Low-Trust Military
The Army’s response to the Reagan crash should stir Americans to demand honesty.
Sir Winston Churchill is known to have remarked that “In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies.” That timeless mindset of deception has proven effective at enabling militaries to surprise adversaries on the battlefield throughout the history of human warfare. But when such tactics carry over into how the military communicates with citizens, ethical lines have clearly been crossed. This undermines the military officer’s oath of office and sows distrust among the public that the military is supposed to serve. Such a case is presently before us.
A recent report in the New York Times revealed that the pilot of the UH-60 Blackhawk helicopter that knocked American Airlines flight 5342 from the sky in January made several errors. The pilot ignored a warning to change direction and collided with the plane, killing everyone on both aircraft. This information was not released by the U.S. Army nor the Department of Defense, even though the official policy of both is maximum disclosure, minimum delay. But in this and countless other cases, the military’s actions are hostile to official DoD policies.
The Army took unprecedented actions to delay releasing the pilot’s identity, as all traces of her online persona were wiped from the web. Once the public learned that former Biden White House aide U.S. Army Capt. Rebecca Lobach piloted the helicopter on that tragic night, they had virtually nothing to use to evaluate her. We were assured she was a stellar soldier, but we have heard nothing from those who served alongside her.
Was Lobach allowed multiple retry attempts for repeatedly failing required check rides? Was her entire unit threatened not to speak with the press? We don’t know. But I do know from 20 years of experience as a military public affairs officer that there is ample precedent for commanders breaking regulations by ordering troops not to talk with the media. This often happens when there is a chance that the truth would be embarrassing to the military, or when a senior officer lied and the force feels it’s better to perpetuate that lie than to come clean.
That’s exactly what happened when Bowe Bergdahl abandoned his unit in Afghanistan in 2009. The Army allowed a narrative to develop in which Bergdahl merely fell behind on a patrol. Meanwhile, members of his unit were threatened and forced to sign non-disclosure agreements. Only after his return in 2014 did many of those former soldiers feel safe speaking out, thus pressuring the Army to court-martial a deserter it had been publicly holding up as a hero. Frequently, the military’s communication malpractice swings the door open for a number of theories to proliferate on military-affiliated tragedies and scandals.
Well known for its thoroughness and professionalism, the National Transportation Safety Board will no doubt ascertain the technical causes of the crash. But what are the potential cultural factors?
Was Capt. Lobach rushed to levels beyond her mastery because of her sex and sexual orientation? (The latter was alluded to in the tribute statement released by her family through the Army, another seismic departure from procedure.) That has been a hallmark of military practice in recent years. Did her female commander show preference for a fellow female aviator? If so, it would be far from the first time this has happened in the ranks. Why did the instructor pilot not take the controls? Is it possible he doubted the command would have his back in taking action that could have a detrimental effect on an officer who had recently worked for President Biden?
It has been open knowledge across the military for years that for a white man to question or criticize anyone other than another white man is a high-risk endeavor for which the pain of retaliatory investigation eagerly awaits. This same fear no doubt plays a role in why half of eligible U.S. Army officers decline consideration for battalion command, a requirement to be considered for promotion to colonel.
These are men and women who braved Iraq and Afghanistan—but who find navigating the minefield of grievance culture too high a risk.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth recently acknowledged this truth in signing what he called a “no walking on eggshells policy.” Beyond that, the military has done its best to drum common sense out of its soldiers. Consider how nearly every single military physician and commander went along with masks, shots, and the six-foot social distancing rule without requesting or offering a single point of proof.
Of course it’s possible that the D.C. air crash was merely the merging of multiple human and technical factors unrelated to any ideological commitments. But given the Army’s method of handling such situations, the burden of proof rightly falls on them to prove otherwise.
As the Obama Administration pushed the Army to get women successfully through the grueling Ranger School in 2015, some Army officials anonymously admitted that women were being given preferential treatment to ensure they would graduate from a course that is extremely rigorous, even for the strongest men. The Army destroyed the training records for the first women who attended the course.
Then-Chief of Public Affairs Maj. Gen. Malcolm Frost slandered Susan Keating for reporting on allegations that the Army failed to hold women ranger trainees to its stated standards. Had Frost consulted a history book, he might have known that the Ranger School fiasco followed a long trail of dishonesty from an Army that brought us Agent Orange, told lies about Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman, and went so far as to arrest reporters during the Civil War, among many other dishonorable actions.
Retired U.S. Navy Admiral William McRaven let it slip during a recent CNN interview that generals and admirals, and those still hoping to attain those ranks, cannot be trusted to be truthful. If previous actions are indicators of future behavior, we should assume any records that might cast a shadow on Capt. Lobach’s capability and her command’s decision to put her in the air that night no longer exist. Even with new leadership at the top of the DoD, the entrenched bureaucracy continues to focus on preserving itself above all else.
The tragedy over the Potomac may be an innocent accident. Or it may be tragic proof that DEI initiatives literally kill. But because of the Army’s tendency to obfuscate, it will likely be years before we know the truth.