“Ethical conduct is essential to the moral authority of the force.
In the profession of arms, acting lawfully is obligatory; acting ethically requires your judgement.
Doing the right thing ethically will, on occasion, expose you to greater personal danger and risk to your life than simply acting lawfully; this is the job we all committed to on enlistment.
"The risk of moral injury increases if you are not well prepared and practised in ethical decision-making. Be prepared, now.” – General Angus J Campbell, AO, DSC Chief of the Defence Force September 2021
Ethical decision-making is a cornerstone of military professionalism in the Australian Defence Force (ADF), crucial for both operational effectiveness and moral integrity. In the Australian Army, training is essential for instilling ethical standards, ensuring personnel can ethically navigate moral problems in both peace and wartime. Importantly, as the complexities of modern warfare evolve, the need for rigorous ethical decision-making training increases. This article reviews the unique ethical challenges faced by modern warfare and assesses if our ethical decision-making training is Future Ready. Different ethical philosophies are summarised and explained within the ADF context. An overall assessment about the current state of ethical decision-making within the Land Domain of the ADF is made through the lens of how ethical decision-making is currently integrated into the Army training system. By examining these aspects, we can understand how the Army continues to enhance its commitment to maintaining the highest ethical standards among its people.
Challenges in Ethical Decision-Making
Modern warfare presents numerous ethical challenges that are often unprecedented and multifaceted (Alsworth, 2019). The nature of contemporary conflicts the Army has been involved in recently, such as in Afghanistan and Iraq, are characterised by asymmetric warfare, counterinsurgency operations, and in limited capacity, cyber warfare. The nature of these conflicts complicates the ethical landscape and has resulted in situations and war crimes, such as those highlighted in the Brereton Report (Office of the Special Investigator, 2020). Soldiers and officers must navigate situations where the lines between combatants and non-combatants are blurred, making ethical decision-making more difficult (ADF-P-0 Military Ethics, 2021).
Modern warfare will continue to become more complex, as demonstrated by the ongoing conflicts between Russia and Ukraine and Israel and Hamas. The extensive use of autonomous weaponry, drones, artificial intelligence, and cyber warfare is part of the evolving nature of conflict. The ethical use of these systems is complicated by an environment where ethical decision-making is increasingly vulnerable to manipulation and misinterpretation.
Is the ethical decision-making training adequate to meet future challenges?
To address these challenges and to ensure past mistakes are not repeated, the Army continuously updates its training curricula to reflect the realities of modern warfare. This includes incorporating lessons learned by the ADF (and our coalition partners) from historical and recent conflicts, engaging with international military ethics scholars, and leveraging advanced simulation technologies to recreate complex ethical scenarios.
The need for continuous adaptation in ethical training is important and is undertaken by the Land Combat College for the Army with additional support and guidance from the Centre for Defence Leadership and Ethics. This is demonstrated by training materials being updated to reflect current operational realities, incorporating new ethical frameworks to address emerging technologies, and ensuring that training programs are inclusive and relevant to all personnel. By genuinely heeding the changes in modern warfare, and continually updating our training, soldiers and officers are better prepared for the realities of modern warfare (ADF-P-0 Military Ethics, 2021).
The Importance of Ethical Decision-Making in the ADF
Ethical philosophy can be broadly categorised into the following five primary theories:
- Consequentialism: Determines the moral value of an act based on its outcomes. If an act results in overall good, it is deemed ethical, summarised by the phrase "the ends justify the means."
- Duty ethics: Focuses on adherence to rules or duties regardless of the consequences. The morality of an act is judged based on its conformity to these rules, summarised by the phrase “is the act right in itself?”
- Virtue Ethics: A theory that emphasises the moral character of the individual rather than the act or its outcomes. It prioritises minimising vices and making virtues central to one’s character.
- Natural law theory: The premise of natural law theory is that something is ethical if the intent is to pursue a good outcome in a reasonable way. Its focus is on what we intend, what is reasonable, and importantly what is the good outcome we are seeking to pursue.
- Ethical relativism and subjectivism: Ethical relativism is the belief that what is considered morally ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ varies from one culture to another. Subjectivism asserts that there is no objective moral truth, it is simply what each person thinks is right.
These ethical theories can conflict, particularly consequentialism and duty ethics, which are often mutually exclusive (Stokes, 2021). In a military context that is reliant on a higher standard of morals and a sense of duty, both approaches have advantages and disadvantages. A duty ethics view might prioritise adherence to orders and rules, but could lead to conflicts with personal morals, causing moral dislocation. This moral dislocation is a common issue when ethical decision-making in a military context is examined.
The two broad approaches to ethics that do not align with the ADF’s approach to ethics are consequentialism, and ethical relativism and subjectivism (ADF-P-0 Military Ethics, 2021). Consequentialism does not align well as considering ‘the greatest good for the greatest number’ could lead to justifying unethical acts. Regarding ethical relativism and subjectivism, the ADF acknowledges that allies, host nations, and adversary forces are likely to have different approaches to ethics. As members of the ADF, we respect that they hold different beliefs, but act in accordance with our own.
Ethical decision-making in the Army involves making choices that align with the values and principles upheld by the ADF operating within the interest of the Australian Government, even under challenging circumstances. The ADF integrates virtue ethics at the individual level and adopts a duty ethics approach organisationally. The ethical narrative of the ADF is that its members always strive to do ‘the right thing.’ Scenarios faced by serving members will always be different; however, an individual’s ethical framework and moral character remain constant. The decision to always ‘do the right thing’ is crucial for not only maintaining the integrity and reputation of the military, but also for ensuring the trust and support of the public.
Integrating Ethics into Australian Army Training
Ethics training in the ADF begins at the foundation level. Recruits receive instruction on the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC), ADF's core values, ethical theory, and the ADF ethical decision-making framework. These lessons and values form the bedrock of ethical decision-making while instilling a strong moral compass in soldiers and officers from the outset of their careers. The ethical decision-making framework is outlined in Figure 5.1 below (ADF-P-0 Military Ethics, 2021, p.27).
The ethical decision-making framework asks all ADF members to consider the following four questions and periodically reflect on the fifth question.
- Is this lawful? What are the obligations and constraints this creates?
- What is my intent? Is the objective I intend good?
- Is it aligned with Defence Values?
- Have I evaluated my thinking?
- How can I reflect on my character and decision-making?
Once recruits are in the wider Army, their training in ethical decision-making is reinforced through PME. Courses at various stages of a soldier's career, from junior leadership to senior command, include modules on ethical theory, case studies, and practical exercises. Further, healthy ethical discussions are facilitated by leadership at all levels within the barracks environment to ensure ethical decision-making is not something that is only touched on in foundation training and on career courses. This continuous education ensures that ethical considerations remain at the forefront of decision-making processes.
One of the most effective methods for teaching ethical decision-making the Army uses is scenario-based training. Soldiers, usually in small teams, are presented with complex, real-world scenarios that require navigation of ethical dilemmas. This hands-on approach allows them to apply theoretical knowledge in a controlled environment, preparing them for the challenges they may face in actual operations. Pre-deployment training – such as cultural and intelligence briefs – and tailored scenario-based training all assist with ethical decision-making and the ethical application of combat power.
Developing leaders is paramount to the Army's approach to ethical decision-making. Leaders at all levels are expected to model ethical behaviour and guide their subordinates – through training and by example – in making morally sound decisions. This responsibility is emphasised by complex ethical leadership training conducted in PME and courses as soldiers and officers progress through the ranks. The Army cannot maintain the legitimacy of our operations and the support of the Australian people without ethical leadership.
Promoting a Culture of Ethics
To foster a culture of ethics, the Army implements various initiatives aimed at promoting ethical behaviour (ADF-P-0 Culture in the Profession of Arms, 2024). These measures include ethics awareness campaigns, confidential reporting mechanisms for ethical breaches, and continuous professional development programs focused on ethics. Leaders at all levels are also expected to model ethical behaviour, constantly setting the standard for their subordinates. This top-down approach ensures that ethical decision-making is normalised and ingrained in the ADF's culture. A clear example of the ADF embracing the culture of ethics was the Chief of the Defence Force’s (CDF) response to the Brereton Report. The CDF openly shared the findings of the Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force (IGADF) Afghanistan inquiry and announced systematic changes to prevent similar war crimes from occurring in the future.
Is the Current State of Ethical Decision-Making in the Australian Army Training Context Future Ready?
I assess that due to the recent attention and renewed emphasis by ADF senior leadership on ethical decision-making, the Army is making headway in ensuring its ethical training is future ready. In order to maintain this progress, the Army must continue to prioritise both ethical decision-making training and reflection time as part of each individual’s social mastery journey. This includes maintaining efforts in PME, scenario-based training, ethical leadership development, and promoting a culture of ethics.
In conclusion, the Army has successfully developed an ethical decision-making training continuum purpose built to maintain its reputation and adapt to the challenges of future warfare. Ethical decision-making in military training within the Australian Army is integral to maintaining high moral standards among our people. Foundational training, PME, scenario-based exercises, and ethical leadership training form the backbone of the ADF's approach to ethical training. This training is conducted professionally and maintains relevance by adapting to the challenges posed by a continually evolving threat environment. By embracing a culture of ethics and embracing ADF values, the Army ensures that its soldiers have been prepared to always ‘do the right thing’ in the barracks, field training, and operational environments. The Army’s commitment to ethical decision-making remains steadfast, ensuring that its personnel uphold the values and principles that define the Australian Defence Force.
Bibliography
Alsworth, R. 2019. 'What is the Most Significant Ethical Challenge for the Application of Military Power in the Twenty First Century?'. Accessed: 14 June 2024. Retrieved from https://theforge.defence.gov.au/article/what-most-significant-ethical-challenge-application-military-power-twenty-first-century
Australian Army. (2023) Good Soldiering, Edition 1. Retrieved from https://theforge.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-03/ADF-P-0%20Culture%20in%20the%20Profession%20of%20Arms.pdf
Australian Army. (2020) “On the Occasion of ADF Alignment - Army's new Mission and Values”. Retrieved from the Defence Protected Network.
Department of Defence. (2021) ADF-P-0 Military Ethics, Edition 1. Retrieved from https://theforge.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-12/ADF-P-0%20Military%20Ethics%20Ed%201_0.pdf
Department of Defence. (2021) ADF-P-0 ADF Leadership, Edition 3. Retrieved from https://theforge.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-06/adf-philosophical-doctrine-adf-leadership.pdf
Department of Defence. (2024) ADF-P-0 Culture in the Profession of Arms, Edition 1. Retrieved from https://theforge.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-03/ADF-P-0%20Culture%20in%20the%20Profession%20of%20Arms.pdf
Department of Defence. (2020) “Press Conference – IGADF Afghanistan Inquiry.” Accessed: 15 June 2024. Retrieved from https://www.defence.gov.au/news-events/releases/2020-11-19/press-conference-igadf-afghanistan-inquiry
Guthrie, D. (2020). “Unified Defence Values and Behaviours.” The Cove. Accessed: July 08 2024. Retrieved from https://cove.army.gov.au/article/unified-defence-values-and-behaviours
The Economist. (2023) “How Israel Is Using Drones in Gaza.” Accessed June 17 2024. Retrieved from https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2023/12/04/how-israel-is-using-drones-in-gaza
The Economist. (2024) “How Ukraine Is Using AI to Fight Russia.” Accessed June 18 2024. Retrieved from https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2024/04/08/how-ukraine-is-using-ai-to-fight-russia
Office of the Special Investigator. (2020). Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force Afghanistan Inquiry Report. Australian Government Department of Defence. Retrieved from https://www.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-10/IGADF-Afghanistan-Inquiry-Public-Release-Version.pdf
Parliament House, Canberra, “War Crimes in Afghanistan: The Brereton Report and the Office of the Special Investigator.” Retrieved from https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BriefingBook47p/BreretonReport
Stokes, A. 2021. 'Defining ‘Right’: What are the ADF’s Ethics?'. Accessed June 14 2024. Retrieved from https://theforge.defence.gov.au/article/defining-right-what-are-adfs-ethics
