Air University Review, July-August 1985
I HAVE noted the increased content of "Commentary" in recent issues of the Air University Review, and I think that perhaps there is yet hope for the Review to become a more challenging journal. I have worked rather closely with some of the past editors and tried to push for years for greater reader discussion and even encouragement of disagreement with the official Air Force party line. Apparently there wasn't generally enough correspondence to warrant the commentary as it seems to be developing now.
The March-April issue "Commentary" is of particular interest. I am a charter and life member of the Air Force Association and, a long-time member of the U.S. Naval Institute. Both, as you well know,. publish a journal. I find both of interest, but I read more of the USNI Proceedings because more of its content is thought-provoking rather than expansion of stated official policy. Unfortunately, in the past, I could not say the same for the Air University Review if we included it in the comparison. I believe that reasoned argument, conjecture, and disagreement with official stance are both desirable and needed. Yet, too often in the past, the U.S. Air Force seems to have felt 180 degrees differently. At least, the two major journals (Air Force and Air University Review) have rarely included the conjectural or the argumentative and have often discouraged discussion by "it's policy" control.
The recent comments about absence of history in most Air Force military publications and education/training programs are certainly concurred with. I pushed for more history in the programs of AFIT's School of Systems and Logistics with little success. Many people will readily agree with a statement that more history awareness is needed, but those same people will stiffly resist providing the time or resources for that additional history to be accommodated. To say that those who do not know history are condemned to repeat it does little to shake loose either the time or the resources to provide a better Air Force military history background for military and civilian students. When it is given some little time, the general tendency is to fill that time with the glamorous stories of air-to-air combat or to show films of the large bombing raids of World War II, Korea, or Vietnam. Little is done to present the history of military planning and preparation for war. We made many great mistakes in World War II, for example, along with many great gains in producing and delivering the weaponry of our U.S. forces and the forces of our allies. Yet, today's planners and leaders know little of the problems and faults of those days, and, perhaps because of that lack of knowledge, we can sense some repetition occurring. Do we see isolationism creeping back into Air Force thinking today? Do we see parochialism showing its face in the Air Force today? Do we see "we'll take care of that when it comes" becoming a major element of Air Force planning?
I hate to sound excessively harsh, but I fear that we are developing Air Force officers now who are excellent technicians but not military officers. Many of them seem today to identify more with their specialty than with the Air Force. In other words, they think of themselves as pilots, or information systems managers, or whatever, rather than as Air Force military officers. They concentrate on their professional disciplines and become myopic in their views of the world. We are creating a host of competent specialists but very few military experts, yet, should that dreaded balloon go up, it will be the military expert whom we shall most urgently need. I worry about a military organization that does little to imbue in its members respect and feeling for the trappings of military professionalism. Where is the courtesy of the call on the commander? Where is the comradeship of the club when membership is not required and often not even encouraged? Where is the teaching of military science? Why do we push management and give only lip service to leadership? Why do we not insist that the Air Force Academy, ROTC, and OTS provide a big bite of Air Force history and background? Why should an Air Force officer not know the names of key developers and movers of aviation history and air strategy, tactics, and logistics? Why don't we develop Air Force officers and rely on competent NCOs for technical efforts? Why do we expect so many of our officers to be "do-ers" rather than leaders of people?
Because constructive criticism is essential to any effective organization, I hope that you continue to print reader responses in "Commentary" which reflect honest views and that you do more to obtain and publish articles of conjecture, articles of history, and articles that may disagree with existing Air Force policy. We would certainly hope that the Air Force is strong enough to stand questioning by its members.
Fairborn, Ohio
Jerome Peppers is Professor Emeritus at the Air Force Institute of Technology.
Disclaimer
The conclusions and opinions expressed in this document are those of the author cultivated in the freedom of expression, academic environment of Air University. They do not reflect the official position of the U.S. Government, Department of Defense, the United States Air Force or the Air University.
Air & Space Power Home Page | Feedback? Email the Editor