The army is a branch of service whose main purpose is to protect the territorial independence of any country.1 Most military personnel across the world must adhere to various core values such as loyalty, honor, respect and selfless service to the citizens and the country.2 In executing its functions, the army strives to maintain professionalism and preciseness. This paper seeks to provide reasons which prove why the US military has and still maintains its professionalism in undertaking its duty by looking at various reasons.
First, the army maintains its professionalism through its doctrine of discretional judgment. Generally, efficiency is the primary principle that drives the military which protects the country. However, building a strong relationship between the army personnel and their clients requires physical presence for survival and success, especially in the field. In order for this to happen there must be professional effectiveness.3
Second, the army upholds it professionalism through the protection and protection of the constitutional order. It achieves this by performing its missions, fulfilling its duties, and ensuring the members portray themselves in a way equal to their professional status.4 The soldiers practice making the right choices and actions, thus enabling them to act ethically as reliable professionals.5 To cement their honor, the army professionals take an oath where they declare to support and defend their country’s constitution against all enemies through faith and allegiance.
Third, the army sustains its military professionalism in its effort of improving professional performance and success. Its members take years of research and experience in various fields to apply knowledge in the execution of numerous missions. The army career involves the development and enhancement of skillful expertise.6 It also entails training the army towards the achievement of moral values, enabling them to abide by the law, beliefs, and norms during their missions.7 The other task entails the application of the armed force expertise. In this task, the soldiers are trained to recognize and apply the principles of mission command; thereby unconditionally devoting their best efforts to fulfill their tasks.8 The last component in this career is the certification of the soldiers as professionals. The accreditation process in the military primarily serves two significant purposes; to prove the attainment of all the required qualifications and motivate military personnel to have a sense achievement during training.9
However, several scholars argue that the army lacks some qualities to meet the requirements of a professional body because of its bureaucratic nature. By handling its soldiers as bureaucrats instead of specialists, the organization appears identical to an extensive government system.10 Apart from that, underfunding of the defense department also undermines the army profession.11 Finally, the military lacks the right channel to address the commonly known crime, sexual harassment, especially from its seniors.
In conclusion, this paper has provided three reasons to prove why the military still maintains a professional image in the public. For the military to uphold its professionalism, it incorporates the use of proper moral standards and critical thinking in its trainings. The military adheres to all its expertise to gain the trust of citizens in their services. To enhance the military professionalism, the government needs to increase funding and punish sexual harassers within their personnel.
Böhmelt, Tobias, Abel Escribà-Folch, and Ulrich Pilster. “Pitfalls of Professionalism? Military Academies and Coup Risk.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 63, no. 5 (2019): 1111–39. Web.
Brooks, Risa. “Paradoxes of Professionalism: Rethinking Civil-Military Relations in the United States.” International Security 44, no. 4 (2020): 7–44. .
Snider, Don M. “Renewing the Motivational Power of the Army’s Professional Ethic.” Parameters 44, no. 3 (2014): 7–12.
Travis, Donald S. “Discovering the Fault Lines in American Civil–Military Relations.” Armed Forces & Society 44, no. 4 (2018): 731–47. Web.
United States Government US Army. Army Doctrine Reference Publication ADRP 1 The Army Profession June 2015. Army Publishing Directorate, 2015.
- United States Government US Army. Army Doctrine Reference Publication ADRP 1 The Army Profession 2015. Army Publishing Directorate, 2015.
- Risa Brooks, “Paradoxes of Professionalism: Rethinking Civil-Military Relations in the United States,” International Security 44, no. 4 (2020): 10. Web.
- Don M. Snider, “Renewing the Motivational Power of the Army’s Professional Ethic,” Parameters 44, no. 3 (2014): 11. Web.
- Donald S. Travis, “Discovering the Fault Lines in American Civil–Military Relations,” Armed Forces & Society 44, no. 4 (2018): 745. Web.
- Tobias Böhmelt, Abel Escribà-Folch, and Ulrich Pilster, “Pitfalls of Professionalism? Military Academies and Coup Risk,” Journal of Conflict Resolution 63, no. 5. 2019. Web.
- Ibid 13
- Ibid 9.
- Ibid 21
- Böhmelt, Escribà-Folch, and Pilster, “Pitfalls of Professionalism?”
- Snider, “Renewing the Motivational Power of the Army’s Professional Ethic.”
- Brooks, “Paradoxes of Professionalism.”