At a time in American military history when such issues as chain of command and the legality of military orders have taken center stage in public discourse, Nye's The Challenge of Command would seem to be a necessary addition to any aspiring military officer's reading list. It is inaccurate to say that Challenge is also sufficient, since military history, theory, and praxis are dynamic, not static.
Even so, there are some constant verities. Nye locates them in the person, training, and experience of the commander. It is around the various identities, or roles, that an executive military officer inhabits that Nye organizes his text. He begins by advising those who desire top command to erect a coherent vision of themselves as complex actors: "It is in the mind of the commander that all specialization, personalities, doctrines, and missions must be integrated into some pattern of united effort" (Nye, 1986, p. 16).
After a chapter each on the theory of command and what could be called the division of command labor, or the authority over and responsibilities to line manager/commanders that the executive-commander might exercise Nye focuses on the various roles that a commander may assume: tactician in the field of operations; warrior, or one possessed of "courage, aggressive leadership, skillful war-waging, and winning" (p. 81)--all indispensable features the commander must embody if orders as well as policies of engagement are to be adhered to; moral arbiter, which refers to the commander's need to insist on absolute honesty from junior officers and to articulate standards of honest policy unambiguously; strategist, which involves the commander in understanding political complexities, including national objectives and the approach the country has to supporting and maintaining military forces (p. 143). Nye's treatment of the commander as strategist is an outgrowth of his discussion of duty. He assumes integrity of character but insis...