The
Dog Days of Summer: How Cartoon Canines Clarify Civ-Mil Relations
by
LTC
Andrew Whiskeyman
In
the Republic, Plato described the
proper role of the military in society. He understood that as guardians of the
republic, they should be set apart: living, learning, mating, and thriving amongst
themselves. He thought “they ought to be
dangerous to their enemies, and gentle to their friends; if not, they will
destroy themselves without waiting for their enemies to destroy them.” In this respect he likened them to dogs that
are loyal to their masters and ferociously aggressive against outsiders.
Plato’s dog metaphor, while an interesting literary device, is also a useful
heuristic for exploring modern civ-mil relations’ theories. In fact, cartoon dogs are particularly useful
given their anthropomorphized features, and their archetypal characteristics. Starting
with Plato as the standard and ending with a recommended American ideal, this
essay will pick the perfect pets to explicate four modern civ-mil theorists: Samuel
Huntington, Morris Janowitz, Peter Feaver, and Eliot Cohen. We begin with Plato and Mr. Peabody.
Mr.
Peabody is the adopted father of the orphan Sherman, taking care of him when he
is unable to care for himself. Mr.
Peabody saves him from bullies in the first episode, and thereafter repeatedly
keeps him out of trouble. Mr. Peabody is superior to Sherman in everyway –
educating him and creating an exterior safety net to prevent Sherman from
hurting himself. Yet, Mr. Peabody never
takes advantage of Sherman. In fact, he
seeks to ensure that Sherman leads a healthy, fulfilled life. Despite his superior nature, he serves
Sherman. Had Plato lived in the 1960s he
would have put posters of Mr. Peabody on his walls.
In
the case of Huntington, Nana from Peter
Pan is the best dog. She is hired as
a nurse/nanny by George and Mary Darling, and tasked with looking after their
children Wendy, John, and Michael. She takes to her tasks with professionalism
and limited interference from the parents.
Nana’s relationship with the Darling parents exemplifies the epitome of Huntington’s
objective civilian control. Nana is a
professional who obeys her civilian masters, but her masters do not interfere once
they have given her a task. Were Nana a
real dog, one could imagine Huntington hiring her to care for his own children
Nicholas and Timothy.
Turning
the channel, one hears the plaintive wail of Shaggy asking, “Scooby Doo, Where
Are You?” Luckily
for Shaggy’s sake, Scooby is in the midst of Morris Janowitz’s theory, which is
the anti-thesis of both Huntington and Plato. Janowitz envisaged a constabulary
concept in which the military officer becomes more like a police officer,
taking on more of society’s values. He
does not see the military as separate from society, but very much a part of its
social fabric. The dog, in this case, would sit at table and be required to use
a napkin. Sounds like a job for Scooby-Doo! He is the consummate constabulary dog
mentioned in Janowitz. He has taken on society’s
characteristics -- eating snacks like Shaggy, speaking a similar language
(albeit butchering the “R” sound), and assisting with crime fighting. Scooby
rides around in the "Mystery Machine” with Fred, Shaggy, Daphne and Velma,
and shares their values and vulnerabilities.
For Feaver, who utilizes
principal-agent theory to explore the nature of civ/mil relations, Dogbert is
the ideal specimen for explaining the principal-agent tension explored by
Feaver. Dogbert works sometimes and shirks sometimes. Without a mechanism in place for monitoring
and punishing him, Dilbert is not able to effectively manage his pet. "There's
no explanation of why Dogbert chooses to live with Dilbert, except that he
finds him amusing. Once in a great while we'll see some glimpses of affection.
And if Dilbert gets in deep trouble we can count on Dogbert to bail him
out." This
is the crux of the issue for Feaver.
Without safeguards and control mechanisms, the military may run amok.
Eliot
Cohen’s “unequal dialogue” immediately brings to mind the relationship of Odie
and Garfield.
Professor Cohen advocated an aggressive and sometimes intrusive role for
civilian leaders in the planning and conduct of war – as does Garfield in the
life of Odie, who needs constant supervision in order to properly be focused.
Odie is not stupid; in fact he is quite intelligent. In several strips, Odie is
seen to have a superior intellect. He is
completely misguided, however, and without the close control of Garfield would
likely be incapable of cogent decisions. Cohen sees that civilians must meddle
in the affairs of generals to ensure that proper strategic decisions are made –
and Garfield would agree.
While
each of these authors disagree on the best model to explain the nature of U.S.
civ-mil relations, they do agree on the fact that civilians are in control. The
question is not whether civilians should run the military – that is a settled
issue in the United States. American Soldiers do not have the right to publically
protest, or to lobby congress or to conduct a coup. George
Washington cemented that sentiment when facing down a potential mutiny over pay
stated, “Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for I have not
only grown gray but almost blind in the service of my country.” In the American model concentration of power
is to be avoided. That brings us to our last dog. The perfect dog. The one that
epitomizes how things in America ought to be.
Snoopy.
He
is the perfect dog to explicate how the American system ought to work. Snoopy is completely dependent on Charlie
Brown for supper. He listens to Charlie,
yet does not sit and wait for orders.
Snoopy is an active agent who uses the mission command to protect not
only Charlie Brown, but also his sister Sally and their closest friends. Snoopy is always searching, fighting,
cajoling, or informing the situation. He is simultaneously separate from the
group and yet very much included and participatory. He acts human when necessary – when kissing Lucy
or battling the Red Baron, but does not speak the same way Scooby does. He is neither superior nor set apart, yet he
is still in a special class. He is his
own dog, who understands his role, serves his master loyally, and yet is able
to fend for himself and take initiative when require.
Snoopy
possesses the “two qualities [which] are indispensable: first, an intellect that, even in the darkest hour, retains some
glimmerings of the inner light which leads to truth; and second, the courage to
follow this faint light whenever it may lead.” Snoopy is the American ideal and our
proto-typical example because he embodies that keystone characteristic: coup d’oeil.
