The George Tenet and Torture Case Studies are extremely similar in that, both cases are issues

of ethics as defined by Waldo. In this paper, I will define the way in which these two case studies are issues of ethics as defined by Waldo and present an alternative solution to the ones presented by the authors in each case. The two case studies presented are issues of ethics as defined by Waldo. In both cases, decisions and actions were supposed to be based in the best interest of the public, while contending to ethical obligations (Stillman, 2010). In the Tenet case for example, the conflicts between his relationships with the president, his role as Director of Central Intelligence and the responsibility of his own agency are indicative of the pull of ethical interest that Waldo describes as issues of ethics in public administration (Stillman, 2010). Tenets competing obligations include all twelve ethical obligations described by Waldo. The obligation to the constitution is one that is founded on an ambiguous foundation. Whether or not one upholds their obligation to the constitution is wholly dependent on the way in which the constitution is interpreted. So Tenet may have upheld his obligation to the constitution and even to the law, democracy and organizationalbureaucratic norms because historically these obligations are relative to a specific situation and may be ambiguously defined (Stillman, 2010). Tenet may have also fulfilled his obligation to middle-range collectives and to religion or God as well, because the characteristics that define these obligations are ambiguous as well, in that one may believe the obligation may have been met while others will believe it has not, strictly based on independent, ambiguous factors.

However, he did not uphold his obligation to the remaining ethical obligations. Tenet did not fulfill his obligation to the nation because he allowed political consequences to supersede truth (Stillman, 2010). By not being completely honest and forthcoming with the information he possessed, Tenet was doing his nation a disservice. The damage done to Tenet s reputation and the reputation of the intelligence community as a whole is indicative of Tenet s failure to meet the obligation to profession and professionalism (Stillman, 2010). Additionally, Tenets failure to act in the best interest of the public by telling the truth serves to illustrate how he did not meet his obligations to his family and friends, the public interest, humanity or his obligation to self, which Tenet explicitly stated (Stillman, 2010). Tenet s loyalty to the president superseded his loyalty to his agency, agency professional and to the truth overall. His lack of ethical behavior ultimately served to ensure that Tenet could not fulfill his ethical obligations (Stillman, 2010). In this case, I would have managed the situation differently than Tenet by ensuring that professional accountability took precedence over political and bureaucratic factors. Tenet should have ensured that he was aware of relationship between power and administration and how that relationship impacts his decision-making ability. A more thorough system of accountability and involving more actors may have served to change the outcome of the case since more communication lines would have been available to the office of the president. The Torture case is another example of an issue of ethics as defined by Waldo. The aforementioned obligations described as ambiguous are ambiguously defined in this case as well, since one may see those obligations as being fulfilled while others may not,

depending on the individual framing. The obligations to the nation may or may not have been fulfilled depending on he framing. Some may believe the goal was to gain necessary information by any means possible, while other may view torture as wrong one hundred percent of the time. Next, the obligation to the military profession was not upheld because although there were navigation tools, like the Geneva Convention and other military protocols, they were ultimately removed (Stillman, 2010). Again, whether or not the obligations to the public, family and friends, or humanity were or were not fulfilled is relative to the framer. Either way, in both cases, it is strikingly evident that ethics is definitely an issue. In this case, I would have managed things differently by first and foremost ensuring that navigation tools, like the Geneva Convention and Military Commission Order, remained in place. Torture inherently implies ethical implications and that is why tools like the Geneva Convention were created. The absence of these tools serves to promote a lack of specificity in policy creation and implementation, as was the case at Abu Ghraib (Stillman, 2010). The removal of such tools served to create an atmosphere where flexibility was allowed in mandating and implementing torture policies which ultimately under minded all basic laws, rules and regulations (Stillman, 2010). This case would have extremely different outcomes if it were managed through an accountability and policy based frame. The main things missing with the new torture measures are levels of accountability and specific policy mandates. The lack of accountability controls coupled with the new policy implications creates a situation where harsh interrogation techniques are the norm and a part of the informal culture within the

U.S. Army. By ensuring that navigation tools exist and remain in place, the outcomes would be extremely different (Stillman, 2010).