governments that he didn't like!
LBJ basically carried on what was handed to him. He was surrounded by "bean counters" and efficiency experts from the military industrial complex who thought they could run the war like they ran a large corporation. Crucial decisions involving the execution of the war were carried out by these "experts," some of whom had never been in a war or set foot in a battle field! It was the beginning of what was then called a "push button war," an outdated term that was considered "modern" in the 1960s! Technology is wonderful and can be a great advantage. But technology alone cannot win wars as those "experts" in the 1960s and 70s believed. So then Nixon came to power, became our next President rising from the ashes, like a bad phoenix! Remember, how poorly Nixon compared to JFK and how badly he lost! To top that off, he lost his bid for the gubernatorial seat in California. Nixon couldn't even become a governor in his home state, yet, he was able to win the Presidency of the United States! Go figure.
Nixon tried to take a page out of Ike's playbook. He immediately launched his plan to end the war in Vietnam and make peace with China. He did accomplish both goals, but unlike Ike who ended the war in Korea honorably, maintaining steadfast support of South Korea. Nixon's Vietnamization called for essentially abandonment of our allies, the South Vietnam, which we did shamefully! But that wasn't all, in order to make peace with China, he betrayed the Republic of China in Taiwan! So yes, he ended the war in Vietnam and made peace with China, but at what cost? Nixon may have very well considered those two acts as his greatest accomplishments, but others would argue that perhaps those two acts were some of the more shameful acts committed by our government! Be that as it may, that is now history, having taken place some 40 years ago! But that legacy still lingers on, and Nixon's departure from his office was inglorious and predictably appropriate! It was like a K-drama, where karma plays a very important role and all bad things come to a bad end!
We are now facing a new administration that will soon take office. Already, some of the cabinet appointments have not only raised eyebrows but some howls from the liberal section. It never ceases to amaze me how we don't seem to learn from the past. The military industrial complex appears to be alive and well, perhaps even having made substantial gains. The problem with the previous administration, according to its critics, is that it just didn't do much. There were very few changes if any, and when it came to our foreign policy, we seemed to have crawled into a rabbit hole and stayed put for eight years, only occasionally peeking out to see if the sky hadn't fallen yet. Are we finally going to be out of that rabbit hole? Or are we going to be out of the hole just in time to see the sky come crashing down, as some predict? Some of those cabinet post choices are indeed curious, to say the least. But then, they still have to be confirmed by congress, and there seems to be opposition brewing across party lines to some selections. Whatever the case may be, it certainly will be interesting to see how things develop after inauguration.
No comments:
Post a Comment