The trials against the Ukrainian generals gained wide resonance both in Ukraine and abroad. The discussion of this issue does not subside, because the decision on the trials of the military command during the war has serious consequences for the defense capability of the country. American General Wesley Clark, who closely follows the events in Ukraine and has many years of experience in military service and commanded the Combined Forces of NATO in Europe, expressed his opinion about this situation.
Western model of military justice
Wesley Clark explained that he would not be talking about military operations, but about the legal aspects of warfare. According to him, the system of military justice in Western armies contributes to increasing their efficiency. The general is convinced that Ukraine needs to introduce an independent system of military law as soon as possible. The Ukrainian army needs reforms in the field of military law, as the current system of civil justice does not meet modern challenges. He also emphasizes that in the war with Russia, Ukrainians are fighting not only for their own state, but also for the future of the entire democratic community.
As Wesley Clark pointed out, Western armies have a special code of professional conduct and military justice. He emphasized that there is a clear division between civilian crimes and military disciplinary violations. In case of violations of military statutes, officers may be transferred to other positions or removed from command. However, he said, they should not be subject to civil criminal prosecution for decisions made in combat.
Clark said that in the West, commanders are accountable to the military leadership, not to civilian courts. If an officer shows insufficient efficiency or makes mistakes, he can be removed from command, which will negatively affect his career. At the same time, he emphasized that such decisions are not accompanied by criminal cases, unless it is about war crimes.
Soviet heritage in military administration
As Clark emphasized, the system of control over the army that existed in the Soviet Union was based on political supervision. He recalled that in the Soviet army, military commissars had the right to remove commanders and open criminal cases against them, which was part of the Communist Party’s control over military specialists. In his opinion, this practice contradicts the principles of effective military management, since decisions on the battlefield should be made by professional soldiers, not politicians.
He noted that the hierarchy of command in the Western armed forces is clearly defined. Responsibility is distributed according to the level of management, and if a subordinate commander does not complete the task, not only his work is evaluated, but also the decision of the higher command. Clark said that in the US Army, commanders are able to explain their actions and justify their decisions before an internal military commission that determines an officer’s future career.
Trials of generals during the war
As Clark noted, there are examples in world military history when commanders were dismissed or removed from leadership positions for insufficient effectiveness. He cited the example of the US military campaign in Iraq, when a Marine colonel was removed from command due to poor performance. However, he emphasized that this was not accompanied by criminal prosecution, as military decisions are viewed through the prism of professional competence and not as civilian crimes.
“I understand that there is a great war going on, but that does not mean that during the war you cannot improve your armed forces. On the contrary, it is even more important.
I do not have detailed information about the specific circumstances or actions of the officers you are asking about. Therefore, I have no right to comment on a specific case. I can only say that, from the point of view of Western standards, this procedure would be extremely illegal,” – Clark thinks.
In addition, the general stated that it is critical to maintain the motivation of the military in times of war. If commanders begin to be prosecuted in civilian courts for combat decisions, this can undermine the credibility of leadership and reduce the initiative of officers on the battlefield. He warned that such lawsuits could demoralize the army, as commanders would be afraid to take bold decisions because of the risk of legal consequences.
“When the US went into Iraq in 2003, a Marine colonel who was in command of one of the regiments and was not doing the job properly was removed from command. It was the end of his career, although he was not accused of cowardice or anything like that. The bottom line is to have the most efficient army, so it is governed by military professionalism,” – said the general.
Absence of military justice in Ukraine
As Clark emphasized, there is no military justice system in Ukraine, and this significantly complicates the management of the army in wartime conditions. He emphasized that in the US there is a special procedure for evaluating officers, where their effectiveness is analyzed by commissions of military specialists. If an officer does not fulfill his duties, he receives a reprimand, suspension or dismissal from military service, but this does not turn into a criminal prosecution.
The general gave a specific example:
“In the US Armed Forces, if an officer does not fulfill his duties, he can be removed from command, after which he receives a report of unsatisfactory performance in the performance of official duties. Also, a reprimand is possible. These punishments can ruin a career.
An officers’ council meets once a year to evaluate the performance of all officers in the armed forces. They are analyzing whether they made any mistakes, whether they were dismissed from the position of commander, or whether they received a report on the unsatisfactory performance of official duties.
Then they are subject to dismissal or suspension from service in the armed forces.
There is a procedure called “order to show cause” (Order to show cause). The officer must prove why he should not be dismissed from service in the armed forces.
He must write a final letter of explanation to justify his position: whether he was wrongfully removed from command, whether his supervisor gave incorrect instructions, whether he was not provided with the necessary resources, or whether the task was impossible to complete. He has the right to lead everyone arguments, and they will be considered before making a decision on a possible dismissal from military service.”
Clark said that Ukraine needs to create a similar system that will allow evaluating the effectiveness of military decisions without the intervention of civilian courts. He emphasized that the introduction of the military code of justice is an important step for the adaptation of the Ukrainian Armed Forces to NATO standards.
“I am surprised that Ukraine, participating in the Partnership for Peace and other programs – we have been working with Ukraine for about 30 years, and Ukraine has been in the Partnership for Peace for a little more than this period – has not reformed its Code of Justice. You do not have a separate system of military law. But you need to create something similar to our system in the United States as soon as possible,” – said the general.
According to Clark, the trials of the generals can negatively affect Ukraine’s military effectiveness. He emphasized that many Ukrainian officers were trained in the USA, Great Britain and other NATO countries, where clear principles of military justice apply. If these officers see their colleagues prosecuted in civilian courts for military decisions, this can cause a loss of confidence in the command and a decrease in initiative among junior officers.
Clark said that Ukraine needs to reform military justice as soon as possible and create a mechanism that will allow evaluating the actions of commanders within the limits of military law. He emphasized that this will contribute not only to increasing the efficiency of the army, but also to meet international standards of warfare.
General Clark believes that war requires quick and effective decisions, and trials against military commanders could damage Ukraine’s defense capabilities.
