SOLDIERS AND SCHOLARS: Military Education and National Policy

By Profs. JohnTV. Masland and Laurence I. Radway.Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1957.240 pp. $4.75.

Since Machiavelli pointed out that civil and military life "are not only compatible and consistent with each other, but necessarily connected and united together," students and practitioners of the arts of military and statecraft have been asking how these activities can most usefully be put together. To these studies, Professors Masland and Radway have made a major contribution with their Soldiers andScholars.

The theme of this scholarly volume is that the technological revolution has changed drastically the nature of the military profession; that a high-grade military officer today must have breadth of knowledge to handle wisely his assignments, which more often than not are as much economic, political, and social as military; and that a proper education can help develop the variety of talents needed for this complex career.

How can the armed services best prepare their officers to serve as statesmen as well as leaders of combat forces? In seeking answers to this question, it was first necessary to attempt some definition of the qualities, aptitudes, and skills needed by the soldier-statesman. In addition to searching official statements, the authors interviewed about 300 military and civilian officials, and obtained the views of 550 Pentagon officers by means of a questionnaire.

A brief statement of the "job description" might be: first, the officer must be a competent military technician; second, he should have the imagination, energy, competence, and motivation needed for leadership in any sizable, complex civilian organization; third, he should be able to qualify at least as an amateur scholar in history, economics, foreign affairs, and related subjects; and, fourth, he should have the temperament to work effectively under leadership.

Obviously, it is difficult to create an educational system for producing men of this quality. The problem is not unlike that of large corporations, which increasingly select promising executives at various points in their careers for further education, to prepare them for the next step on the ladder. Professors Masland and Radway have studied carefully the service academies where training is begun, and the various "war colleges" and joint service schools for advanced military education. The programs of these institutions are described in detail and their strengths and weaknesses noted. These sections of the book are interesting for anyone curious about military or any other kind of education.

The authors encountered a questioning attitude on the part of the faculty and staff of these schools. At the undergraduate or academy level difficult choices must be made. For example, how much of the effort can be devoted to preparing students for policy positions without weakening critically the supply of good combat leaders? Institutional officials are by no means certain they have the best answers, and they welcome help in finding better solutions. This kind of humility is not notable on some civilian campuses.

The services presumably have been "unified." This is a fact in a combat area. But unification seems to be least effective in the educational system. The Army, Navy, and Air Force each has its academy and separate ROTC program; each has its "war college." The joint service schools (The National War College and the Industrial College of the Armed Forces) are fine institutions, with special and perhaps critical problems arising out of the fact that they are interservice in nature.

One might point to two matters that concern us all. How can faculty careers in military schools be made more attractive to a competent person, with or without military background, who views teaching and scholarship as his profession? Are we getting into the academies the best-qualified students under the present methods of selection, in which members of Congress play such an important role?

There will be many by-products of this execellent work. For example, in the Pentagon it is known as "The Dartmouth Study." The Carnegie Corporation, which financed the project, has already asked Professor Masland to study intensively the whole matter of ROTC programs in colleges and universities. These are additional reasons why Dartmouth can be grateful to John Masland and Larry Radway, and proud of their contribution to our understanding of a difficult and significant subject.