About civilian control … .

Retired Army Gen. Lloyd Austin’s planned nomination as defense secretary has unleashed a spate of breathless encomiums to “civilian control of the military” that are conceptually inaccurate, insulting and frankly silly.

It is as though those of us who have worn the uniform and achieved senior rank are somehow stunted. It is as though, because of our service, we are incapable of understanding the wider context of the role of the armed forces in the country, whereas those who have not served are singularly capable of understanding these wider considerations.

In the first place, the phrase “civilian control of the military” is inaccurate and misleading. A more accurate phrase is “the people’s control of the armed forces through their elected representatives,” which could be shortened to “democratic control of the armed forces.”

The armed forces are the most powerful institution in the country, with well-trained troops and awesome weapons. This power must be used wisely for the defense of the country and its security interests, but not turned against the country to oppress American citizens or take over the government in a coup d’etat.

The defense secretary is the top unelected official in the military chain of command, and this person, too, is appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, just like military flag officers, and for the same reason. The bedrock of democratic control of the armed forces is the authority of elected officials, provided by Congress through the funding of the armed forces and appointment and confirmation of both military and civilian appointees.

The bedrock is not some mystical superiority of the knowledge and integrity of those who have never served in the armed forces.

The charge that senior military officers are somehow warped by our military experiences, that we are somehow incapable of understanding the wider responsibilities of military forces, that we are single-minded killing machines that have to be controlled by more erudite and sensitive people — all of this would be laughable if it were not so widely accepted.

Senior military officers generally are better educated than comparable civilians; they often have a wider range of experience, both in this country and internationally.

The best of them, such as Austin, lead by listening, by thinking and by example, not by shouting “and that’s an order.”

Democratic control of the armed forces is well established by law and custom in the United States. The defense secretary needs to be wise, experienced, dedicated and forward-looking. Above all, he or she needs character and integrity. These are the criteria by which the Senate should measure Lloyd Austin.