The Resignation of General James Mattis--Following the Call of George Marshall.

A just published article in "The Atlantic" magazine (reference link below) provides an eloquent tribute to the character and career of General James Mattis and thoughtfully assesses why he reached the decision to resign as Secretary of Defense. 

This had to be a very difficult decision for Mattis. The case for staying on in the Administration to minimize damage from policies which Mattis found wrong I am sure weighed heavily on his mind. And it certainly could not have been obvious to him that Trump would find anyone more likely to persuade him to follow the directions which Mattis found to be correct. Probably Mattis' reason was as he stated: the President, being the nation's constitutional leader deserves a Secretary of Defense more aligned to his beliefs. That would be a difficult decision, but one of integrity.

Speaking of integrity,  reminds me of something a supreme hero of mine, George Marshall, said in the middle of World War II, in the spring of 1943. He was talking to General John Hilldring as he was giving Hilldring the job of organizing military governments for countries to be liberated or conquered.

"I'm turning over to you a sacred trust and I want you to bear that in mind every day and every hour you preside over this military government and civil affairs venture. Our people sometimes say that soldiers are stupid. I must admit at times we are. Some (people) think we are extravagant with the public money, that we squander it, spend it recklessly. I don't agree that we do...But even though people say we are extravagant, that in itself isn't too disastrous.

BUT, we have a great asset and that is our people, our country men (they) do not distrust us and do not fear us.They don't harbor any illusions that we intend to alter the government of the country or the nature of this government in any way.

This is a sacred trust that I turn over to you today. I don't want you to do anything and I don't want you to permit the enormous corps of military governance that you are in the process of training..to damage this high regard in which the professional soldiers in the Army are held by our people--and it could happen, it could happen, Hilldring, if you don't understand what you are about".

I believe that with his decision General Mattis has preserved the sacred trust which General Marshall raised to   the highest plain.

Talk about a timeless, unblinking  statement of principle. A principle which applies to the leader of any organization or to anyone holding a covenant of trust with others, above all one's family.

http://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/12/mattis-proved-you-cant-serve-both-trump-and-america/578902/?utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_content=5c22eb2d1adf6400019ac42f_ta&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook

It's Up To Every Generation-The Responsibilities of Leadership

We recently celebrated the 100th Anniversary of Nelson Mandela's birth. We celebrate his life; his heroic journey from humble beginnings, to being imprisoned for 27 years, to emerging as President of his country, forgiving and uniting whose who had opposed him and threatened his life.

He inspired his country and much of the world in the hope for a better future based on a common respect for others and integrity.

Yet, we sadly read this week a series of deeply researched stories in the New York Times with headlines like this:

"'They Eat Money: How Mandela's PoliticalHeirs Grow Rich Off Corruption"

"Corruption Gutted South Africa's Tax Agency. Now the Nation is Paying the Price"

"South Africa Vows to End Corruption. Are Its New Leaders Part of the Problem?"

It has so often been this way. The examples are legion. Take the aftermath of the Civil War. Slavery at long last outlawed. Yet, in a matter of less than a decade it is virtually reimposed as Reconstruction folds and new forms of "slavery" are created. Yet, leaders like Frederick Douglass continued the fight for justice and new leaders would emerge, leaders like Martin Luther King, abolitionists of their own day and some unlikely partners, like Lyndon Johnson, who were persuaded at long last to open their eyes and take action which only they could take. And, yet--still--the fight for justice for all goes on.

All of this underscores the truism that justice and freedom and respect for others do not operate on automatic pilot. They have to be continually fought for. The human tendency for self aggrandizement and pursuit of the convenient path will always exist.

It us up to each generation, to each of us, to demand of ourselves and our leaders that we do what is right even knowing we will not do so completely. I return to the words of the Talmud: it is not required of us that we complete the task, but nor are we permitted to desist from it.

We and our government face this challenge today with our President. We should recognize it is not a new challenge. We have faced it many times before; for example in the Presidencies  of Andrew Johnson and Richard Nixon to name just two.

What has "saved us"in these times it seems to me is the constitutional underpinning of our government--one ingeniously created by our Founders lodging specific responsibilities in three entities: the Executive, Legislative and Judiciary. It is critical that the leaders of these entities carry out their responsibilities with courage and integrity.

 It is this structure combined with the Bill of Rights including freedom of speech and freedom of  the press and respect for the rule of law that gives me hope for the future.

Too often we have seen one of these entities abdicate their responsibility. We have seen this in recent years in the legislature abdicating its decision making role in declaring war and on key foreign relations matters.  The judiciary has a special role to play. We have seen that recently on matters of immigration policy and healthcare policy.

To be sure, there will be fierce debates as to where the line of responsibility should lie. Courts will be accused of improperly assuming a legislative role; presidents will argue for more latitude in their decision making.

 It will always be this way. It will be messy at times. But everyone needs to step up to carry out what they see as their responsibility to the best of their ability, recognizing the roles they have been charged to carry out.

This is the only way we can preserve our heritage and make the most of a form of government which even if  imperfect and never fully settled is to my mind the best that has yet been conceived in our world

WHAT WE HAVE TO LEARN FROM TREES: WE ARE ALL CONNECTED

I have written in several places about the “plague of the other”; how often, usually out of fear or suffering from a lack of self-confidence, we choose to see ourselves as separate from each other and as superior to “the other.”

In the book, “Everyday Bias,”* which develops the reality that we all possess implicit biases, I came across a metaphor by the author, Howard J. Ross, that I found extremely compelling in this regard.  

Here it is.

Many of us have seen the magnificent forests full of aspen trees that grow in large “stands” throughout the northern areas of North America.  The trees are extraordinary, ramrod straight, and often standing nearly one hundred feet tall.  There can be thousands of them in just one stand.  Still, we look at each of these trees and see it in its solitary magnificence.

But there is something interesting under the surface of these forests.  These trees are not at all separate.  Underneath the soil, they are connected by a common root system, and that makes each of these clusters of trees among the largest organisms on Earth.  A new tree grows because the root sends out a runner that then grows into another tree.  The largest of these is called “Pando” (Latin for “I spread”), and is located in the Fishlake National Forest in south-central Utah.  Pando covers more than 106 acres and has been estimated to collectively weigh almost seven thousand tons, making it the heaviest organism in the world.  It also is thought to be more than eighty thousand years old, making it one of the world’s oldest known living organisms.

And yet we see it as a lot of single trees.

The trees brings us to a perfect metaphor for we who are as human beings.  We look at the “other” as if he or she is separate from us.  We see the other group as a threat.  And yet, we are all deeply connected.   We share a common destiny on this planet.  We all seek pleasure and do our best to avoid pain.  We want what is best for our children and grandchildren.  All of us are the products of that which we have seen before.  And we are all (for the most part) unconscious about the “programming” that runs our thoughts and our lives.

We can transcend.  We can, through discipline, practice and awareness, find a new way to relate that honors our differences, yet also build upon our similarities.  While the potential for mass destruction looms broadly in the world and our global community expands, we are more and more invited to recognize, as R. Buckminster Fuller said, that “we are not going to be able to operate our Spaceship Earth successfully, nor for much longer unless we see it as a whole spaceship and our fate as common.  It has to be everybody or nobody.”  

That is the path before us.  It is indeed the “road less traveled” when we look at our common history.  But it is a road that is worth paving clear.

What could be a greater journey?

*”Everyday Bias, Identifying and Navigating Unconscious Judgments in our Daily Lives”

George H.W. Bush--A Role Model for Me and for Us All

Jon Meacham’s Biography of George Herbert Walker Bush

Just over three years ago I read this magnificent biography of President George H.W. Bush. Immediately afterwords, in December 2015 I dictated this set of reflections about the book and his life. 

*********************************************

This is one of the finest biographies I have ever read. It describes the life of a man whom I’ve admired for decades.  The basis for that admiration—his strength and integrity and his commitment to service and his country and his family--was brought forth in a transparent and convincing way.

The book is greatly strengthened by Meacham’s judicious use of Bush’s diary which he dictated for much of his active life.

Bush’s role in overseeing the peaceful end of the Cold War in the late 1980s and early 1990s, his empathetic and constructive relationship with Gorbachev and his balanced judgment emerge clearly.  His decency was remarkable.

I agree with Meacham’s judgment: “His life was spent in the service of his nation, in his spirit of conciliation, common sense and love of country will stand him in strong stead through the ebbs and flows of posterity’s judgment.  On that score—that George H.W. Bush was a uniquely good man in a political universe where good men were hard to come by—that was shared by a bi-partisan consensus a quarter of a century after his White House years.

Modest but driven, almost always compassionate, he was out to serve but also to win.  Yet he had his personal doubts.  I think he failed to appreciate his full excellence, this despite a remarkable record of accomplishments:  at Yale; in the service; in business and in public service: in Congress; Envoy to China; leading the CIA, etc.

I had no idea how many disappointments he had faced, above all the death of his and Barbara’s daughter, Robin, at the age of three.  Losses in political elections, not getting the job he wanted.  And indeed until the very last moment, feeling he would not get the Vice Presidential slot with Ronald Reagan. 

I’m not sure Bush ever would have become President if he had not been the Vice President for Ronald Reagan. He learned so much from Reagan, though never, happily, tried to be like him.

Of the various tributes to George H.W. Bush, I rate none stronger than this.  It came from his son Jeb:  “How great is this country that it could elect a man as fine as our dad to be its President?”  That remark so struck Laura Bush that she included it in the White House memoir she wrote after she and George W. left Washington in 2009.

I think it is fair to say, as Meacham does, that George H.W. Bush represented “the twilight of a tradition of public service in America, one embodied by FDR, by Eisenhower, and by George H.W. Bush.”

There is so much to be learned, and imitated, in Bush’s relationship with Gorbachev.  It took the two of them.   Bush fully understood how important it was to work constructively with Gorbachev.  And so did Gorbachev with him.  The “old suspicions” between the two super powers had to go, Bush said. Both nations had to learn how to thrive in a multi-polar world.  

If only we had not lost that instinct.  Gorbachev made a huge concession in agreeing to a united Germany and then, with great reluctance, agreeing for it to become a member of NATO.  Gorbachev’s associates were dumb-founded that he agreed to do that. 

Nowhere did Bush’s respect for and empathy with Gorbachev manifest itself more than in his reaction to the attempted overthrow of Gorbachev.  He resisted John Major’s suggestion of convening the NATO ministers out of his fear that “it will make it look like we are militarizing and that we anticipate a military threat to the West...it is the last damn thing we need to get involved in in that kind of confrontation.”

And then he spoke with Gorbachev on the phone:  “My dearest George,” Gorbachev said.  “I am so happy to hear your voice again.”  “My God,” Bush said, “I’m glad to hear you.”  They spoke for 11 minutes.  “He sounded jubilant and he sounded upbeat,” Bush dictated, “he was very, very grateful to me...for the way we have conducted ourselves.”

The peaceful resolution of this crisis was, for Bush, ratification of his essential diplomatic instincts of balance and moderation.  “We could have overacted, and moved troops, and scared the hell out of people,” Bush told his diary.  “We could have under-reacted by saying, ‘well, we will deal with whoever is there.’  But...I think we found the proper balance.”

The respect which Bush showed to other leaders was genuine and worked to great advantage.  The relationship with French President Mitterrand was an example.  There had been worry that France might not support the use of NATO outside of Europe in the circumstance of the Gulf War.  However, when Bush asked for that support, Mitterrand simply said, “we will be there.”  To his diary Bush confided that he felt that the visit he (Bush) had with Mitterrand at his place in Maine and “the respect I have tried to show him personally, (paid) off in diplomacy.  I differ with his personal diplomacy, but I think when you talk from a basis of friendship, it does help; and I think he knows I respect him.”

As always, respect builds trust and trust means everything.  

During the Gulf War, Bush reflected on the nature of American leadership.  Gregarious and inclusive by nature, Meacham writes, he could uphold the Presidency in keeping with these essential elements of his own character.  “All countries in the west clearly have to turn to us,” Bush told his diary, “but it is my theory that the more they are included on the take-off, the more we get their opinion, the more we reach out, no matter what is involved in terms of time involved, the better it is.  Everyone is proud.  Everyone has his place in the sun—large country or small, they should be consulted, their opinions considered and then when the United States makes a move, and I make a decision, we are more apt to have solid support.”

If only we conducted ourselves more in line with that conviction today.  If only that spirit had permeated our relationship with Russia over the last 15 years.  If we had, I do not believe we would be in the position we are today.  The neocons, whom Bush resisted, but whose son, George W. Bush, sadly did not, have continued to have an influence that has been disruptive, in my view, to the best interests of the United States. George H.W. Bush demonstrated this more than ever as he decided not to occupy Iraq.  The war to unseat Hussein, “to occupy Iraq would instantly shatter our coalition, turning the whole Arab world against us, and make a broken tyrant into a latter-day Arab hero,” Bush recalled in 1998.  “It could only plunge that part of the world into ever greater instability and destroy the credibility we were working so hard to reestablish.”  If only his son had followed this instinct.

The candor and honesty of Bush’s own self-reflections pours out of his diaries in a manner that I can sometimes identify with.  The post-Gulf War period was, as Meacham describes it:  “a study in shadow.”  Coming off that intense experience, Bush had to turn back to what he really didn’t relish, domestic affairs, and it is clear to me he was tired.  He was now 66.  He fantasized in his diary about surprising the world by announcing that he would not seek reelection:  “You need someone in this job (who can give) his total last ounce of energy, and I’ve had (that) up until now, but now I don’t seem to have the drive.”  He was tired of what he described as “sniping, carping, bitching, predictable editorial complaints.”  

But he continued on.

I’ll conclude these notes with a salute to George H.W. Bush by his son George, on the occasion of the commissioning of an aircraft carrier named after his father.  “We will always be inspired by the faith, humor, patriotism, and compassion he taught us through his own example.  And for as long as we live, we will carry with us Dad’s other lessons:  that integrity and honor are worth more than any title or treasure, and that the truest strength did come from the gentlest soul.”

George H.W. Bush is a role model for me, for all of us.

George H.W. Bush--A Study in Character

This is the first time I have devoted a blog to the simple posting of a link to a video.

This one is only a few minutes in length and shows George H.W. Bush as a candidate for the Republican nomination in an interview on Face the Nation. Reagan ultimately won the Republican nomination and of course the Presidency.

It is a priceless short course in the character of this man whom I greatly admired--a combination of thoughtfulness, civility, toughness, competitiveness and, something he declaimed (unfortunately) vision which he graphically expressed here for our Nation and would go on to live as he became President in the 1988 election wisely navigating the demise of the former Soviet Union without disrespecting President Gorbachev, defeating Hussein's incursion into Kuwait and fostering the "Thousand Points of Light".

Here is the link.

Enjoy and ponder.

https://twitter.com/justinwolfers/status/1069068691252436992?s=12