[March 18, 2015] In 2006 while serving in Iraq as a U.S. Army engineer, I encountered Joe S. (a pseudonym) an auditor with the U.S. Government Accounting Office (GAO). He was looking into whether U.S. dollars were spent appropriately on the Iraqi reconstruction effort. Following all laws and regulations of the United States is a requirement of the U.S. military regardless of its operational status, including combat. There was considerable angst over this issue at the highest levels of senior leadership within the U.S. government over combat in Iraq because the laws were designed for peacetime only.
Most people I speak to believe that most U.S. laws do not apply outside the territorial boundaries of the United States and that our military is exempt from many federal laws and regulations. While logic may dictate such a view, that is not the case, nor should it be. The only concession I ever saw was to speed up any approval/disapproval processes required. Everything moved faster in combat, yet speed also meant increased risk … thus the GAO investigation being conducted by Joe S. The results of the investigation can be found here on the official GAO website (see link).
A particular area effecting combat engineering was the requirement to adhere to all current U.S. building codes. Imagine building handicap access to new buildings for combat soldiers in Iraq and you get the picture. One challenge was importing sufficient amount of construction material that met U.S. standards – nearly all coming directly from mainland USA. Clearly, this constraint was difficult to follow and meant construction was often slowed and far more expensive. This put our military at risk of attack because a needed facility was not available when required.
The U.S. military was hobbled by the U.S. Congress because there was little motivation for Congress to act to make modifications. The reasons were multifaceted. The Iraq War had been highly politicized by 2006, the war was not going as well as expected, and Congress was in no mood to make changes to any law governing our combat forces in the field. Also, if Congress were to create exemptions, many believed it would be voluntarily giving up its power to the military and that would be unprecedented and unacceptable.
There is a good reason why studying the details of how and why certain actions were taken in combat makes for better performance in the future. Senior leaders must ensure such information is captured promptly and analyzed with the idea on how to do things better. The GAO audit did this and brought to light many things that our military could have improved upon (cheaper, faster, better) if it had better prepared for the mission in advance and executed its mission with tighter controls.
[Don’t forget to “Like” the Leader Maker at our Facebook Page.]