The term "commander-in-chief" echoes so often in presidential campaign rhetoric these days that we should stop and think about why that is. The term has always been there; it hasn't always been so omnipresent.
In this year's election, it seems most often used by Republicans, obviously because it loads the issue in favor of John McCain, a candidate with a strong military identification. That doesn't mean that it gives McCain the election hands down, however, since Obama's demonstrated poise, ability to take things in stride and gift for taking a new view of each day's new problems are also positive traits for a commander-in-chief.
And, given that we do have wars in progress, it's natural that the term would surface more often than it did in many elections before 9/11.
But the use of the term, and what it implies—Does this candidate have what it takes to run a war?—deserves to be challenged, not only because it may load the question in favor of one candidate this time, but because we should be cautious about letting it move to the top of the checklist of qualifications for president.
To the man whose hammer is his only tool, they say, every problem looks like a nail. The current financial crisis, a disaster of enormous scope and complexity that touches more Americans firsthand than the wars, has no military solution. Climate change has no military solution. Even terrorism is more effectively combated by measures on many levels—such as training Americans better in history, anthropology and foreign languages—than by large-scale military actions.
With global warming, with competition for ever-scarcer resources, more problems are ahead that can't be solved by war. But the president who sees himself primarily as commander-in-chief may be too quick to see problems as military problems. President Bush made much of his role as commander-in-chief, and only proved that having the nerve to start a war is not the same as having the skill to manage it well or the foresight to see that it may spawn new evils. Even Defense Secretary Bob Gates warned last week, "Be modest about what military force can accomplish."
