美國總統軍事統帥權的傳統與變革－兼論從雷根總統至歐巴馬總統（1981-2013）的軍事領導

Abstract

兩百四十年以來，美國總統此一職位的重要性，隨著美國國力日盛與積極介入國際事務而備受矚目。雖然，美國國內不斷有國力式微的概嘆；然而，美國總統的軍事權力與行使，仍然深深受到世界各國的注目。這其中，包括擔任美國總統軍事決策重要幕僚的美軍「參謀首長聯席會議」（Joint Chiefs of Staff, JCS），更在美國總統歷次執行軍事決策時，扮演舉足輕重的重要角色。 美國的政治制度實施「總統制」（Presidential System），每一任美國總統對於軍事將領的拔擢、任命與免職，都掌握有極大的權力。美國總統若要任命一位軍事將領，可以不次拔擢，不受資格與條件的限制，擁有極大的任命權。舉例而言，二次大戰期間擔任歐洲盟軍最高統帥的艾森豪（Dwight Eisenhower）將軍，從一位中校軍官晉升到四星上將，僅僅花了四年時間；而在尼克森總統（President Richard Nixon）任內擔任副國家安全顧問、後來在雷根總統（President Ronald Reagan）任內擔任國務卿的海格（Alexander Haig, Jr.），更是高階將領一路平步青雲的例子。 然而，相對地，美國總統擁有極高的將領任命權限，自然也有對於高階將領免職的權力。1991年波灣戰爭期間，美國空軍參謀長由於未經授權，私自對外發言，立即遭到白宮解職。而1993年美國總統柯林頓就職不久，遭到空軍少將甘勃爾在公開場合批評他「逃避兵役」、「私生活不檢」及實施「同性戀軍中服役」政策等，也立即被空軍解職，並罰款七千美元。這些雖非美國總統或白宮親自主導的人事任免，也反映了美國總統作為三軍統帥與高階將領的相處關係。 同時，近年來，美國從共和黨的老布希總統（President George Bush）發動波灣戰爭（Gulf War）開始，近幾任總統包括民主黨的柯林頓總統（President Bill Clinton）、共和黨小布希總統（President George W. Bush），以及民主黨歐巴馬總統（President Barack Obama）等任內，都有大型的軍事行動。這些也都在在考驗著美國總統與軍事將領的領導關係。 早先，美國於1986年10月1日通過的「高尼法案」（Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986, 亦即針對美國國防體制改革的「國防部改革法」），主要是對於美國軍事預算的編配、武器系統的採購、軍官人事的升遷，以及「參謀首長聯席會議」（Joint Chiefs of Staff, JCS）體制的改革，也與本論文將進行研究的美國總統軍事任免權息息相關，本論文將針對該法立法背景與影響層面一併加以分析。 同時，美國現任歐巴馬總統於西元2009年1月就任，就職初期就接受了前任小布希總統任內尚未結束的伊拉克戰爭（Iraqi War）與阿富汗戰爭（Afghan War）兩場主要戰爭，他與軍事將領的互動及軍事領導的關係，也甚受矚目。因此，筆者也希望將分析軸線延伸至歐巴馬總統的第一任期之內。 我國近年來由於對於總統體制、權力與修憲的議題不斷被提出，有關總統的軍事權力也甚受重視。作者想要藉此檢視美國總統軍事統帥權與軍事領導之機，復足以對我國的體制與經驗，做出一些他山之石的借鏡及比較學習。 值此，本論文將運用歷史研究法（Historical Approach）與比較研究（Comparative Studies）等研究方法，針對美國總統遂行軍事統帥權與高階將領的人事體制，以及歷年來美國總統與軍隊之間的軍事領導關係，做一法制上的分析與探討，並針對在歷次戰爭與重大時期的實際例證運用，提出借鑑與經驗參考。

The importance of the U.S. Presidency has risen dramatically in the past 240 years, aiso the strength and activities of the U.S. has involved in the operation of the international affairs and became the focus of attention. The implementation of the U.S. Presidential System has made each President of the U.S. promoted military generals such appointed and removed from office; all of them have great powers. The U.S. President has the power to appointment of a military general; it cannot be promoted just little qualifications and constraints, with the great power of appointment. For example, when General Eisenhower served as Supreme Allied Highly Commander in Europe during World War Ⅱ, he was promoted to a four-star general from a colonel, just four years. Alexander Haig, served as the Richard Nixon’s presidency as deputy national security adviser, then promoted as secretary of state in the presidency of Ronald Reagan, also was a special case of a high-ranking general meteoric rise all the way. However, relatively, the President of the United States has the power to appoint high-ranking generals, same the removal power for high-ranking general. During the 1991 Gulf War, the U.S. Air Force chief of staff due to unauthorized, unauthorized external speech was immediately met with White House dismissed. Soon after, the General was taken office by President Bill Clinton, just cause he criticized him “to evade military service”, “private behavior for mistake”, and the implementation of the “Homosexual military service” policy, immediately dismissed by the Air Force Major General Campbell in public and a fine of 7,000 dollars. These, though not the President of the United States or the White House personally led appointment, removal and also reflects the U.S. President as a Commander in Chief to get along with high-ranking general relationships. In addition, the United States on October 1, 1986 through the “Goldwater-Nichols Act”(Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense reorganization Act of 1986, that is, for the reform of the defense system in the United States Department of Defense Reform Act), mainly for the United States military budget allocation, procurement of weapons systems, the promotion of officers and personnel, as well as the Joint Chiefs of Staff '(closely related to the President of the United States military Joint Chiefs of Staff, JCS) institutional reform, the paper will be the study of dismissal rests, the paper will focus on the legislative background of the Act affect the level of Merger to be analyzed. Thus, there are so many discussions among the Presidential Rights and other issues in our country; this will be a very important progress at the National Security and National Defense issues. Therefore, this Dissertation will use the Historical Research Method and Document Studies for the implementations of the Law of the U.S. top military leaders and personnel system for 27 years, as well as military leadership between the Presidents of the United States and armed forces over the years, to do an analysis and discussed.