Sears: [00:00:00] This is Radio Stockdale. Welcome to Radio, Stockdale. I'm your host, Michael Sears at the Stockdale Center for Ethical Leadership. My guest is a retired Marine Corps colonel where he served as an infantry officer and field historian. He earned a doctorate at Boston University and among many other assignments and activities. He was the director of ethics and character development at the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy. His latest book is How to Think Like an Officer. Welcome, Professor Reed Bonodona.

Bonodona: [00:00:43] Thanks, Michael. Very glad to be here.

Sears: [00:00:44] Great to have you here. You know, I'm going to put a little bit of a preamble here. We just are wrapping up a nine-part series on our podcasts about the Oath of Office and the connection between the oath of office and the Constitution, the Bill of Rights. Ok, we're hitting that pretty hard. But you've got an issue here. You're saying that might not be enough. Why aren't the existing guidelines strong enough to really connect service people with ethics?

Bonodona: [00:01:15] Well, I think one of the reasons for that that occurred to me and which was a motivation for my, my sitting down and writing out this code and then and then working on getting it published was just some recent ethical problems that the military services have been experiencing now for several years, from unprosecuted war crimes to the persistence of sexual assault, sexual harassment, toxic command climates being reported on all sides. And then finally, this came to a head with me with the six January insurrection. This was this was this was a personal embarrassment to me to find out that actually a disproportionate number of the six January insurrectionists were military veterans or military members, and in fact, as a marine to find out that a disproportionate number of the of the military types were marines or former marines.

Sears: [00:02:09] Let me ask you this, then, if the code of conduct is not enough. Isn't the UCMJ standing there to take care of this stuff?

Bonodona: [00:02:17] Well, I think it's maybe important to look at some of the things that I'm talking about in the in the code itself, which are simply not covered by the UCMJ. I'm looking at I'm looking at number four, for example, of the ones that I propose. I will send an example of my commitment to human rights and diversity to gender, racial and ethnic equality. And I'll exert myself to ensure my fellow service members do likewise. I'll respect the religious beliefs. Number six or absence of religious belief in my fellow service members, and I'll never seek to impose my own beliefs on others. I will demonstrate respect for the institutions of democracy and support for the electoral and legislative process. These matters are not covered in in the UCMJ and not, not explicitly. And although certainly an interpretation or a discussion of the constitutional oath could bring these out as elements of the constitutional oath, they're not made explicitly, and I would venture to say they're not made, they're not made explicitly enough. As a matter of fact, one of the major players in the six January insurrection who recruit among recruited heavily among military. These people style themselves Oath Keepers and the idea that the way these people were behaving. Demonstrates a commitment to their constitutional oath. May strike us as absurd, but the fact that there are people out there who even having gone through military service, military training, been involved in discussions hopefully of military ethics of of the constitutional oath could still come away from their service. Thinking that, you know, an assault on the U.S. Capitol was and was in keeping with their oath to the Constitution is is a problem and something that greater command attention needs to be exerted against.

Sears: [00:04:22] Ok, so I think I see what you're talking about. Being a bigot is not illegal. Being a misogynist is not illegal. That's what you're saying, right? Right. Yes. Now let me ask this, but if they're if they're doing the right thing, at least in their mind, isn't that good enough? The ends matter as well as the means is something I've heard you say before. What do you mean by that?

Bonodona: [00:04:43] What do I mean by the but the ends matter as well as the means? Well, I did bring into my discussion of the of the 10 points of the code. I discussed the debate over the over the over the Confederate monuments. And I think that there's there is a kind of a narrow definition of military professionalism that's out there, which seems to suggest that as long as you are, as long as you are fighting well, as long as you are fighting within the rules that the cause is secondary. But I think that that's a very bad road for us to go down the, you know, back in World War to the armed forces. And this was commissioned by George C. Marshall, who was the army chief of staff at that time. Also, Nobel Prize winner commission called Why We Fight and this question of what we're fighting for, what kind of what kind of values we're serving, what is the point of our military expertise, our professionalism? What is the object, for example, of the Marine Corps commitment to honor, honor, courage and commitment is an extremely important question and one, I think which is left been left too much to chance.

Sears: [00:06:07] You know, so what I'll do here is we'll put a link to your article on this code of ethics that you're talking about. But let me ask this who does that apply to?

Bonodona: [00:06:20] Well, I think that that could be a topic for discussion my my initial conception was that this would apply certainly to all uniformed military members. I've had a couple of people write to me and say, well, really, shouldn't this be anyone who's involved in the national defense to include civilian members of the of the Department of Defense? You know, perhaps others who bear arms in the service of their country, even if not nominally members of the armed forces. So, I I'm not sure I could cover all the bases, all the different branches that are out there and departments that are out there. But I would say certainly, certainly uniformed military and probably civilian Defense Department as well and retirees.

Sears: [00:07:17] Did I hear you say that?

Bonodona: [00:07:18] Well, I think that making it applicable to retirees would be, you know, you can't really hold retirees liable to a military legal code. But I think the point here, the primary point here, my idea would be that if we had an armed forces in which everybody coming in had to read this oath on the on the on the bulkhead of his or her first job and, you know, then get asked, OK, get it. And then if it became part of the military education system of military culture, it was something that you that you saw in barracks. It was something that you had classes, classes on, hopefully discussions on hopefully that by the time someone became a veteran, they would they would get the idea. This would be part of it. And frankly, one of the thoughts I also had was that someone who proposes to come into the military but does not believe in in equality does not believe in some of the some of the tenets of the code that that that cover things like human rights and diversity of freedom of religious or not having religious belief, the institution of democracy and support for the electoral and legislative process. Someone who does not have these views, frankly, could be dissuaded from entering military service, and I think that these people are people that we could do without.

Sears: [00:08:57] Very interesting. I've had a chance to read your 10 points here. Where did this come from? What are you? Where are you drawing these ideas from?

Bonodona: [00:09:06] Well, I list a number of a number of general sources. I think they are in part derived from the Constitution and sort of an interpretation or a rereading of the of the constitutional oath. I also cite the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the United Nations Declaration of a Human Rights, among others. But you know, maybe to go even further back than that. One of the sources is the golden rule of treating others as we as we would like to be treated or as we or as we should treat others, a categorical imperative to treat our own behavior as if we were as if we were setting a setting a rule of conduct for the rest of humanity. These are, I think, some of the things that were in the in the in the far background when I was trying to come up with, you know, and perhaps they can't be comprehensive, but I limited myself to 10. I wanted them to be succinct. I saw this, I saw this problem. And am I my sort of simple Jarhead way? I was thinking, well, let's just let's just make some rules, make a make a set of 10 easily comprehensible rules. And sort of this would not be the end, but sort of start from there. Start with a discussion of that. But also, be will also be explicit about what we want, which is, I think sometimes a reach with the constitutional oath unaided by some other supporting explicit points to be made on the subject of ethics.

Sears: [00:10:47] Professor Reed Bernadino, former director of ethics and character development at the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy and retired United States Marine Corps Colonel. You're biting off a lot here, Colonel.

Bonodona: [00:10:58] Yes, I know. I recognize that.

Sears: [00:11:01] We appreciate having you aboard. And there's obviously more things we can talk about. Thanks for joining us.

Bonodona: [00:11:07] Thank you. Thanks for the opportunity, Michael.

Sears: [00:11:15] You've been listening to Radio Stockdale, a series of podcasts produced by the Stockdale Center for Ethical Leadership at the United States Naval Academy. You can hear more podcasts at Stockdale Center's podcasts.