Periodically my uncle
posts on his Facebook page a reminder of Dwight Eisenhower’s “Farewell” speech
to the nation delivered in early 1961 as he was in the process of relinquishing
power to the newly elected John F. Kennedy.
Asking those who frequent him on Facebook if we remember it, I posted
this response:
“Yes, I
remember it. What inspired it was that Ike sent his science advisor George
Kistiakowsky to SAC headquarters to inspect the plans the Air Force had in
place for nuclear retaliation in the event of a nuclear exchange, only to be
informed that not only was the president's advisor not privy the 'plans', but
that the president himself was not cleared for security. Kistiakowsky famously
replied that he would put in a call to the oval office and the generals would
be free to explain to the commander-in-chief himself why it was that the
information was not forthcoming. Eventually the military brass backed down,
perhaps reckoning the stature of the former General would make their position
look ridiculous. Upon examining the military's strategic plans which included
nuclear weapons targeting Moscow that would be nine times the power used at
Hiroshima, Ike concluded that the military, and their industrial partners, were
engaging is grotesque "overkill", producing weapons and levels of
retaliation out of all proportion to what was militarily necessary. The result
was his famous "Farewell Address" to the nation, patterned after the
example of another supreme commander George Washington.”
Originally dubbing it the “Military-Industrial-Congressional Complex” Ike, always the diplomat sensitive to political sensibilities, reduced to calling it simply the “Military-Industrial Complex” so as to hopefully not thwart much needed efforts to reign in on the military by needlessly offending tender congressional egos.
Ike was clearly on to
something. In what would later be
described by historians and scholars of public administration ‘The Iron Triangle’
(1) Ike the experienced military and political leader spoke with great
authority.
“My fellow Americans:
Three days from now, after half a century in
the service of our country, I shall lay down the responsibilities of office as,
in traditional and solemn ceremony, the authority of the Presidency is vested
in my successor.
This evening I come to you with a message of
leave-taking and farewell, and to share a few final thoughts with you, my
countrymen.
Like every other citizen, I wish the new
President, and all who will labor with him, Godspeed. I pray that the coming
years will be blessed with peace and prosperity for all.
Our people expect their President and the
Congress to find essential agreement on issues of great moment, the wise
resolution of which will better shape the future of the Nation.
My own relations with the Congress, which
began on a remote and tenuous basis when, long ago, a member of the Senate
appointed me to West Point, have since ranged to the intimate during the war
and immediate post-war period, and, finally, to the mutually interdependent
during these past eight years.
In this final relationship, the Congress and
the Administration have, on most vital issues, cooperated well, to serve the
national good rather than mere partisanship, and so have assured that the
business of the Nation should go forward. So, my official relationship with the
Congress ends in a feeling, on my part, of gratitude that we have been able to
do so much together.
II.
We now stand ten years past the midpoint of
a century that has witnessed four major wars among great nations. Three of
these involved our own country. Despite these holocausts America is today the
strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world.
Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America's
leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material
progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the
interests of world peace and human betterment.
III.
Throughout America's adventure in free
government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress
in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among
people and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and
religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of
comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt
both at home and abroad.
Progress toward these noble goals is
persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands
our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology --
global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in
method. Unhappily the danger is poses promises to be of indefinite duration. To
meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and
transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry
forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and
complex struggle -- with liberty the stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite
every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human
betterment.
Crises there will continue to be. In meeting
them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring
temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the
miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer
elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill
in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research -- these and
many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested
as the only way to the road we wish to travel.
But each proposal must be weighed in the
light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among
national programs -- balance between the private and the public economy,
balance between cost and hoped for advantage -- balance between the clearly
necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential
requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the
individual; balance between actions of the moment and the national welfare of
the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually
finds imbalance and frustration.
The record of many decades stands as proof
that our people and their government have, in the main, understood these truths
and have responded to them well, in the face of stress and threat. But threats,
new in kind or degree, constantly arise. I mention two only.
IV.
A vital element in keeping the peace is our
military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so
that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.
Our military organization today bears little
relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the
fighting men of World War II or Korea.
Until the latest of our world conflicts, the
United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could,
with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk
emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a
permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a
half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment.
We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United
States corporations.
This conjunction of an immense military
establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The
total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every
city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize
the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend
its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so
is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard
against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought,
by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of
misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this
combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take
nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the
proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with
our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper
together.
Akin to, and largely responsible for the
sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological
revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become
central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily
increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal
government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in
his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories
and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the
fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a
revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs
involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual
curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic
computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation's
scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is
ever present and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and
discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and
opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a
scientific technological elite.
It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to
balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the
principles of our democratic system -- ever aiming toward the supreme goals of
our free society.
V.
Another factor in maintaining balance
involves the element of time. As we peer into society's future, we -- you and
I, and our government -- must avoid the impulse to live only for today,
plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of
tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without
risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want
democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent
phantom of tomorrow.
VI.
Down the long lane of the history yet to be
written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid
becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be instead, a proud
confederation of mutual trust and respect.
Such a confederation must be one of equals.
The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do
we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That
table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the
certain agony of the battlefield.
Disarmament, with mutual honor and
confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose
differences, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this
need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official
responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one
who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war -- as one who
knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been
so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years -- I wish I could say
tonight that a lasting peace is in sight.
Happily, I can say that war has been
avoided. Steady progress toward our ultimate goal has been made. But, so much
remains to be done. As a private citizen, I shall never cease to do what little
I can to help the world advance along that road.
VII.
So -- in this my last good night to you as
your President -- I thank you for the many opportunities you have given me for
public service in war and peace. I trust that in that service you find some
things worthy; as for the rest of it, I know you will find ways to improve
performance in the future.
You and I -- my fellow citizens -- need to
be strong in our faith that all nations, under God, will reach the goal of
peace with justice. May we be ever unswerving in devotion to principle,
confident but humble with power, diligent in pursuit of the Nation's great
goals.
To all the peoples of the world, I once more
give expression to America's prayerful and continuing aspiration:
We pray that peoples of all faiths, all
races, all nations, may have their great human needs satisfied; that those now
denied opportunity shall come to enjoy it to the full; that all who yearn for
freedom may experience its spiritual blessings; that those who have freedom
will understand, also, its heavy responsibilities; that all who are insensitive
to the needs of others will learn charity; that the scourges of poverty,
disease and ignorance will be made to disappear from the earth, and that, in
the goodness of time, all peoples will come to live together in a peace
guaranteed by the binding force of mutual respect and love.” (2)
Prescient words spoken
by a man who was in a position to know much and learn more; a man of enduring
decency and commanding stature.
______________
1.
The “Iron
Triangle” is the relationship between contractors, the military and the
relevant congressional committees responsible for military appropriations. Generals make their annual budgetary demands
before congress based on real and imagined military requirements themselves
determined after consultation with the contractors. They are put before the relevant committees
who are themselves beneficiaries of massive campaign contributions by the very
contractors that do business with the military.
The result is a closed loop, a three corner arrangement, an “iron
triangle” from which spiraling costs and military requirements can produce some
very outrageous outcomes.
