JOs, I was sympathetic, but now I'm not. Just take care of your people and move on.

By Capt. Amir Abu-Akeel, U.S. Army

Best Defense guest columnist

I've read the JO retention debate with quite a bit of interest. Initially, I found myself nodding
in agreement with the disgruntled officers, but have since come to re-evaluate
my stance.

Many company
grade officers approach the issue of the military through a narrowly focused,
emotionally tinged lens: "It's too big for me to fix, so why should I stay,"
or "my civilian friends don't put up with this, why should I, and more
importantly, my wife." In most cases their observations are correct. The
military is indeed too big to fix singlehandedly, and it asks a lot more of
people than civilian jobs, but this view lacks nuance and context.

Junior officers
need to understand that they aren't going to singlehandedly right American
foreign policy. Even senior officers have little individual sway over
issues. It's not because the system is broken. Nowadays, most policy
decisions are made on a consensus basis. Contrary to what people think, the
team-first mantra of the military encourages agreement between ranks even in
the presence of a clear chain of command. Leaders don't make decisions in a
vacuum; they listen to the arguments made by their subordinates and peers. Commanders
render judgment only after their staffs have beaten the courses of action to
death. At the company level, if my first sergeant and I needed to hash
something out, we closed the door and talked to each other (often yelled),
until someone's opinion made more sense. Tom's book Fiasco makes the same case: President Bush didn't declare war on
Iraq; the American security establishment did. JOs have not been in long
enough to see this team dynamic play out frequently, and therefore tend to
individualize their problems. If you try to take on the big green machine
alone, it will beat you down every time.

JOs also need to
stop fixating on how they alone will finish the Syrian war, or end government
corruption, and instead focus on the responsibilities that really matter: the
care of their soldiers. It can be as simple as giving subordinates time off on
a Friday afternoon to be with loved ones, or it can be as difficult as serving
as a Casualty Assistance Officer. My personal favorite has always been to fend
off a random tasker from higher (usually some CSM or division staff officer
with a "bright" idea). Strategy is important, and a JO will go far to
comprehend the bigger picture, but the soldiers in their immediate care are the
priority, and that alone will consume the majority of their time. Aesop's fable
about the astronomer rings true here: "Hark ye, old fellow, why, in
striving to pry into what is in heaven, do you not manage to see what is on
earth?" Child's tale, but hey, it's still poignant, and relevant.

As for
considering the career goals of a spouse, I have heard more gripes than
solutions. HRC has always been a problem. The organization has close to a
hundred-thousand officers to manage. Throw in the excessive branch parochialism
and the congressional regulations that restrict officer management, and it's
surprising the command hasn't suffered a meltdown. Adding the requirement
to manage the careers of spouses would probably force the AG Corps to jump off
a cliff en masse. That's not to say we can't improve the lot of spouses. Creating
comprehensive geo-bachelor BAH schemes and offsetting professional
certification costs is a good start, but the pie-in-the-sky ideas people have
been bandying about are unworkable, especially in the face of a giant RIF.

I don't write
this to belittle anyone's issues with the armed forces or the security
establishment at large, because there are many, and they are serious. But at
the end of the day, the military, for all its awesome might, is an organization
run by people, and therefore subject to all their human strengths and weaknesses.
Show some patience and enjoy the simple pleasures that come from caring for
your Joes. You won't get that direct satisfaction in many other places.

Captain Amir Abu-Akeel is currently an operations officer with
the 52d Ordnance Group (Explosive Ordnance Disposal) in Fort Campbell, KY. CPT
Abu-Akeel previously commanded the 788th OD CO (EOD) and the 202d OD CO (EOD). His
bachelorhood has been ensured by two combat deployments and four PCS moves in
the past six years. The views here are his own and don't represent any
government agency, yet.