Colin Powell's Core Values

Core Values and the War on Terror
Given the countless advances we’ve collectively achieved as a nation throughout the past few decades, it’s nothing short of a miracle that the conflict we’ve experienced has been relatively tame, at least in comparison to previous, larger-scale disputes. Nevertheless, war seems to be an unfortunately integral part of humanity’s capability, and despite the comparative peace that has been established and sustained in the U.S., the natural ebb and flow of our world manages to miss a beat on occasion. The spoke of history’s turntable violently fell out of harmony on a fateful September 11th almost fifteen years ago. People that were old enough to fully comprehend the significance of the situation can still bring

back vivid recollections of that day from their experience. For weeks, endless video replays and analyses gripped the media, seemingly insistent upon ingraining the terror of the fall of the Twin Towers (OEF & OIF, n.d.).
The effects of this catastrophe were felt worldwide; most everyone was in shock, to say the least. Countless accounts around the world will show that most countries have been subject to attacks from arbitrary opposition, but this instance in New York City it occurred on U.S. soil. The lives of thousands of civilians were taken in an instant, some of which having had to confront their end with an incomprehensibly difficult choice to do so. Both immediate and ensuing damages to infrastructure caused by the two planes were disasters of their own, having created billions of dollars in loss and months in man hours dedicated to cleanup, rescue, and recovery - but this is just in regard to New York and the United States. The fiscal collision between the planes and global markets lead to falls in shares in most other major countries, the implications of which are still being felt to this day. Naturally, action had to be taken - the United States along with various other major powers across the globe wanted redemption for this tragedy. From the initial scramble to uncover the perpetrators of these attacks came form to a terrorist organization known as Al-Qaeda, a militant Islamic extremist group (OEF & OIF, n.d.).
During this time, two military leaders would emerge: enter General Tommy Franks, accompanied by the service provided by retired-general/Secretary of State Colin Powell. Franks came from a modest background and was quick to rise in leaps and bounds throughout his lengthy career in the military. His resume on paper alone as a four-star General gives credence to his ability as a great military leader and the responsibility he upheld in defending our nation. Born in Oklahoma and having grown up in Texas, Franks would go on to receive his first commission in 1967 as a field artillery officer, subsequently being sent off to Vietnam where he earned three purple hearts in addition to several awards for valor. His assignments following this included a brief stint in West Germany during the Cold War, then Korea, after which he would proceed to the deserts of Saudi Arabia. The variety in his missions, along with the immeasurable factors associated with each location (ranging from interacting with new people, dealing with foreign environments, etc.) would provide him the knowledge and experience he would later apply into the groundwork for his future mission of defending the United States against the war on terror (Biography Military Career, n.d.).
Franks was promoted to four-star general in 2000 and was assigned to United States Central Command (CENTCOM). While there, Franks was instrumental in leading two seamless strategic multi-national campaigns against the war on terror, while carrying out Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan and again during Operation Iraqi Freedom in Iraq. He led two separate invasions on two fronts within two years. The invasions on both fronts were extremely successful; on October 7, 2001 Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) began and the United States made the invasion of Afghanistan look almost effortless as Al-Qaeda was ousted from government power rather quickly. However, the emerging new threat of the Taliban proved to be much more difficult to oust, creating a counterinsurgency tactic. Again in March 20, 2003, the United States launched Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and General Franks was able to repeat the invasion into Iraq, usurping Saddam Husain from power. Although our involvement in the war was launched with controversy (with support only provided by the British) the invasion was successful at overthrowing the Hussein regime (Thomas, Brant, Barry, & Lipper, 2003).
I recall being stationed at MacDill Air Force Base during this time and being deployed to the region. My unit was preparing to invade Iraq while directly assigned to support Naval Special Warfare staged in Kuwait. The push to go into Iraq was fast and fierce, and different teams had their assigned target areas to secure. Conventional force commanders made it a race to reach Baghdad and everyone was talking about the leadership of General Tommy Franks. Many remarked about his great leadership strategy and some were in awe of the skill and speed involved when we invaded two different countries. Many were exclaiming great things about his tactical accomplishments but not many were discussing his leadership qualities or philosophies. Most leaders at his level were very distant from proverbial troops and their strategic leadership was almost unseen for the ground soldier (Thomas, Brant, Barry, & Lipper, 2003).
The other aforementioned leader that stands out and made his leadership style available to ground soldiers is Colin Powell.

Having served during this time and actually being deployed to both Iraq and Afghanistan in more than one occasion, his leadership strategies have personally helped me along the way. There are very few leaders during the past twenty years that have been as influential or stayed as relevant as Powell and his contributions to our nation. Of course there have been many leaders with generally good strategies for conducting in the war on terror, but none have made it clear on how to be a good leader, let alone set an overall standard for one. Powell was the Secretary of State during OIF and OEF and proved himself paramount with carrying out the decisions and political backing needed for the United States to invade Iraq and Afghanistan (LaFEBER, 2009).
I recall being on the ground in Kuwait waiting for the order to push into Iraq when I was forwarded a power point presentation with several of Retired General Powell’s leadership philosophies. One that immediately stood out to me was “the commander in the field is always right and the rear echelon is wrong, unless proven otherwise “(Harari, 1996, p. 37), which is very interestingly similar to Sun Tzu rule of “ it is essential for victory that generals are unconstrained by their leaders” (History Channel, 2011, par.

25).
Powell’s impressive service started when he overcame many odds by joining the military in a time that had just seen the end of segregation within the army.

Moreover, he survived being wounded two times in battle during the Vietnam War during two separate tours. He was wounded a second time during a helicopter crash where he saved three soldiers and a general, despite his own wounds, which he received the heroism medal for. From there he obtained his masters degree and went on to command the 101st Airborne Division. Soon after he was serving in pivotal positions in Washington (LaFEBER, 2009).
Powell, much like General Franks, had established himself as a fast learner and in 1984 he had already achieved the rank of Major General. His position as the assistant to Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger catapulted him to the forefront of military leadership and politics. This is when he adopted and learned the concepts of what was to be known as the “Powell Doctrine” (LaFEBER, 2009, P. 73). Later in his career, there was talk about making him a five-star general and he was even offered a presidential nomination. The Weinberger/Powell doctrine went as

follows:
First, the "engagement" must be "deemed vital to our national interest or that of our allies." Second, U.S. forces should only be sent "with the clear intention of winning." Third, in putting American lives at stake, "we should have clearly defined political and military obligations." Fourth, the size and purpose of the force sent out to fight should be "continually reassessed and adjusted if necessary"—as had clearly not occurred when the situations in Vietnam and Lebanon rapidly changed. Fifth, troops should be assured, before they go abroad to fight and possibly die, that they have "the support of the American people and...Congress." Finally, and what would become of special importance to Powell over the next twenty years, Weinberger declared that "the commitment of U.S. forces to combat should be a last resort (p. 73).
These principals later during the first gulf war proved to be extremely effective during Operation Desert Storm and for the invasion into Panama (LaFEBER, 2009).
Along with becoming the first African American to be appointed to the position of US Secretary of State from 2001-2005, he was a pivotal player in the US invading Iraq and Afghanistan after the atrocious attack of September 11th. Powell was thrust to the forefront to gain support for the US to invade Iraq, even after we did not have the complete support of the UN or American people. The principles to invade Iraq went against the “Powell Doctrine” and support for his doctrine was rapidly failing. There was little understanding at Washington about the outcomes of ousting the Taliban regime and destroying and killing the al Qaeda leaders (LaFEBER, 2009).
General Colin Powell’s background would fit into the mold of what Harvey (2008) would call a maverick military leader. He used sixteen traits that define the maverick leaders and Powell’s character fits into this mold. First, he showed “outstanding and exemplary courage under fire” and had “the ability to think coolly and rationally on the battlefield” (p. xlvi), while he was wounded twice after two tours in Vietnam. Second he was a verve and charismatic leader often executed through consummate diplomacy” and had “skill in selecting subordinates” (p. xlvi). His own philosophies reiterate on this. Also he displays several of the sixteen qualities Harvey describes in his texts like highly intelligent, an instinct to question, a strategic grasp and a remarkable determination in making it to the top. Moreover, the Generals, six principles for his doctrine loosely fit into Sun Tzu principals for war (Harvey, 2008; History Channel, 2011).
Many generals / political leaders have played a pivotal part in fighting the war on terror since 911 but few have left their leadership mark in a positive aspect and went on to remain relevant. Most have been ousted for what they might have said or inappropriate actions they may have taken discrediting all the good things and sacrifices they made for the country. However, many of them have put their best efforts forward in attempting to fight and idea and not an actual physical enemy which leads one to believe that the war on terror may never have an end in sight unless we follow the teaching of our past mistakes and listen to the great generals and leaders that have paved the way like Sun Tzu, Washington, Wellington, Patton, and Powell to name a few (Harvey, 2008; History Channel, 2011).