Everyday we come in contact with some of the greatest military personnel both enlisted and officer. Personnel that will display Physical Courage within a heartbeat, put themselves in harms way by taking a bullet, an IED, defend their teammates, steer an out of control aircraft and not think twice about themselves. We honor them, justifiably so, by pinning a medal to their chest for incredible acts of bravery.
Why is it that personnel find it easier to display acts of Physical Courage versus Moral Courage? We have personnel in all services that come in contact daily with people who are taking short cuts, violating standards, falsifying documents, etc. and rather than report or turn them in we turn the other way because we risk the stigma that comes along with exercising Moral Courage because our peers really don’t like snitches amongst the group? Why is that? If we are quick to honor Physical Courage with a medal, and senior leaders are serious about ridding on our services of the “toxic” leaders, or leaders who are violating our values or ethos, then maybe we should consider a decoration for Moral Courage? When someone says that exercising Physical Courage is easier then Moral Courage, maybe it’s time to continue our military transformation regarding our Moral Compass?
12 Comments on "Why is it so hard to recognize Moral Courage in the military?"
It is hard to recognize moral courage because it is hardly recognized as a positive thing. It is hard for a Soldier to display moral courage when they feel they will be ostricized. They do not want to be labeled as a “snitch”. Soldiers are always taught to do the right thing but it’s hard when the same people that are teaching this are the people who are committing immoral acts. The Soldiers see these immoral acts being committed and nothing is being done to stop it then unfortunately it becomes the norm. This corrupts the Soldier just entering the military. They are only doing what they have been taught. Maybe the Army should develop some type of incentive program or reward system to acknowledge the deserving Soldiers for choosing to display moral courage. This system would be most effective early in a Soldiers career in order to stress the importance of moral courage and to assis the Soldier realizing that it is not a bad thing to react to someone that is not doing the right thing regardless of their rank.
I’m not sure that moral courage is really that uncommon in our Army. Perhaps the reason why we do not reward examples of moral courage the same way that we do physical courage is that moral courage is an expectation of leaders and Soldiers, while acts of physical courage are rewarded because they go above and beyond what was required. One of the definitions that we learned for moral courage in L207 was, “the capacity to overcome the fear of shame and humiliation in order to admit one’s mistakes, to confess a wrong, to reject evil conformity, to denounce injustice, and also to defy immoral or imprudent orders.” I do not mean to imply that this is an easy thing to do, but as leader I expect it of my subordinates and I they should expect it of me. Another idea we discuss in L207 was that those with high levels of power, both personal and position, often find it more difficult to exercise moral courage than those with little power due to a fear of losing power. I believe that this is a true statement because leaders who admit mistakes or question an order have more to lose than a young Soldier does. I think this can be changed by establishing a command climate where honest mistakes are accepted as learning, all Soldiers are held to the same standards of conduct, and moral courage as defined above is an exectation of all Soldiers not something to be honored with an award.
Moral courage is extremely important and the author is right, something that is not proudly recognized the same as physical courage is. Perhaps a reason is because the most well-known acts of moral courage such as in exposing the 1968 My Lai Massacre or the 2006 Mahmoudiyah killings have exposed major weaknesses in Army leadership and have shed light on the dark-side of unit cohesion, both of which are bedrocks of the Army institution/profession. So to really applaud moral courage when it has at times exposed serious weaknesses in the institution’s values is a difficult thing. Yet it is something that must be done, especially as the Army looks to not only transition to a new phase and define itself as a profession, but as it seeks to maintain the trust and confidence it has been showered with by the American public for the last 10 years.
Thus now, as the Army revamps its Army Leadership manuals and seeks to more strongly instill the values of empathy, trust and ethics in its leadership doctrine, now is the time for the Army to walk the walk and demonstrate that moral courage is just as important as physical courage. Only when the Army’s actions reflect its values, will the Army ever achieve its aim of being considered an Army Profession.
Ultimately, acts of moral courage may in reality never be considered for awards or certificates, but they can certainly be honored and applauded as acts of ‘true’ leadership and courage, following the doctrine of the world’s premier fighting force.
MAJ Carmen Iglesias
ILE 13-01
The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government.
Personal courage is the Army value that encompasses physical and moral courage. While the military frequently rewards acts of physical courage demonstrations of moral courage are rarely celebrated. There are numerous incidents where those who dared to demonstrate moral courage by taking a stand were ostracized rather than praised. The easier response in most cases is to cave to the pressure and look the other way rather than “rock the boat”. Some would equate reporting a moral infraction to “snitching”. All too often those who demonstrate moral courage become targets of reprisal. If we are an Army of values and principles, it is imperative that we practice what we preach and creating an environment that encourages open and honest communication. In fact, effective communication is the cornerstone for building and maintaining moral character within an organization.
During basic training drill sergeants stress the importance of moral courage both as an individual as well as a military professional. Defining acceptable and unacceptable behavior adds to a trainee’s moral foundation and shapes their understanding of the Army’s expectation of its leaders. While upholding moral standards resonates in theory all too often leaders failed to encourage, recognize and reward acts of moral courage. When some leaders overlook moral infractions to focus wholly on mission completion they send a message that some immoral behavior is acceptable. However, taking this stand could prove detrimental as minor infractions could potentially lead to larger ones. Although the success of the mission is paramount the way in which victory is won is arguably more important. If troops are permitted to violate rules and participate in unethical behavior without recourse a permissive culture will develop that could lead to a larger moral crisis. In the long run it is beneficial to the unit if soldiers feel comfortable to coach and correct one another when issues arise to maintain good order and discipline. Creating an organizational structure that encourages and values moral courage improves transparency and builds trust.
Moral courage must be demonstrated at every level in order to cultivate a moral environment. Standards and rules are meant to be followed and Soldiers need to understand that there are consequences for moral lapses. Although missteps will be made it is important that we acknowledge and correct inappropriate behavior while retaining a learning environment. As the Army continues to evolve as an institution it is up to leaders at every level to encourage, support and celebrate acts of moral courage as they continue to steward the profession.
This blog on moral courage is interesting. The number of reports about how rare moral courage is within our Army is very disturbing considering, we are required to “self-police” our profession. Going against the grain is never easy, often misinterpreted, and typically followed by a backlash of negativity. Since the commander is responsible for everything that does or does not happen within the unit, it is their responsibility to set the conditions to facilitate subordinates’ ability to demonstrate moral courage. Unit cohesion can deter acts of moral courage. Since speaking up is often difficult, lack of dissent in the organization does not mean full agreement. It is the commander’s responsibility to establish a command climate that encourages feedback and reinforces moral courage. Commanders must create avenues for subordinates to speak up and display moral courage and commanders must consider their perspective before passing judgment; otherwise, leadership can fail, command climate can break down, and tragic things can happen.
People who are exhibiting moral courage are probably not the type who are seeking recognition, especially in the form of a medal. Organizations like the Army would likely reward morally courageous leaders by promoting them to the next grade. Generally, moral leaders stand up for their organization or their subordinates at the risk of losing their career. For those who are successful in these matters, professional success should also follow (promotion). If they fall on the sword and actually lose their career for doing what they believe is right, then they can at least feel comfort in knowing they held the moral high ground.
However, there is a new medal, the “distinguished warfare medal”, that might be used for matters of moral courage since it is based on a significant act not involving acts of valor.
Moral courage is an interesting topic and definitely one worthy of discussion. Some would argue that maintaining high moral standards is expected within the ranks; however, very few people possess this courageous trait. In fact, very few things are as challenging as taking a moral stand. This is most likely due to follow on perceptions and repercussions. In my opinion, comparing moral and physical courage is like comparing apples and oranges. In many cases, doing a brave physical act happens quickly. A person may not have time to think about the outcome of their decision. This does not diminish physical bravery, because many people fail to act when presented with a situation that requires physical courage. On the other hand, moral courage often times requires you to take a stand against organizational norms. In many cases this could include reporting violations being done by a peer or friend. This is challenging because you have time to evaluate the possibility of being viewed as a “snitch” or losing friends. As a leader, I believe you should recognize and reward moral courage. I believe moral courage is of the utmost importance, and those who practice it put the organization’s interests above their own.
This blog on moral courage brings up an interesting point. Should the Army, or even the Department of Defense, consider giving awards to individuals that report moral violation like we do for performance or physical courage. As I first read that, I thought why? We are in the Army and that is what we are expected to report. After giving it more critical thought, it might not be a bad idea. In today’s Army, there is a push to try and get rid of the corruption that may have infiltrated the ranks. Some of this corruption ranges from senior officials abusing phones and money to sexual assaults. If an award was given for having moral courage, would some of these violation have been reported and discovered earlier?
In order for it work, there would need to be adjustments and steps put into place to make it successful. First and foremost, the Army needs to get rid of the stigma that normally accompanies reporting such violation. Out of fear of reprisal or getting a label of not being loyal to the command, some individuals may not report violations. An award may help fight this, but most want to be accepted by the group they are in. Second, detailing how the award is awarded and for what actions and who approves the award are vital. These are important to ensure that an individual does not get an award for reporting seemingly inconsequential violations, such as the taking of a box of pens (most likely the extreme). The concept of this award would be to get people to report major violations. To capture that intent, the Army would need to define a major violation. By keeping it at a high level, like the division, may give the award the proper vetting required. These are just a couple of things to consider in the development of a moral courage award. A moral courage award is a sound idea if implemented with deliberate planning and not done out of haste.
MAJ Ryan Miedema, ILE 13-01
Pride. Human nature. Just a couple of reasons why it is hard to recognize moral courage not just in the military but in any organization. We as human being do not take criticism very well. When someone criticizes your work or action, no matter how well you can take them, your pride gets touched by it. You automatically feel negative toward the person who criticized you. You may not show it but its there. Even it the criticism is in a way that is pleasing, your pride is still in some way hit by it. And no one wants to praise someone who criticizes you. I think it would take moral courage to recognize someone for acting in moral courage.
“Morality Matters”
Why are morals important to the Army? Do immoral actions impact our profession? Does it suffice to be a proficient warrior without moral conscience? These questions reside in the bedrock of our profession as American Soldiers. The answer is yes, morality matters… above all else. Our decisions must be guided by moral principles for the good of others – our teammates and our allies. America is a beacon of light in a dark world, and the effects of our right or wrong actions have a resounding impact on political influence and operational success. For this reason we are entrusted as leaders to make judgments, commitments, and decisions based on moral fortitude. Our strength as a nation lies in this very principle.
The instant one of us falters the news spreads like wildfire through our ranks and across the globe. The world is watching and waiting for us to fail. Make no mistake; because our enemies cannot beat us on the battlefield, they are counting on our failure from within. We must remain aware of this and be steadfast as the moral standard bearer. Fighting wars and leading the world through its problems is hard enough without heaping immoral morass on ourselves. If we succumb to an amoral paradigm of relativism, then the enemy is us. Have you ever listened to a “leader” speak, knowing very well that he or she is a liar, a cheat, or a thief? For many of us it’s a disgusting emotional experience, because they have lost their credibility and reputation. No matter how experienced or knowledgeable a person may be, the moment their decadence is revealed everything good in their past is obscured by dishonor and shame. Learn from the ignominy of others, who disgrace themselves and face a sad future of irrelevance.
The good news is that moral excellence can be achieved by all of us at anytime. It is measured in our actions and daily choices between right and wrong. This is our Army; we are the catalyst for its moral distinction. Understand that the decisions we choose, when in garrison or forward deployed, literally make all the difference in the world. And do not despair in the moral infractions of others, or those in your own past. Learn from them, and have the moral courage to rise above them. Morality matters – because our actions, public and private, define who we are.
MAJ Tim Bible
ILE 13-001, SG B
The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government.
Moral courage is not popular in our society and in the Army. People or Soldiers would rather look the other way than making a stand to do the right thing. The Army has many great leaders that lead the way and do the right thing. On the other hand, we also have many that are worried about thier next promotion or assignment and will not make a tough choice or decision if it does not benefit their success.
As far as Moral Courage awards; the Army awards medals every day to deserving Soldiers that have made tough decisions with the awards we have in the inventory.
The difference between physical and moral courage is a Soldier usually has a small chance of being maimed or killed for showing acts of moral courage. You may get fired but then you can go to IG or JAG and plead your case. Awards should be for going above and beyond what is considered the standard. Besides, last time I checked, doing the right thing is considered the standard.