Ollie North, the Misdirected Midshipman : Military Disorientation Fostered His Errant Notion of ‘Service’

As I read about the exploits of Marine Lt. Col. Oliver L. North in connection with the Iranian arms sale and the diversion of funds to the contras , my mind flashes back to an incident involving him 18 years ago when we were friends and classmates at the U.S. Naval Academy.

Everybody liked Ollie, from the academy’s top scholars to the lowest midshipman muddling through. He was flamboyant and a little wild, a gung-ho patriot, but a dedicated midshipman who would do whatever had to be done if he thought that it was in the best interests of what he believed in.

At the time of the incident I was the brigade commander, the highest-ranking midshipman at the academy and ostensibly the personification of the highest standards and ideals of military leadership. As I walked through the darkened corridors of the academy’s Bancroft Hall late one night I was surprised to encounter Ollie. It was well after “lights out,” and although I was on duty it was unusual to see anyone else up and about. Not as a challenge but out of curiosity I asked why he was up at that time. He replied that he had been looking for his medical records, which contained information about serious injuries that he had received in an automobile accident. He said that he wanted to get the information out of his file because it might prevent his being accepted into the Marine Corps.

I don’t know if he succeeded in his mission. I do recall admiring his determination to do whatever he had to do to be a Marine and serve his country, even if it meant altering his medical records. There was no question that this would be wrong, but I said nothing about it at the time; I was more concerned about the risk that he was taking. There was little doubt in my mind that he considered the higher ideal of serving our country worth the risk, and that as long as he was doing it for our country it couldn’t be wrong.

As I peer back through the haze of 18 years since graduating from the academy, I realize that my feelings about Ollie and his actions are much different now. I feel saddened that his zealotry, which was admired by me and others at the Naval Academy, has gotten him into so much trouble. And, with a doctorate and a practice as a psychotherapist, I think that I have a deeper understanding of how the standards and ideals of military leadership are formed and how they are pursued and sometimes distorted by well-meaning patriots.

The Ollie whom I knew 18 years ago was the personification of patriotism. So were the vast majority of us at the Naval Academy. Most of us were shielded from the complicated and sometimes disorienting political and social arguments of that time. Right and wrong were defined in terms of patriotism and loyalty, and it was rare that a midshipman would run into problems with the law. Our greatest challenge was to do the best that we could and to do what we believed was right.

Much has been written about how much Ollie was and is liked. There is no question that something about his sincerity, loyalty, commitment and unswerving belief in the American way was endearing and disarming. Yet I can also see the dangers of such blinding commitment and the potential for rationalization to justify breaking the rules.

Someone in the White House has been quoted as saying, “Ollie was wild.” And some of the more extreme risks that he has taken undoubtedly have damaged not only his credibility but also that of his government. In psychological jargon a person who takes such risks and flirts with doom is called self-destructive. But that same person fighting for a cause often is called a hero or patriot. If Ollie broke the law, who is to blame, who is responsible and who is to be held accountable?

There is a deeper issue here than the plight of one man. It goes beyond hawk vs. dove, right vs. wrong, good vs. bad. Ollie North is the product of a system that has put him in a double bind and given him mixed and confusing messages with regard to how to behave within that system.

In that system the goal was paramount, and when Ollie set a goal he would not be deterred. I still recall how he persevered to win the brigade welterweight boxing championship over a classmate, James Webb, who was considered a superior boxer. It was like the plot of a Rocky movie.

In retrospect I can see the two sides of Ollie back then--the determination to win for himself and the drive for acknowledgement and acceptance from the brigade. And I can’t imagine that Ollie would ever have had a personal goal not connected to being accepted by his superiors.

There is a disquieting parallel between my image of Bancroft Hall where the midshipmen lived and the White House basement where the National Security Council is located and Ollie often worked. The parallel is in the isolation and the autonomy of the people in that environment.

Ollie was not an intellectual giant at the academy. But point him in a direction, give him a goal that he believed in, and he would find a way to get there. He was a leader who even then needed good leadership, and the structure of the academy provided that leadership through its traditions, rules and regulations. As Ollie progressed up the chain of command, his superiors apparently failed to recognize his limitations because his strengths were so apparent and somehow so closely linked to his main weakness--his zealotry. It seems to me that somewhere along the line Ollie’s leaders failed him, and in so doing failed us all.