Essay on the US Army's Status as a Military Profession

This essay delves into the debate surrounding the US Army's status as a military profession, drawing upon Huntington's influential work and exploring the complexities of military leadership and decision-making. It examines key aspects such as military ethics, values, and responsibilities, highlighting how these factors contribute to the Army's professional identity. The essay discusses the importance of expertise, corporate culture, and the relationship between the military and civilian authority. It also considers criticisms and alternative perspectives on the US Army's adherence to the standards of a profession, ultimately concluding that despite certain challenges, the US Army largely maintains its status as a professional organization. The essay references various academic sources to support its arguments, providing a comprehensive overview of the topic.

Running head: MILITARY PROFESSION
MILITARY PROFESSION
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1MILITARY PROFESSION
According to Huntington, the definition of professionalism was recognized in the
basis of four factors. firstly, the concept of professionalism is associated with the systematic
knowledge, primary orientation to the community , behavioral control by assessing codes of
ethics in the course of work socialization and reward system to appreciate work achievement
(Moten, 2011). In the context of the definition of professionalism, the code of ethics is
primarily to be focused on to understand the status of the military profession. The essay
focuses on the deliverance of the status of US Army whether the professionalism in this field
is maintained. The essay delivers the usage of authoritative power and further discusses about
the military ethics,values and responsibilities that is observed in this arena.
It is evident that in the Huntington’s The Soldier and the State (1957), the concept of
military profession has been appreciated and embraced by the educational institutions of
military throughout the world (Ingesson, 2020). However, the focus on professionalism
obscures the complexities in the military leadership and decision making by reducing it to the
status of a profession (Moten, 2011). It is noticed that as per Huntington, the term military
profession and officer corps are similar or synonymous and on the basis of this
understanding, he further defines that professionalism dwells in three major factors
(Ingesson, 2020). They are corporateness, responsibility and expertise (Snider, 2003). The
military professionalism is thereby located within these categories (Ingesson, 2020).
However, service ethics are major factor that binds and values the military subordination to
civilian authority (Moten, 2011). The responsibility of Army officer is considered as the
highest embodiment of the profession of arms in the spectrum of expertise, corporate culture
and responsibility (Moten, 2011).
As a profession, it is to mention that military expertise are expected to remain well
equipped, organized and trained (Ingesson, 2020). In addition, the armies or the soldiers plan
the activities regarding mission and focuses on how to execute the plan both in war and peace

2MILITARY PROFESSION
(Moten, 2011). The structure of the army force aims to ensures not to assess the commanding
position unless it is instructed to do so (Snider, 2003). The corporate culture in the military
professional is embedded in their professional customs and courtesies under the guidance of
military ethics (Snider, 2003). The military ethics are recognized through the army values
which is a centralized factor in the military profession (Ingesson, 2020).
As discussed in the previous paragraph, the army values sustains the decorum of
professionalism in military arena. Following it, candor is considered as the eighth army value
(Moten, 2011). It is evident from surveys and focused group that candor is the value based on
which the relationship between civilian and armies is strong (Snider, 2003). Through these
values the professional ethics are recognized and thereby, the state of US Army is defined as
a profession (Snider, 2003). The professional factors through these elements are held together
to build trust with the American people and proceed towards excelling and developing the US
Army as a profession (Moten, 2011).
However, it is witnessed that the code of ethics is not universal, that is, the military
organizations across time and region are different in organizational motives as well as in their
code of ethics (Snider, 2003). Following it, it is often witnessed that the armies tend to
remain engaged in opportunistic wars of aggression (Moten, 2011). However, the highlights
of flaws and arguments against stating that US Army does not maintain the proficiency
consistently is not enough or sufficient enough to out-rule the tradition of military ethics
towards the responsibility, expertise and corporateness. Thereby, it is evident that US Army
sustainably maintains its status as a profession.

3MILITARY PROFESSION
References:
Ingesson, T. (2020). When the Military Profession Isn't - The Military Leader. The Military
Leader. Retrieved 22 March 2020, from https://www.themilitaryleader.com/when-military-
profession-isnt/
Mittelstadt, J. (2015). The rise of the military welfare state. Harvard University Press.
Moten, M. (2011). Who Is a Member of the Military Profession?. Apps.dtic.mil. Retrieved 22
March 2020, from https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a546558.pdf
Snider, D. J. (2003). Officership: The professional practice. Military review, 83(1), 3.
Uakron.edu. (2020) OFFICERSHIP AND THE ARMY PROFESSION. Uakron.edu. Retrieved
22 March 2020, from https://www.uakron.edu/armyrotc/MS1/17.pdf