A military is an organization that functions through strict orders and procedures. Every member has to follow their commanders' instructions without questioning them. There are many examples where military personnel have been punished for disobeying their commander's order even if they were right.
There can be instances where soldiers break these rules intentionally to save another soldier's life or to gain personal benefit. In such cases, do they lose their autonomy as well as relational closeness? How do military personnel balance autonomy and relational closeness under operational and hierarchical pressures? This article will discuss this concept in detail.
Balancing Autonomy and Relational Closeness
Autonomy means having control over one's actions and decisions. On the other hand, relational closeness refers to the connection between individuals. It involves emotional attachment and trust among people. While both concepts are important in everyday lives, it becomes challenging when balanced against each other. When faced with operational and hierarchical pressure, military personnel find themselves in tough situations where they must make decisions that might compromise either of these two things. The following sections will explore how military personnel handle this dilemma.
Operational Pressure
Military operations require teamwork. Every individual must perform their tasks effectively and efficiently. They should not deviate from their duties because any deviation could result in catastrophic consequences.
A military unit may be tasked to capture enemy territory, but one soldier wants to help his injured comrade instead of following orders. He goes ahead and rescues him, which puts himself and others at risk. His superior officer reprimands him, but he has no choice since helping his comrade was the right thing to do. In this case, the soldier has chosen autonomy over relational closeness. This is risky for everyone involved, including the commander who issued the order.
A soldier may choose autonomy over relational closeness if he believes an order is unethical or morally wrong.
The commander asks him to torture prisoners of war, but he refuses to obey such an order. He chooses autonomy even though it means breaking rank and facing severe disciplinary action.
Many soldiers disobey commands due to selfish reasons like greed or personal gain. They commit crimes during military operations to benefit themselves financially or socially. These individuals lose both autonomy and relational closeness simultaneously as they break rules and jeopardize their position in the unit.
Hierarchical Pressure
Hierarchy exists in every institution, and military organizations are no different. Military personnel have to follow strict instructions without questioning them. If they disobey orders, they face severe punishment that can range from demotion to imprisonment. But sometimes, officers give out unreasonable or ambiguous orders that leave room for interpretation.
An officer instructs his men to raid a village, but there is no clear guidance on how to deal with civilians found within the village. Some soldiers might decide to destroy everything in sight while others spare lives. The latter option results in saving more lives and preserving relations between the two sides. By choosing this route, the soldiers compromise autonomy by not following orders but improve relational closeness.
In other instances, soldiers ignore hierarchies to save someone's life.
An officer issues a dangerous mission to rescue a fellow soldier who has been taken hostage. Some soldiers refuse to participate because they feel their leader is putting them in danger, which affects relational closeness. Others agree to go on the mission despite knowing its risks, which compromises autonomy. This scenario shows that balancing autonomy and relational closeness under operational and hierarchical pressures requires careful consideration of all factors involved.
Military personnel must balance autonomy and relational closeness when faced with operational and hierarchical pressures. They make decisions based on what they believe is right, even if it means breaking rules. Some individuals prioritize one over the other, depending on the situation.
Military institutions frown upon such behavior since it undermines discipline and orderliness. Soldiers should work together to achieve their goals without sacrificing either concept.
How do military personnel balance autonomy and relational closeness under operational and hierarchical pressures?
Military personnel must maintain a complex balance between their need for independence and personal space with the demands of interdependence and group cohesion imposed by military culture and hierarchy. This can be challenging given that the military is often characterized by high levels of stress, uncertainty, and risk, which require individuals to rely on one another for support and guidance.