First Among Equals: The History and Politics of Choosing the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Open AccessABSTRACTAs the principal military advisor to the President, the National Security Council, and the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) plays an important role in the formulation and implementation of U.S. defense and foreign policy. The advice the Chairman gives to the U.S. government's senior civilian defense and foreign policy leaders can strongly influence such national-level decisions such as whether to go to war, to deploy U.S. forces abroad, or to bring them home, and whether to extend or withhold U.S. support to a foreign power among a number of other strategic, operational, and tactical choices. Since the creation of the position in 1949, the United States Senate has never rejected any of the eighteen generals and admirals who have been nominated to serve as Chairman. This would seem to suggest that the President has incredible latitude to choose whomever he would like for JCS Chairman and that Congress plays a minimal role in the executive branch decision-making process to select that nominee. This dissertation provides evidence that the U.S. Congress does play a role in the development of an administration's short -list as well as in its eventual selection of a nominee for Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. It was discovered that while Congress generally defers to the Executive Branch in nominating a Chairman, in the few instances in which it has stated an opinion, its influence has been statistically significant. The influence is felt during the generation of an administration's short-list as well as in its final choice of a nominee. This advice is especially important under unified party conditions as an administration assembles its short-list. The president does not have unfettered discretion but is rather more limited in his options than one would initially think. The empirical models also indicate that presidents typically select general officers for Chairman who agree with the administration's foreign and defense policy priorities, have been recommended by the outgoing Chairman, and are of higher quality as measured by a "merit" score than their peers.
- All rights reserved
Notice to Authors
If you are the author of this work and you have any questions about the information on this page, please use the Contact form to get in touch with us.