Editorial: Give heroes their due

[CommunityEditor]

A California congressman who served two tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan convinced the House Armed Services Committee to order a full review of the criteria used for giving awards for gallantry and valor after a senior defense official said technological advancements and new combat tactics might be the reason fewer of the highest medals are being issued.

At the urging of Rep. Duncan D. Hunter, R-Calif., a Marine combat veteran elected to Congress in November, the armed services committee has asked for a review of trends in awarding the Medal of Honor to determine if the low number of awards in the current wars is the result of “inadvertent subjective bias amongst commanders.”

The committee also wants the Defense Department to survey officers and noncommissioned officers in leadership positions to look at attitudes about acts of valor. Hunter is looking for the reasons behind not just fewer nominations, but also a trend since the Vietnam War in which the only Medal of Honor awards have been for people who died during an act of valor.

He hopes the review and study, approved by voice vote during debate on the 2010 defense authorization bill, lead to an overhaul of defense and service guidance.

Hunter has been pressing the Defense Department for a review since a nomination for the Medal of Honor for Marine Sgt. Rafael Peralta was downgraded to a Navy Cross. Peralta died as he smothered a grenade in Iraq in an act that saved lives — the same act that resulted in some veterans receiving Medals of Honor in the past.

In a June 2 letter to Hunter that was released Wednesday, Gail McGinn, acting undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness, said defense officials see nothing amiss in the Peralta decision.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who made the final call, “was advised by five independent reviewers who all individually concluded that the evidence included in the [Medal of Honor] recommendation did not support the award,” McGinn wrote.

The reviewers included a former commanding general of Marine forces in Iraq, a neurosurgeon, two pathologists and a Medal of Honor recipient, McGinn said.

Her letter also responds to Hunter’s larger question about whether the criteria have changed over time. A 2008 review of guidance used in making the awards “found no evidence of a posthumous requirement, either written or unwritten,” she said.

What has changed, McGinn said, is warfare. U.S. military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq “are inherently different from previous major conflicts,” she said.

“The conduct of warfare has evolved significantly in the 30 years since the end of the Vietnam conflict,” she said. “Technological advancements have dramatically changed battlefield tactics, techniques and procedures. Precision-guided stand-off weapons allow our forces to destroy known enemy positions with reduced personal risk.”

Another factor, she said, is that the two modern conflicts involve adversaries who use tactics like remotely detonated explosive devices, rockets, mortar and sniper attacks — all of which reduce face-to-face engagements.

Hunter isn’t fighting alone. Fellow Iraq war veteran Rep. Patrick Murphy, D-Pa., another armed services committee member, said he also thinks something is wrong if the Medal of Honor is being given only posthumously. “If this trend continues, we will have no more living heroes,” Murphy said.

The order for the study and survey are included in the report accompanying the defense bill, HR 2647, which the armed services committee approved early Wednesday after an all-day and all-night marathon session.

The bill calls for the study and report on the Medal of Honor process to be delivered to Congress by March 31.


Article: http://www.militarytimes.com/news/20...honor_061709w/

[Shrike]

Finally, a bi-partisan initiative that I support 100%.

It is about time someone evaluated/overhaul the broken down medal process.. I really hope that they look at all of the awards that have been given for valor and gallantry to see if these service members can have current medals upgraded... I am sure if a full investigation of medals given you will find many that would qualify for the medal of honor..

[CommunityEditor]

A panel of Medal of Honor recipients would have a say in the process of issuing military awards for valor under a compromise being pushed by a California lawmaker.

Rep. Duncan D. Hunter, R-Calif., a freshman congressman who served two tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan, believes a panel of people who have already received the military’s highest medal for gallantry and valor could look over the paperwork of nominations for awards to determine if they are appropriate, given the heroic act that led to the nomination.

“In some cases, many cases, I think a panel of 10 or so people who have received the Medal of Honor would look at citations and recommend an ‘up-award,’ such as taking a Navy Cross and making it a Medal of Honor,” Hunter said Wednesday. “In some cases, they might recommend reducing an award.”

A panel would not have the final word but simply would advise Defense Secretary Robert Gates of their recommendation on the appropriate medal — which could be ignored.

“The key thing, though, is that they would have their own experience on which to judge decisions,” Hunter said. “They would be able to make comparisons about why they received the medal to the citation, and would know if this act is deserving of a higher award.”

Hunter’s suggestion comes as part of a year-long effort he has made to get a full review of the criteria used for valor awards. In particular, he wants a review to look at why no Medal of Honor has been awarded to a living service member since Vietnam.

“I don’t have a quota in mind, like there needs to be five Medals of Honor handed out in the next two years, but I think it is worth looking at why there has not been one to a living person in 40 years,” he said.

Hunter said his call for a review, approved by the House of Representatives as part of its version of the 2010 defense authorization bill, has received criticism from some lawmakers for pushing politics into the awards process.

Hunter said that is not his intent. “Congress really has nothing to do with it and should not have anything to do with it,” he said.

He is pitching the idea of a Medal of Honor review panel to colleagues on the House Armed Services Committee, who are in negotiations with the Senate Armed Services Committee over final details of the 2010 defense policy bill. A final bill is expected to come from those talks by about Oct. 1, the start of the fiscal year.

Exactly how many people would serve on a panel and how they would be selected has not been decided, Hunter said.

“I don’t want politics involved in this at all, so I would be happy if the Medal of Honor Society picked the panel members,” he said. “I just think it would be good to have an independent review.”


Article: http://www.militarytimes.com/news/20...unter_091009w/

I think this would be an awesome idea. Who better to judge this better than a winner of the medal.

[JEMC50]

This is an effort that deserves total support and enactment.

[BEDEREST]

"No Medal's of Honor have been isssued to living service members in 40-years." Not so. President Clinton upgraded two World War ll medals to minority members of congress. Bothj are still alive.

Originally Posted by BEDEREST

"No Medal's of Honor have been isssued to living service members in 40-years." Not so. President Clinton upgraded two World War ll medals to minority members of congress. Both are still alive.

Yeah but they are talking about people who have been in combat actions in the last 40 years. Counting an upgrade is splitting hairs. I think this should have the full support of any one in the military.

[Michaep]

Originally Posted by Abnwife

I think this would be an awesome idea. Who better to judge this better than a winner of the medal.

Medals and wars were a lot different way back when...its 50/50 good and bad if they put up that panel

What they need to investigate is the lopsided officer versus enlisted medal ratios, and the "good ol boy" system if other officers are writing their officer friend's medal packages

[CommunityEditor]

No living service member has been awarded the Medal of Honor during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

That could finally be changing.

On the same day that President Barack Obama presented a posthumous Medal of Honor to Army Sgt. 1st Class Jared Monti at the White House, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said reviews are underway that may result in the nation’s top military honor being presented to a living recipient of the current wars.

During a Thursday news conference at the Pentagon, Gates was asked: “Has no one [in the two wars] performed an act of courage worthy of the Medal of Honor and lived through it?”

“This has been a source of real concern to me,” Gates said. “We are looking at this. Without getting into any detail … there are some [award recommendations] in process.

“It is, as everybody knows, a very time-intensive, thorough process. But I would say that I’ve been told there are some living potential recipients that have been put forward.”

Only six of nation’s highest award for valor have been issued during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which have lasted 6½ and 8 years, respectively. Four were awarded for acts of heroism in Iraq; Monti’s award brought the Afghanistan total to two.

The 16-year conflict in Vietnam, by contrast, produced 246 awards of the Medal of Honor.

Many have questioned the disparity. In August, Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., told The Associated Press that the Pentagon argument that the prevalence of roadside bomb attacks in Iraq and Afghanistan has reduced the amount of traditional face-to-face combat, and thus the opportunity for acts of heroism, doesn’t wash.

“It seems like our collective standard for who gets the Medal of Honor has been raised,” said Hunter, a veteran of both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

The criteria for an award of the Medal of Honor are exacting. Recipients must “distinguish themselves conspicuously by gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of their lives above and beyond the call of duty” in combat — action that, according to a congressional document, must be documented by the “incontestable evidence of at least two eyewitnesses” that leaves “no margin for doubt or error.”

Recommendations for the award go through a rigorous review process that can take as long as 18 months.

Gates, who has bridged two administrations as defense secretary, said Obama’s predecessor wished he could have done what Obama did Thursday.

“I think it was one of President Bush’s real regrets, that he did not have the opportunity to honor” a living Medal of Honor recipient, Gates said.


Article: http://www.militarytimes.com/news/20...iving_091709w/