The horrific scenes from #Bucha reinforce the contents of this piece. ICC & others will investigate, but Russian commanders were negligent, ethically corrupt & criminal. Bucha shows the Russian Army is not ‘professional’ nor do they deserve the term ‘soldiers’.$1:
The Russian military transformation since 2008 has clearly not transformed anything at a human level. Beneath the shine of fancy equipment and clever slogans (like ‘active defence’) lies a rotten core of a sloppy and corrupt Russian military culture.But, as the saying goes, fish rot from the head. If the military serves a self-interested class of corrupt authoritarians, why would it’s military culture be any different?
This highlights two issues for me (although this invasion will be studied for years and many other areas of study will emerge).
First, the study of civil-military relations matters. It is important that democracies have a theory of how military organisations interact with elected governments and with the people they defend. See the work by @EliotACohen, @RisaBrooks12 and others.
This interaction should focus on constitutionally enshrined civil primacy of the military, and the military being representative of the people and their values.
This theory of civil military relations will vary slightly from country to country, and there is more to it than I can put in one thread. But each nation will need their own that they can educate their military (as well as politicians, public servants and citizens) about.
The second issue is that military institutions must see themselves as part of the profession of arms. Only this mindset can prepare large organisations, the sole elements of society legally able to kill, maim and destroy at scale, for the responsible use of those powers.
Several times in my last appointment, I had senior officers discourage to me the use of the term ‘profession of arms’ as ‘antiquated’, ‘something from WW1’ or ‘just an army thing’. Acting professionally and ethically is not antiquated. And never has been.
Understanding that one is part of the profession of arms imposes the responsibility to lead people ethically and with purpose, to use force responsibly, to protect those who can’t protect themselves, and live the values of the society they serve.
All of these characteristics are conspicuously absent from the Russian military, given its performance over the past 6 weeks. They lack the vital mindset of a professional, which is very clear from the appalling leadership and behaviour on display throughout their campaign.
Sorry to preach - but this is a topic I have dedicated my professional life to. I loved being a member of the profession of arms because it imposes a professional discipline that made us better soldiers, better citizens and better servants of our nation.
The Russo-Ukraine War provides us with the impetus to once again look at ourselves in Western military organisations to ensure we have the best ‘professional military ethic’ as a foundation for military effectiveness at the tactical, operational & strategic levels.
Because, at heart, the best and most successful military forces are built on smart, connected, ethical and well-led humans. This is the core of military advantage in this century, and every other age.
CKA Moderator 
CKA Moderator 
