LTG (Ret) Ricardo S. Sanchez Address, Washington
LTG (Ret) Ricardo S. Sanchez
Military Reporters And
Editors Address Washington D.C.
12 October 2007
Transcript: LTG (Ret) Ricardo S. Sanchez Military Reporters And Editors Address, Washington D.C.
Some of you may not believe this but I am glad
to be here. When sig asked me if I would consider addressing
you there was no doubt that I should come into the lion's
den. This was important because I have firmly believed since
desert shield that it is necessary for the strength of our
democracy that the military and the press corps maintain a
strong, mutually respectful and enabling relationship. This
continues to be problematic for our country, especially
during times of war. One of the greatest military
correspondents of our time, Joe Galloway, made me a believer
when he joined the 24th Infantry Division during Desert
Storm.
Today, I will attempt to do two things -
first I will give you my assessment of the military and
press relationship and then I will provide you some thoughts
on the current state of our war effort.
As all of
you know I have a wide range of relationships and
experiences with our nation's military writers and
editors. There are some in your ranks who I consider to be
the epitome of journalistic professionalism - Joe Galloway,
Thom shaker, sig Christensen, and john burns immediately
come to mind. They exemplify what America should demand of
our journalists - tough reporting that relies upon
integrity, objectivity and fairness to give accurate and
thorough accounts that strengthen our freedom of the press
and in turn our democracy. On the other hand, unfortunately,
I have issued ultimatums to some of you for unscrupulous
reporting that was solely focused on supporting your agenda
and preconceived notions of what our military had done. I
also refused to talk to the European stars and stripes for
the last two years of my command in Germany for their
extreme bias and single minded focus on Abu Ghraib.
Let me review some of the descriptive phrases that have
been used by some of you that have made my personal
interfaces with the press corps difficult:
-
"dictatorial and somewhat dense",
- "not a
strategic thought",
- Liar,
- "does
not get it" and
- "The most inexperienced LTG."
In some cases I have never even met you, yet you
feel qualified to make character judgments that are
communicated to the world. My experience is not unique and
we can find other examples such as the treatment of
secretary brown during Katrina. This is the worst display of
journalism imaginable by those of us that are bound by a
strict value system of selfless service, honor and
integrity.
Almost invariably, my perception is that the sensationalistic value of these assessments is what provided the edge that you seek for self aggrandizement or to advance your individual quest for getting on the front page with your stories! As I understand it, your measure of worth is how many front page stories you have written and unfortunately some of you will compromise your integrity and display questionable ethics as you seek to keep America informed.
This is much like the intelligence analysts
whose effectiveness was measured by the number of
intelligence reports he produced. For some, it seems that as
long as you get a front page story there is little or no
regard for the "collateral damage" you will cause. Personal
reputations have no value and you report with total impunity
and are rarely held accountable for unethical conduct.
Given the near instantaneous
ability to report actions on the ground, the responsibility
to accurately and truthfully report takes on an
unprecedented importance. The speculative and often
uninformed initial reporting that characterizes our media
appears to be rapidly becoming the standard of the
industry. An Arab proverb states - "four things come not
back: the spoken word, the spent arrow, the past, the
neglected opportunity." Once reported, your assessments
become conventional wisdom and nearly impossible to
change.
Other major challenges are your
willingness to be manipulated by "high level officials" who
leak stories and by lawyers who use hyperbole to strengthen
their arguments. Your unwillingness to accurately and
prominently correct your mistakes and your agenda driven
biases contribute to this corrosive environment. All of
these challenges combined create a media environment that
does a tremendous disservice to America.
Over the
course of this war tactically insignificant events have
become strategic defeats for America because of the
tremendous power and impact of the media and by extension
you the journalist. In many cases the media has unjustly
destroyed the individual reputations and careers of those
involved. We realize that because of the near real time
reporting environment that you face it is difficult to
report accurately. In my business one of our fundamental
truths is that "the first report is always wrong."
unfortunately, in your business "the first report" gives
Americans who rely on the snippets of CNN, if you will,
their "truths" and perspectives on an issue.
As
a corollary to this deadline driven need to publish "initial
impressions or observations" versus objective facts there is
an additional challenge for us who are the subject of your
reporting. When you assume that you are correct and on the
moral high ground on a story because we have not respond to
questions you provided is the ultimate arrogance and
distortion of ethics.
One of your highly respected
fellow journalists once told me that there are some amongst
you who "feed from a pig's trough." if that is who I am
dealing with then I will never respond otherwise we will
both get dirty and the pig will love it. This does not mean
that your story is accurate.
I do not
believe that this is what our forefathers intended. The code
of ethics for the Society of Professional Journalists
states:
...public enlightenment is the forerunner
of justice and the foundation of democracy. The duty of the
journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and
providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and
issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and
specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and
honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a
journalist's credibility.
The basic ethics of a
journalist that calls for:
1. Seeking truth,
2.
Providing fair and comprehensive account of events and
issues
3. Thoroughness and honesty
All are
victims of the massive agenda driven competition for
economic or political supremacy. The death knell of your
ethics has been enabled by your parent organizations who
have chosen to align themselves with political agendas. What
is clear to me is that you are perpetuating the corrosive
partisan politics that is destroying our country and killing
our service members who are at war.
My assessment is
that your profession, to some extent, has strayed from these
ethical standards and allowed external agendas to manipulate
what the American public sees on TV, what they read in our
newspapers and what they see on the web. For some of you,
just like some of our politicians, the truth is of little to
no value if it does not fit your own preconceived notions,
biases and agendas.
It is astounding to me when I
hear the vehement disagreement with the military's forays
into information operations that seek to disseminate the
truth and inform the Iraqi people in order to counter our
enemy's blatant propaganda. As I assess various media
entities, some are unquestionably engaged in political
propaganda that is uncontrolled.
There is no
question in my mind that the strength our democracy and our
freedoms remain linked to your ability to exercise freedom
of the press - I adamantly support this basic foundation of
our democracy and completely supported the embedding of
media into our formations up until my last day in uniform.
The issue is one of maintaining professional ethics and
standards from within your institution.
Military
leaders must accept that these injustices will happen and
whether they like what you print or not they must deal with
you and enable you, if you are an ethical journalist.
Finally, I will leave this subject with a question that
we must ask ourselves--who is responsible for maintaining
the ethical standards of the profession in order to ensure
that our democracy does not continue to be threatened by
this dangerous shift away from your sacred duty of public
enlightenment?
Let me now transition to our
current national security condition.
As we all
know war is an extension of politics and when a nation goes
to war it must bring to bear all elements of power in order
to win. Warfighting is not solely the responsibility of the
military commander unless he has been given the
responsibility and resources to synchronize the political,
economic and informational power of the nation. So who is
responsible for developing the grand strategy that will
allow America to emerge victorious from this generational
struggle against extremism?
After more than four years of fighting, America continues its desperate struggle in Iraq without any concerted effort to devise a strategy that will achieve "victory" in that war torn country or in the greater conflict against extremism. From a catastrophically flawed, unrealistically optimistic war plan to the administration's latest "surge" strategy, this administration has failed to employ and synchronize its political, economic and military power.
The latest "revised strategy" is a desperate
attempt by an administration that has not accepted the
political and economic realities of this war and they have
definitely not communicated that reality to the American
people. An even worse and more disturbing assessment is that
America can not achieve the political consensus necessary to
devise a grand strategy that will synchronize and commit our
national power to achieve victory in Iraq. Some of you have
heard me talk about our nation's crisis in leadership. Let
me elaborate.
While the politicians espouse their
rhetoric designed to preserve their reputations and their
political power -our soldiers die! Our national leadership
ignored the lessons of WWII as we entered into this war and
to this day continue to believe that victory can be achieved
through the application of military power alone. Our
forefathers understood that tremendous economic and
political capacity had to be mobilized, synchronized and
applied if we were to achieve victory in a global war. That
has been and continues to be the key to victory in Iraq.
Continued manipulations and adjustments to our military strategy will not achieve victory. The best we can do with this flawed approach is stave off defeat. The Administration, Congress and the entire interagency, especially the Department of State, must shoulder the responsibility for this catastrophic failure and the American people must hold them accountable.
There has
been a glaring, unfortunate, display of incompetent
strategic leadership within our national leaders. As a
Japanese proverb says, "action without vision is a
nightmare." There is no question that America is living a
nightmare with no end in sight.
Since 2003, the
politics of war have been characterized by partisanship as
the republican and democratic parties struggled for power in
Washington. National efforts to date have been corrupted by
partisan politics that have prevented us from devising
effective, executable, supportable solutions. At times,
these partisan struggles have led to political decisions
that endangered the lives of our sons and daughters on the
battlefield.
The unmistakable message was that political
power had greater priority than our national security
objectives. Overcoming this strategic failure is the first
step toward achieving victory in Iraq - without bipartisan
cooperation we are doomed to fail. There is nothing going on
today in Washington that would give us hope.
If
we succeed in crafting a bipartisan strategy for victory,
then America must hold all national agencies accountable for
developing and executing the political and economic
initiatives that will bring about stability, security,
political and economic hope for all Iraqis. That has not
been successful to date.
Congress must shoulder a
significant responsibility for this failure since there has
been no focused oversight of the nation's political and
economic initiatives in this war. Exhortations,
encouragements, investigations, studies and discussions will
not produce success -this appears to be the nation's only
alternative since the transfer of sovereignty. Our continued
neglect will only extend the conflict. America's dilemma is
that we no longer control the ability to directly influence
the Iraqi institutions. The sovereign Iraqi government must
be cooperative in these long term efforts. That is not
likely at the levels necessary in the near term.
Our commanders on the ground will continue to make
progress and provide time for the development of a grand
strategy. That will be wasted effort as we have seen
repeatedly since 2003. In the mean time our soldiers,
sailors, airmen and marines will continue to die.
Since the start of this war, America's leadership
has known that our military alone could not achieve victory
in Iraq. Starting in July 2003, the message repeatedly
communicated to Washington by military commanders on the
ground was that the military alone could never achieve
"victory" in Iraq.
Our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines were destined to endure decades of fighting and killing people without the focused, synchronized application of all elements of national power. This was a necessary condition to stabilize Iraq. Any sequential solutions would lead to a prolonged conflict and increased resistance. By neglect and incompetence at the national security council level, that is the path our political leaders chose and now America, more precisely the American military, finds itself in an intractable situation.
Clearly, mistakes have been
made by the American military in its application of power
but even its greatest failures in this war can be linked to
America's lack of commitment, priority and moral courage in
this war effort. Without the sacrifices of our magnificent
young men and women in uniform, Iraq would be chaotic well
beyond anything experienced to date.
What America
must accept as a reality at this point in the war is that
our army and marine corps are struggling with the deployment
schedules. What is clear is that the deployment cycles of
our formations has been totally disrupted, the resourcing
and training challenges are significant and America's
ability to sustain a force level of 150,000(+) is
nonexistent without drastic measures that have been
politically unacceptable to date. The drawdown of the surge
to pre-surge levels was never a question. America must
understand that it will take the army at least a decade to
fix the damage that has been done to its full spectrum
readiness. The president's recent statement to America that
he will listen to military commanders is a matter of
political expediency.
Our army and Marine Corps
will execute as directed, perform magnificently and never
complain-that is the ethic of our warriors and that is what
America expects of them. They will not disappoint us. But
America must know the pressures that are being placed on our
military institutions as we fight this war. All Americans
must demand that these deploying formations are properly
resourced, properly trained and we must never allow
America's support for the soldier to falter. A critical,
objective assessment of our nation's ability to execute our
national security strategy must be conducted. If we are
objective and honest, the results will be surprising to all
Americans. There is unacceptable strategic risk.
America has no choice but to continue our efforts in
Iraq. A precipitous withdrawal will unquestionably lead to
chaos that would endanger the stability of the greater
Middle East. If this occurs it would have significant
adverse effects on the international community. Coalition
and American force presence will be required at some level
for the foreseeable future. Given the lack of a grand
strategy we must move rapidly to minimize that force
presence and allow the Iraqis maximum ability to exercise
their sovereignty in achieving a solution.
At no
time in America's history has there been a greater need for
bipartisan cooperation. The threat of extremism is real and
demands unified action at the same levels demonstrated by
our forefathers during World War I and World War II. America
has failed to date.
This endeavor has further
been hampered by a coalition effort that can be
characterized as hasty, un-resourced and often uncoordinated
and unmanaged. Desperately needed, but essentially
ignored, were the political and economic coalitions that
were the key to victory and stability in the immediate
aftermath of the conventional war. The military coalition
which was hastily put together in the summer of 2003 was
problematic given the multitude of national caveats,
inadequate rules of engagement and other restrictions on the
forces deployed. Even so, the military coalition was the
most extensive, productive and effective deployment of
forces in decades. Today, we continue our inept coalition
management efforts and, in fact, we are facing ever
decreasing troop commitments by our military coalition
partners. America's "revised" strategy does not address
coalition initiatives and challenges. We cannot afford to
continue this struggle without the support of our coalition
partners across all elements of national power.
Without the political and economic elements of power
complementing the tremendous efforts of our military,
America is assured of failure. We continue on that path.
America's political leadership must come together and
develop a bipartisan grand strategy to achieve victory in
this conflict. The simultaneous application of our
political, economic, information and military elements of
power is the only course of action that will provide a
chance of success.
Achieving unity of effort in Iraq has been elusive to date primarily because there is no entity that has the authority to direct action by our interagency. Our national security council has been a catastrophic failure. Furthermore, America's ability to hold the interagency accountable for their failures in this war is non-existent. This must change.
As a nation we must recognize that the enemy we face is committed to destroying our way of life. This enemy is arguably more dangerous than any threat we faced in the twentieth century. Our political leaders must place national security objectives above partisan politics, demand interagency unity of effort, and never again commit America to war without a grand strategy that embraces the basic tenets of the Powell Doctrine. It seems that congress recognizes that the military cannot achieve victory alone in this war. Yet they continue to demand victory from our military.
Who will demand
accountability for the failure of our national political
leaders involved in the management this war? They have
unquestionably been derelict in the performance of their
duty. In my profession, these types of leaders would
immediately be relieved or court-martialed.
America has sent our soldiers off to war and they must
be supported at all costs until we achieve victory or until
our political leaders decide to bring them home. Our
political and military leaders owe the soldier on the
battlefield the strategy, the policies and the resources to
win once committed to war. America has not been fully
committed to win this war. As the military commanders on the
ground have stated since the summer of 2003, the U.S.
military alone cannot win this war.
America must mobilize the interagency and the political and economic elements of power, which have been abject failures to date, in order to achieve victory. Our nation has not focused on the greatest challenge of our lifetime. The political and economic elements of power must get beyond the politics to ensure the survival of America. Partisan politics have hindered this war effort and America should not accept this. America must demand a unified national strategy that goes well beyond partisan politics and places the common good above all else.
Too often our politicians have chosen loyalty to their
political party above loyalty to the constitution because of
their lust for power. Our politicians must remember their
oath of office and recommit themselves to serving our nation
and not their own self-interests or political party. The
security of America is at stake and we can accept nothing
less. Anything short of this is unquestionably dereliction
of duty.
These are fairly harsh assessments of
the military and press relationship and the status of our
war effort. I remain optimistic and committed to the
enabling of media operations under the toughest of
conditions in order to keep the world and the American
people informed. Our military must embrace you for the sake
our democracy but you owe them ethical journalism.
Thank you for this opportunity.
May God bless
you and may God bless America.
Praise be to the Lord my
rock who trains my fingers for battle and my hands for war.
Thank you.
ENDS
More: Latest World News | Top World News | World Digest | Archives