News & Notes 2022 Issue 2

The U.S. Army faces advanced operational environments (OEs) in 2030, and legal advisors must adapt accordingly in order to defend the legitimacy of American combat power. Getting ready for these new OEs is the special responsibility of staff judge advocates (SJAs) who deliver advice to force generating commanders and training organizations.

The ongoing conflict in Ukraine keenly illustrates the likelihood that future warfare will challenge the usefulness of our counterinsurgency experience in Afghanistan and Iraq. National security law practitioners should practice for future warfare in anticipation of a need for mobility in sustained operations, force reconstitution, and the ability to operate in degraded environments.

One requirement of being a German military Rechtsberater (legal advisor, LEGAD) or a judge advocate (JA) with the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General’s Corps remains constant: in order to effectively and efficiently advise battlefield commanders on how to achieve lawful mission accomplishment, a military legal professional must have the right skills, knowledge, and experience.

Readiness is what makes the Army a credible deterrent to war and a capable force to fight war. To fight and win, the Army must conduct tough, realistic training for the truly unknown: the time, place, and adversary in the next fight.

When I received the news from the Personnel, Plans, and Training Office that I was going to First Army, Division West to be their staff judge advocate (SJA), my first thoughts were: what is First Army, and what does Division West do? I know now. Each year, Division West pushes a corps’ worth of troops to commanders all over the globe, and the assigned judge advocates (JAs) have to factor in complexities not found in a typical legal office.

The commander turns to me. “Any issues, Eric?”

I am the legal advisor to a special operations task force conducting counter-terrorism operations. Our mission: locate and capture—or kill—terrorists.

"Jointness” is a priority for the highest levels of U.S. political and military leadership. “Joint Force” appears twenty-nine times in the Summary of the 2018 National Defense Strategy—a document that never even names the separate services.¹ Senior leaders rightly focus on the integration of efforts across the Department of Defense (DoD) and beyond. They need to consider the full range of the Nation’s political and security needs, and they need the full range of the Government’s tools.

Lieutenant Colonel Timothy David Litka died on 19 November 2022. He was fifty-one years old and, at the time of his death, was serving as the legal advisor to the director and senior legal instructor, U.S. Army Command and General Staff College, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.

Practicing environmental law often feels like watching grass grow. Cases stemming from the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act1 (CERCLA or “Superfund”), the comprehensive federal law governing the cleanup of contaminated lands, take years—occasionally decades—to reach resolution.

As the United States has pursued her national interests over the last two decades, the importance of alliances has become ever more apparent. The recent interim national security strategic guidance calls for a renewed commitment to our partnerships around the world “because our strength is multiplied when we combine efforts to address common challenges, share costs, and widen the circle of cooperation.”

[T]he very fact that warfare is of such character as to afford infinite provocation for the commission of acts of cruelty by junior officers and the enlisted men, must make the officers in high and responsible position peculiarly careful in their bearing and conduct so as to keep a moral check over any acts of an improper character by their subordinates.

If the law were black and white, there would be no need for lawyers. It is in those grey areas, between the seams, where national security law (NSL) professionals find their value. What I have found as an NSL paralegal is that those things I enjoy doing most—researching, compiling references, drafting legal arguments—are the exact things my attorneys need from me. I have no desire to litigate the issue in front of the command. My drive is always toward finding the answers.