The Blood on Robert McNamara’s Hands-and Conscience
Case problem and its Significance
The problem in this case is the question ethics of loyalty. Robert S. McNamara is a government official who finds himself in an ethical dilemma. The big question is whether the government official should be loyal to the citizens or the administration. It also questions whether loyalty to a governor, mayor or president has to be greater or lesser than loyalty to the citizens’ overall interests.Robert S. McNamara served as the secretary of defense under the rule of President F. Kennedy and later president Lyndon B. Johnson. As the defense secretary, McNamara served as the chief administrator of a futile war in Vietnam which resulted to deaths of several Vietnamese and Americans. McNamara knew from the very start that the war was unwinnable. Despite this knowledge, he kept silent and continued to pour innocent blood out of loyalty to the president.
McNamara knew that President Johnson’s administration did not have enough knowledge on the war situation. He had also agreed with the protesters of antiwar belief that the war was unwinnable and futile. If only McNamara had confessed these facts before leaving the defense office, ten thousand of American lives could have been saved. This implies that McNamara’s loyalty to the interests of citizens could have helped save American lives. Hence, it is clear that the loyalty of McNamara is questionable. The dilemma is whether he was right to remain loyal to the president or follow his conscience and be loyal to the citizens’ interest. The significance of this case study is that it has been used to show the limitations of relying on system analysis and mathematical models for decision making. Moreover, the case study plays a significant role in depicting today’s public administration sector whereby the question of ethical dilemmas has been a major issue affecting public officials in both public and private sectors. Finally it portrays the high level of dissatisfaction and cynicism citizens have towards their governments.
History of the Case
McNamara taught statistics at HarvardBusinessSchool before the Second World War. Due to his honorable service in the war, McNamara was promoted to the rank of the U.S Army Air Corps lieutenant general. In 1946, he joined the Ford Motor Company and became its president in the year 1961. A few months later, McNamara was appointed as the defense secretary by President John F. Kennedy. As the defense secretary, he pursued a futile war in Vietnam where he was the chief administrator ad instrument through which millions of Vietnamese and tens of thousands of Americans died.Media sources such as the New York Times published information condemning and viewing McNamara as an intellectual and moral coward due to his silence and hypocrisy. He was further referred to as an individual who deserved to be morally condemned by his countrymen. The big question in people’s minds was the reason as to why such a patriotic citizen who wanted to do good in government service could end up causing so much harm in such a massive scale. McNamara was extremely knowledgeable and was the architect of the military strategy of America in Vietnam and among the strongest advocates of the war. As the war progressed, he gradually became disenchanted with the slaughter, which made him believe that the war could never be won at any given time. Due to the great burdens cased by the war and his disenchantment, McNamara was appointed as the President of the World Bank. His leaving for the World Bank made critics conclude that he went to the World Bank while a lot of other Americans went to their graves as a result of losing their lives in the war.
The source of information about McNamara’s true feelings was McNamara himself. He published his memoir in 1995, where he stated his knowledge that the war was unwinnable. Despite knowing this, he kept silent and continued pouring American blood out of being loyal to President Johnston. McNamara’s role in the war became an open secret through his published memoir. His decision of remaining silent took many American Soldiers and millions of Vietnamese lives. He chose to remain loyal to President Johnston in exchange for American and Vietnamese citizens lives. It can be presumed that the guilty conscience is what drove McNamara into publishing his memoir confessing his role in the Vietnamese war. He was not at peace with the fact that he was guilty of the death of many American solders and Vietnamese citizens. The same case applies to our governments and big firms where employees are often faced with ethical dilemmas especially with the loyalty issue. It is essential to make an ethical decision when it comes to such matters. It is also recommendable to follow one’s conscience.
Alternative Solutions to the Problem
The best solution to the problem was for McNamara to make a logical and ethical solution. This would only be possible if he had followed his conscience. Ethics refer to reverence for life and this is the key principle of morality. McNamara’s reverence for life could be clearly expressed by showing loyalty to citizen’s interest rather that loyalty to President Johnston. Morality entails promoting, maintaining and enhancing life. On the other hand, limiting, injuring and destroying life as McNamara did, is referred to as evil and lack of morality (Johnson and Ridley, 2007). It was once said that the greatest tragedy is not to live and die but rather, the greatest tragedy is to live and die without having the satisfaction of giving life to others. If only McNamara had lived with this principle in his mind, he would not have chose to keep silent and let millions of lives die during the war. Hence, McNamara encountered one of the greatest tragedies in his life since he lived and died living people with so much anger and hatred towards him for the role he played in the Vietnamese war and the loss of countless lives (Johnson, 2007). Though it is appropriate to remain loyal to our superiors, it is essential for one to make a wise decision when it comes to ethical quandaries like the Robert McNamara case. Our decisions should be based solely on ethics, morals and conscience. It is essential to weigh the various options and carefully analyze the consequences of the decisions made. One should make a decision that can help save lives instead of killing innocent souls and lives (Johnson, 2007). McNamara opted to remain silent and this decision resulted to countless lives and souls to be lost during the war. Even though, he later confessed through his memoir, it was already too late since may lives had been lost and people had greatly suffered because of him.
Implications and Lessons for a Public Administrator
Public administrators are among the most important individuals or leaders who deserve loyalty from their subjects. Many of the said subjects have an inner fear of facing public administrators and questioning them about some key policies that affect them in one way or another. A good example is a policy that enhances inequality and unfair treatment. Some employees will keep silent and fail to face the public administrators all in the name of loyalty without considering the fact that innocent people are suffering as a result of their silence (Johnson, 2007). Public administrators are not supposed to misuse their offices for self-interest reasons. Misusing of offices may lead to negative effects such as tyranny. These public officials should also have an obligation to stand by the truth since this is the only key to prosperity. There are several levels of ethics in public administration for instance organizational ethics, social ethics, professional ethics and morality. Hence, the issue loyalty ethics forms an integral part in public administration (Johnson, 2007).
Conclusion
It is essential to keep in mind that honor comes before ethics. This is due to the fact that an individual without honor has no moral direction and can not come up with ethical solutions and decisions. Public officials need to be careful not to misuse their offices for self-gain since this may affect the rule of law and change its meaning. Moreover, public officials need to stand by the truth since this is the major key to prosperity and honor.
Reference
Johnson, W. B., & Ridley, C. R. (2007) The Elements of Ethics. Palgrave Macmillan.
Is this your assignment or some part of it?
We can do it for you! Click to Order!
