LS-1X



PART ILesson Title: Ethical and Moral Leadership in the MilitaryTeaching Method: Film Presentation/Guided DiscussionTime Required: 3 hoursPrerequisite Class: Accountability, Leadership Authority and ResponsibilityVisual Aids: Movie: Saving Private Ryan and PowerPoint SlidesStudent Preparation: Read the Student Reader MaterialCertified by: Holm Center/CR (Dr. Charles Nath III)PART IAActivity Statement: View the movie “Saving Private Ryan” and discuss the importance of morals and ethics for military leaders.Affective Lesson Objective: Value the importance of morals and ethics for military leaders. Affective Samples of Behavior: Explain how an officer’s responsibilities establish their priorities for making decisions.Defend why unlawful orders must be disobeyed.Defend the need to recognize and ignore illegal/immoral orders.Describe the ethical dilemmas imposed during war/conflict.Describe the ethical issues surrounding killing prisoners of war/enemies.Actively participate in classroom discussion regarding ethical considerations in war.PART IBStrategy: This lesson has only an affective objective. Of course, the cognitive content of the lesson is the vehicle you will use to reach the affective domain. Samples of behavior are included to provide indications that the students not only understand, but also value the information presented surrounding the objective. You should consciously strive to reach the affective domain as you deliver your lecture/guide your discussions. To assess whether you are meeting the objective, ask questions to obtain responses that demonstrate the affective samples of behavior. To accomplish this, ask how and why questions while recognizing and “seizing opportunities” to make your own inquiries of students’ attitudes and feelings. Avoid providing anticipated responses to how and why questions. This will require you to use effective questioning to get the value based responses you are looking for, but don’t put the “words in their mouths.” Responses that communicate feelings in line with the objective are the first level of determining whether you are reaching the affective learning objective with your students.This lesson is designed to draw upon the students’ interactions and knowledge gained from the Leadership Authority and Responsibility and Accountability lessons taught previously. Using various scenes from the movie Saving Private Ryan, the class will watch the film and then participate in a guided discussion. While the guided discussion questions are available in the lesson plan, you should not feel obligated to stay with the questions provided—especially if the discussion is leading you in another direction. Ultimately though, it’s your responsibility to ensure the students are getting the information necessary to fulfill the samples of behavior.The lesson is three hours long and should be divided into the segments as prescribed. We suggest you pause the DVD after the various scenes to discuss the events presented. It’s important to emphasize to the students that even though most of them will never face a combat scenario like these, the need for moral, legal, and ethical courage by junior officers is required in every career field. The intent of this lesson is to get the students thinking and discussing ethical issues they may have to face. Lesson Outline:Introduction 5 MinutesPart 130 MinutesGuided Discussion 25 MinutesPart 235 MinutesGuided Discussion25 MinutesPart 330 MinutesGuided Discussion25 MinutesConclusion 5 MinutesPART IIINTRODUCTIONATTENTION(Suggested: Who was Army First Lieutenant William Calley? How many of you know why he was court-martialed? He ordered, and participated in, the killing of more than 100 unarmed Vietnamese men, women, and children at My Lai Village during the Vietnam War.) MOTIVATION(Suggested: As we view this film today perhaps you will get some feel for the ethical issues faced by Lt Calley and hundreds of other officers involved in combat. We acknowledge that most of you will never face these situations, but you will most certainly find yourself in ethical situations as a supervisor or a follower. Will you question unethical situations or simply comply as Lt Calley’s men did?)OVERVIEW(Suggested: Today we will view scenes from the movie Saving Private Ryan. This film and discussion on ethical, moral, and legal imperatives should provide you with an appreciation of the ethical issues awaiting officers on a daily basis.) Introduction 5 MinutesPart 130 MinutesGuided Discussion 25 MinutesPart 235 MinutesGuided Discussion25 MinutesPart 330 MinutesGuided Discussion25 MinutesConclusion 5 MinutesINSTRUCTOR NOTE: As a precursor for the students: The movie Saving Private Ryan contains explicit language, violence, and realistic/bloody combat scenes. You will probably need to discuss this with the students to prepare them for the film. We recommend previewing the film/scenes before presenting the lesson.BODYPRESENTATIONShow Part I (Scene 3, Fast Forward to 16:00 minutes AFTER the black screen reading of Saving Private Ryan, play until Scene 7, 46:00 minutes) LOQ: What ethical dilemmas did Captain Miller and his men have to deal with as they stormed the beachhead to take out the Germans?AR: Turning back/hiding after a voracious barrage on their company, saving their own lives versus helping injured, following orders that might put them in harm’s way, killing Germans as they came out of their positions unarmed, killing German POWs that were obviously surrendering to the Americans. FUQ: Were Captain Miller’s orders in this scene ethical? Legal? Why?AR: Yes. Captain Miller’s superiors gave him a legal order to secure Sector 4/“Dog 1” of Normandy Beach—to ensure mission accomplishment. As we learned in Leadership Authority and Responsibility—there are four guidelines for issuing orders:--Captain Miller’s orders were:within the limits of authority of his position—he was the CO of the company and given specific orders to follow.related to military duty, morale and discipline—it was their job.clear and unequivocal—the gun nest had to be taken out or else the mission would fail!received and understood by his men.FUQ: Why were the men continuing to move up the beachhead even though soldiers around them continued to be killed?AR: It was their duty to ensure they accomplished the mission. In order to save the lives of thousands of other allied soldiers, they had to move forward to be successful. The orders were legal, moral, clear, understood, and within the rights of the commanding officer to give. FUQ: During the scene, two American soldiers shoot two German soldiers with their hands up--surrendering. Was that an appropriate action during warfare? Is this an appropriate action to take in war today? Why/Why not?AR: While the American soldiers were angry, frustrated and possibly confused, they had no right ethically, morally or legally to shoot unarmed prisoners. --Today, the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC), as well as the Geneva Convention (agreed upon in 1949), govern our actions as combatants. Prisoners of War must be given their specific rights—especially to life. Article 1 of the Geneva Convention states:Persons taking no active part in hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, color, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.The Law of Armed Conflict states:NONCOMBATANTS --?These people include medical personnel, chaplains, POWs, wounded and sick, shipwrecked, parachutists escaping disabled aircraft, and civilians.? NONCOMBATANTS are NOT legal targets.? A noncombatant poses no military threat to us.? Therefore, there is no military necessity (principle I) in targeting them.FUQ: In the same context, Captain Miller watches the incident (the shooting of the surrendering Germans) happen, without taking action. What responsibilities does Captain Miller have? AR: --Captain Miller both ethically and morally needed to reprimand the soldiers who took part in the incident. This incident was no different than the My Lai massacre during the Vietnam War (no matter the numbers of lives lost). Noncombatants are noncombatants.--He had to decide at that moment whether his men’s lives were more important than those of the German soldiers. While he and his men had just witnessed a massacre of their comrades, they were considered combatants at the time. The Germans were unarmed and hence noncombatants. FUQ: Are your actions as a leader different during combat than any other time?AR: No. As leaders we are expected to uphold the same ethical, moral, and legal principles day-to-day. No matter what the scenario.FUQ: Besides the moral reasons, what is the military value of taking a prisoner versus killing one?AR: The POW may have some valuable intelligence information that can be used against the enemy.FUQ: In the clip, Private Reiban says to Captain Miller, “Explain the math of this to me—what’s the sense of risking the lives of the eight of us for one guy?” --How do leaders make these kinds of decisions? Was this an ethical, moral order given to them? Do the ends justify the means?INSTRUCTOR NOTE: Let’s look at a couple of ideas concerning mission vs. people and how leaders can weigh their decisions. Compare these to Captain Miller’s reply (Show Slide): “There’s a duty as soldiers. We have orders, we have to follow them and that supersedes everything else.”A Leader’s Decision: for the People or for the Mission. As we learned in the Leadership Authority and Responsibility lesson, mission comes first, then unit welfare, then individuals. Leaders must make these types of decisions based on several beliefs. Two of these beliefs include:Group Egoism (to group) -- acts are judged according to whether their consequences are beneficial or harmful for the entire group (family, tribe, nation) to which they belong. Under any form of egoism, the costs and benefits to others, outside of the group, or the leader, are given subordinate status or are ignored entirely.Deontological (to duty) -- comes from the Greek word deon, or duty, since it emphasizes foundational duties or obligations. A moral obligation that a person has towards another person. Duties are actions that are due to someone else, such as paying money that one owes to a creditor. Mission First, People Second. Yes, this mission was both moral and ethical in relation to its intended outcome. The Chief of Staff made the decision to go after Private Ryan based on his ideals, beliefs, and morals. It was worthwhile to “sacrifice” several men as a “compromise” to losing 3 of 4 sons. The Ryan family had sacrificed enough of their boys in the war to make the alternative necessary. “Many of the decisions made in combat are made on the basis of consequences, weighing the costs and benefits of various alternatives.” -- Dr. Larry HinmanAR: Leaders have to balance feelings, morals, and consequences with the outcomes of the mission. In this example, General Marshall knew his duty was to save the last remaining son of the Ryan family at any cost. While the outcome could mean the loss of men, he made the tough decision asked of a senior military leader.Show Part II (Play film from Scene 7 (pool) 00:46:01 where the last scene left off until 1:24:00, Scene 12).Read Scene Set-up: Captain Miller and squad see a family pinned down by the sniper. Private Caparzo, unaware of the danger, runs up to save the daughter from the building. When Captain Miller tells him to get down, Caparzo disobeys the order, grabs the girl and states-- “The decent thing to do is to take her down the road to the next village.” LOQ: What do you think about the scenario that took place between the captain and Caparzo?AR: This was a blatant disregard for the captain’s orders in front of the other men. If Captain Miller wasn’t already a proven leader this could have been a problem down the road (dissention, mission failure). His order was legal, clear, and unequivocal. FUQ: Who was in the right...Caparzo or the Captain? Why?AR: In this scenario, Captain Miller was given a set of orders he knew he must accomplish...Caparzo was in the wrong by disobeying those direct orders.FUQ: Is there ever an appropriate time to sway from the mission? Even against direct orders?AR: Yes, if it’s necessary for mission accomplishment you should sway from the orders given to you—maybe intelligence is bad or communication is lost...different scenarios will mean different decisions. Also, if a mission/order is deemed an unethical, immoral, or illegal mission/order it should be ignored or refused. Otherwise, the person following the orders is just as much a criminal as the leader who gave the order.Read Scene Set-up: After Caparzo takes the girl down and disobeys the Captain’s direct order, Miller states, “We’re not here to do the decent thing!”LOQ: What did the captain mean by “we’re not here to do the decent thing”? Was this an appropriate time to attempt to save a civilian? Why/why not? AR: Captain Miller meant they weren’t sent to the village to save this family. He needed his men’s full attention–as talked about earlier this was “group egoism” – the family was not a part of the group’s mission, nor an objective.FUQ: Is there an appropriate time for compassion in combat/war? Why/why not?AR: Sure. Over the years and most recently with Operation Iraqi Freedom, the allied forces have demonstrated a great blend of humanitarian aid during combat. But, they’ve shown great constraint to not endanger the mission or the people involved in the mission. This is a “right vs. right scenario,” where one outcome must outweigh the other.FUQ: After the sniper is killed, what was Captain Miller trying to get across to his men by pointing at the dead body of Pvt. Caparzo and saying, “That’s why we can’t take children!”AR: The end result was that Caparzo now affected the outcome of the mission. His idea of compassion interfered with mission accomplishment. The mission might have required eight men for success...now’s he’s dead. There will be times when we may want to do something, but we must be accountable for mission first, and then people. Ethically, we might be called to do what feels right...but that’s when we must make a tough decision—right vs. right. Which is more right?Scene Set-up: Captain Miller and First Sgt. Horvath are in the chapel discussing the mission. After telling the men the worthiness of the mission, he begins to wonder if his rationalization is right (Show Slide).LOQ: What do you think about the captain’s rationalization and Horvath’s response (on the slide) for the war/mission? AR: As a leader there are times when you are going to have to do things you don’t particularly like, and not only have to justify them to yourself, but also your followers. Keeping the faith in your leadership is part of service before self and excellence in all we do. Sometimes it takes our followers to remind us of those important pieces, but watch who you are “complaining” or “rationalizing” to.FUQ: In Chaplain Maloney’s article, he writes about three “Ethical Pressures” that the military professional contends with on a day-to-day basis (rules, goals, situations). In this scene what are the rules, goals, and situations the captain must contend with?AR:--Rules: following orders at all costs, U.S. rules of combat, religious, moral--Goals: Accomplishing the mission by any means necessary, keeping his men alive, getting home safely to his wife --Situations: mission vs. his people (deontology vs. group egoism), save the family vs. completing mission, save Caparzo--lose more men, losing eight men to save oneC.Show Part 3 (Play film from Scene 12, 1:24:00 where the last scene left off, stopping in Scene 14, at 1:53:30 where 1st Sergeant and Captain Miller agree to stay and fight with Private Ryan and his platoon.)LOQ: Captain Miller decides to take out the gun nest even though his subordinates disagree. Was this an unnecessary risk since it was not a part of the mission? Was this an illegal/immoral order? Why/Why Not?AR: Captain Miller knew he was putting his men at risk, but felt his overall mission was to defeat the enemy. He wanted to ensure this hidden bunker wouldn’t be a threat to other allied patrols in the future.FUQ: Would it have been morally/ethically wrong not to attack the bunker?AR: As leaders you will have to make tough choices—choosing right from wrong and right from right. Captain Miller believed his immediate duty was to protect the larger group. With group egoism...the question becomes which group will you protect? The squad or allied soldiers as a whole? FUQ: If you’re the squad leader and you see this hidden machine gun nest--do you take it out, or walk around it, as your subordinates would like to do? Why?AR: Individual responses/opinions from the students.Scene Set-up: Private Upham questions the captain after they capture the German prisoner—“Sir, are you gonna let them kill him? This is not right” (Show Slide). LOQ: Would it have been okay to shoot this German since he was an enemy combatant at one time--killing several allied troops? Why/why not?AR: Just as we would expect the enemy to do with our captured (and unarmed) soldiers, it would not be okay to shoot this soldier with or without the LOAC and Geneva Convention. FUQ: If they were to keep the prisoner, what are the limits to making a POW talk? Can you justify torturing prisoners?AR: No, the LOAC and Geneva Convention prevent it. As a leader we must place, as Colonel Maloney wrote, “Rule Oriented Obligations” above those of our “Goal Oriented Obligations.” While we want intelligence from our enemies...we must conduct ourselves, as our enemies would hopefully treat our people.FUQ: When they let this German soldier go, he’s supposed to surrender to the next allied force he met. Unfortunately he didn’t. In a scene towards the end of the movie, the same soldier returns to shoot several of Captain Miller’s squad (Show Slide).--Was this wrong for the German to come back and fight? Was he supposed to do the ethical thing and find an allied force to surrender to?--As a hypothetical question, if you were the prisoner, and the enemy let you go would you escape back to your allies or give yourself up?Scene Set-up: After they release the German POW--there is dissention among the troops. Private Reiban disobeys orders and begins ribbing the captain about “doing the decent thing.” When Reiban walks away from the mission, the 1st Sgt. pulls out his pistol defending the captain, and tells Reiban to get back or he’ll shoot (Show Slide).LOQ: Is this a situation where shooting a fellow soldier is necessary or even ethical? As the commander what would you have done if this soldier walked away from you and the mission?INSTRUCTOR NOTE: The idea of shooting a fellow soldier as depicted in this film is obviously an extreme action. It is highly unlikely to be the right or legal choice. However, there could be an extreme situation when a leader may have to make the “tough call” for self defense, defense of the troops, or defense of resources. If you choose to discuss the gray area of this topic, be sure not to promote or teach this action as an accepted or standard tool of Air Force discipline.AR: Shooting a soldier for disobeying an order is probably unnecessary. But, prosecuting this soldier for disobeying orders is most likely the best avenue. The commander must not only ensure this soldier is punished, but make a stand against mutiny and/or dissention in the ranks. FUQ: Let’s say the captain ordered the shooting of Private Reiban or the prisoner...do higher orders justify unethical or immoral actions at the lower level to achieve a desired outcome?AR: Members of the U.S. Armed Forces have the moral obligation to disobey “unlawful orders” at any point in the chain of command.CONCLUSIONSUMMARY Let’s review some of the basic points in this lesson:1)Officers Provide a “Sanity Check”–Leadership Authority and Responsibility–Principle, Purpose, People2)Obedience is good, but Blind Obedience is Dangerous–Illegal, Immoral, Unethical Orders–Dissention/Disobeying Orders3)The End Does Not Always Justify the Means–Ethical Pressures4)Balancing Considerations–Right vs. Right or Right vs. WrongREMOTIVATION(Suggested: Ethical choices will face you every day you serve on active duty, and probably every day in civilian life also. You need to examine, beforehand, what choices you will make and where you draw the “ethical line.”)CLOSURE(Suggested: While this concludes our lessons on ethics for this course, I highly encourage you to pursue this topic personally as you continue your Air Force career.)Bibliography:Maloney, Samuel D. “Ethics Theory for the Military Professional,” AU-24 Concepts for Air Force Leadership, Air University Press, 2001; pp. 55-60.Spielberg, Steven. (Director). (1998). Saving Private Ryan [Film]. DreamWorks SKG, Paramount Pictures Corporation & Amblin Entertainment, Inc.THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download