Military Review English Edition September-October 2013 | Page 4

Trust Erosion and Identity Corrosion Col. John A. Vermeesch, U.S. Army No profession can survive if it loses the trust of its client; and the Army now has much to do to restore its credibility as a self-policing institution. — Don Snider, Ph.D. P Col. John Vermeesch is currently the deputy director of the Center for Army Profession and Ethic. He holds a B.S. from the U.S. Military Academy, an M.S. from Long Island University and an M.S.S. from the U.S. Army War College. He is a former battalion commander who served two tours in Iraq. PHOTO: From left to right: U.S. Rep. Michael Turner of Ohio, Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta, and U.S. Rep. Loretta Sanchez of California participate in a press briefing at the House of Representatives in Washington, D.C., 16 April 2012. (By Lisa Daniel, American Forces Press Service) ROFESSOR DON SNIDER’S warning to the Army in the 2004 edition of The Future of the Army Profession is now more relevant than ever. The U.S. Army spent the last two years studying and debating what it means to be a profession and what qualifies individuals as professionals. It worked to maintain its professional status as an institution and avoid becoming just one more government bureaucracy. However, the critical task that lies ahead requires the Army to identify the future threats to the profession and safeguard against them. This article tackles that task. It identifies challenges to the Army profession in 2020 and beyond, and makes recommendations to overcome them. The primary threats to the Army profession in the next decade are the erosion of the American people’s trust combined with identity corrosion among Army professionals. There is a growing division between the civilians who control the military and the officers who lead it, brought on by an increasing belief that the officer corps fails to self-police the institution. Senior leaders in the Army exacerbate this perception by committing the very crimes they are charged with policing. While not yet fully manifested in the opinions of the American public, evidence of this loss of trust is rapidly emerging in the form of calls for oversight by the Army’s civil