Is Starfleet Too Powerful?

[TommyR01D]

From a recent Forgotten Trek essay:

Starfleet has a military chain of command, military ranks, military uniforms and it carries out military missions. Yet Picard insists in “Peak Performance”, when he objects to participating in a wargame, that “Starfleet is not a military organization. Its purpose is exploration.”

Gene Roddenberry modeled Starfleet on the merchant marine. Nichelle Nichols called it the “philosophical descendant” of NASA. Even Nicolas Meyer, who brought the most militaristic attitude to the franchise in Star Trek II, compared Kirk’s service to the Coast Guard in an audio commentary for the 2004 DVD of Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country.

Starfleet may be more than an army and a navy, but to claim it is less beggars belief.

Yet it’s not just Picard or Starfleet that is in denial about itself; the Federation gives the organization way more power than a democratic government would any military.

And Starfleet has often proved itself unworthy of the trust the Federation places in it.

Essentially, Starfleet officers are often seen exercising powers that in the real world would be controlled by civilian governments. Of course, much of this is simply due to the necessities of television - the characters with whom we're familiar have to be the driving force of most of the plots even if it doesn't make diagetic sense. Still, food for thought.

 

[Ottens]

Thank you for sharing

I hope people will read the whole thing, and please let me know if there are examples I missed!

 

[The Wormhole]

Starfleet's reach in Federation society does seem a bit too far. Even putting aside The Argument about whether it is or isn't military, we see Starfleet frequently getting involved in matters which a military or a space exploration service should have no business getting involved in. Like on DS9 when Sisko got stabbed outside his dad's restaurant by the Pah Wraith cultist. It was Starfleet Security who apprehended the cultist and Starfleet Medical who looked after Sisko's injuries. Given Sisko was on a leave of absence at the time and the incident took place somewhere where Starfleet shouldn't have jurisdiction, why weren't civilian police sent in to apprehend the cultist? Why didn't civilian EMTs respond to the scene and take Sisko to a civilian hospital? Why was the matter handled exclusively by Starfleet?

Or then there's the fact that Starfleet seems to manufacture its own equipment and ships. I guess there are no corporations for Starfleet to contract that out to?

Even dragging The Argument into this matter, don't even get me started on the supposedly non-military Starfleet giving its Starship Captains the right to decide to completely obliterate all life on a planet. In today's militaries, it takes a flag officer with direct authorization from the head of state just to launch one nuke. But a Starfleet Captain, who is supposedly a peaceful explorer can decide on their own to completely annihilate all life on a planet.

 

[Herbert]

No, Starfleet is not too powerful. If it was then both the Borg and the Dominion would not have been credible threats at all.

 

[Ottens]

[...] don't even get me started on the supposedly non-military Starfleet giving its Starship Captains the right to decide to completely obliterate all life on a planet. In today's militaries, it takes a flag officer with direct authorization from the head of state just to launch one nuke. But a Starfleet Captain, who is supposedly a peaceful explorer can decide on their own to completely annihilate all life on a planet.

This. And it's not a hypothetical power either. We get several examples of captains abusing this power, or threatening to.

 

[fireproof78]

Starfleet's reach in Federation society does seem a bit too far. Even putting aside The Argument about whether it is or isn't military, we see Starfleet frequently getting involved in matters which a military or a space exploration service should have no business getting involved in. Like on DS9 when Sisko got stabbed outside his dad's restaurant by the Pah Wraith cultist. It was Starfleet Security who apprehended the cultist and Starfleet Medical who looked after Sisko's injuries. Given Sisko was on a leave of absence at the time and the incident took place somewhere where Starfleet shouldn't have jurisdiction, why weren't civilian police sent in to apprehend the cultist? Why didn't civilian EMTs respond to the scene and take Sisko to a civilian hospital? Why was the matter handled exclusively by Starfleet?

Or then there's the fact that Starfleet seems to manufacture its own equipment and ships. I guess there are no corporations for Starfleet to contract that out to?

Even dragging The Argument into this matter, don't even get me started on the supposedly non-military Starfleet giving its Starship Captains the right to decide to completely obliterate all life on a planet. In today's militaries, it takes a flag officer with direct authorization from the head of state just to launch one nuke. But a Starfleet Captain, who is supposedly a peaceful explorer can decide on their own to completely annihilate all life on a planet.

Honestly, this lends credence that Starfleet is not only too powerful, but also venerated by the Federation to an unreasonable degree. It is treated as the ultimate part of Federation life, even in civilian life. That Admiral Leyton could so easily move towards martial law, and a nearly effective coup, speaks to that, as well as the involvement of Starfleet Security and Medical in parts of life that arguably be under civilian administration.

More evidence includes why Voyager had a crewmember who didn't want to be in Starfleet in the first place, but had to serve in order to get a more prestigious job opportunity. Are there no civilian agencies, even the Vulcan Science Academy, where such experience could be acquired?

Not sure if the Starfleet officer sitting on the Federation council is necessarily supposed to be a Starfleet representative or an officer from that planet serving in a dual capacity. But, it points to Starfleet's importance in making policy decisions, rather than abiding by the Council's and President's wishes.

I would say that Starfleet is not only too powerful, but also too venerated with few options offered as alternatives that are as lucrative.

 

[The Wormhole]

Not sure if the Starfleet officer sitting on the Federation council is necessarily supposed to be a Starfleet representative or an officer from that planet serving in a dual capacity. But, it points to Starfleet's importance in making policy decisions, rather than abiding by the Council's and President's wishes.

That at least could be based on the fact that in the US, the Joint Chiefs also have seats in Congress. But then, that would mean the Federation does things the way the US does, which tends to trigger people in these discussions.

 

[Ottens]

The Joint Chiefs don't have seats in Congress exactly, they just attend the State of the Union once a year.

Something similar might have been the case in Star Trek IV, though: admirals attending a Federation Council meeting because it related to a Starfleet matter. Although then you would expect them to sit separately from the council members. Instead, we saw interspersed with civilians throughout the chamber. That's why I think it's more likely they were retired admirals who had become Federation Council members, which goes to @fireproof78's points about Starfleet being revered and apparently many member states choosing to send former Starfleet admirals to the council as their representative.

(I still think we didn't see the full council in Star Trek IV, but rather a committee overseeing Starfleet. Analogous to the Senate Armed Services Committee in the United States.)

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

That at least could be based on the fact that in the US, the Joint Chiefs also have seats in Congress. But then, that would mean the Federation does things the way the US does, which tends to trigger people in these discussions.

I'm ok with it =D. But then I'm American and I think StarFleet & the top Brass of StarFleet definitely needs a seat at the Executive Council given how important their work is and how integrated into the government they literally are.

StarFleet literally are representatives of the UFP on 1st Contact missions.

That alone should have HUGE implications for exploration.

And StarFleet is chosen to be the exploration division as well as Scientific & Military Branch of the UFP.

Yes, it's a Hybrid job, but that's part of the requirements.

The entire role of StarFleet & James T. Kirk's adventures was modeled after Horatio HornBlower.

Gene Roddenberry was influenced by the Hornblower character while creating the Star Trek characters James T. Kirk and Jean-Luc Picard. Nicholas Meyer, director of some of the Star Trek films, frequently cites Horatio Hornblower as one of his primary influences.[26][27]

 

[Ottens]

I disagree. We (at least those of us living in democratic countries) don't let the military choose its own missions today. Why should the enlightened Federation of the 24th century?

Because, mind you, that's what's putting Starfleet admirals in the government means: they would both be making policy and be responsible for carrying it out. That's a conflict of interest.

 

[J.T.B.]

That at least could be based on the fact that in the US, the Joint Chiefs also have seats in Congress.

Wait, what?!

 

[Nyotarules]

Which supports my theory that the UFP is a semi-benevolent , militaristic, semi-democratic dictatorship.

 

[Vger23]

sure why not

 

[Ottens]

 

[at Quark's]

From a recent Forgotten Trek essay:
Essentially, Starfleet officers are often seen exercising powers that in the real world would be controlled by civilian governments. Of course, much of this is simply due to the necessities of television - the characters with whom we're familiar have to be the driving force of most of the plots even if it doesn't make diagetic sense. Still, food for thought.

It's often said the idea of Star Trek has been based on the 18th century British Navy - lone exploration ships that had to rely on their own resources, long distances, not always possible to communicate with higher authorities back home, etc.

So my question is, how much political power had been vested in such captains back in the 18th century? Could they (for example) negotiate a peace treaty with a just discovered tribe that their government would recognise later on?

 

[The Wormhole]

Wait, what?!

After reading Ottens's post in response to what I said, I'm thinking I massively misunderstood something I was half-remembering from a Tom Clancy novel. My apologies if needed, and feel free to disregard the comment accordingly.

StarFleet literally are representatives of the UFP on 1st Contact missions.

Isn't it a little concerning that making first contact seems to be exclusively handled by the military/space exploration service? That's something the politicians and diplomats should be extensively involved with.

Though this reminds me of the weirdness on DS9 when Bajor was going to join the Federation and there was no one from the Federation or Bajoran government present. The actual signing was going to be handled by a Starfleet Admiral and the leader of Bajor's dominant religion. Really? Both the military and the church are handling matters of state?

 

[J.T.B.]

Which supports my theory that the UFP is a semi-benevolent , militaristic, semi-democratic dictatorship.

Pretty defensible position, based on the evidence we have.

After reading Ottens's post in response to what I said, I'm thinking I massively misunderstood something I was half-remembering from a Tom Clancy novel. My apologies if needed, and feel free to disregard the comment accordingly.

No need to apologize. In a similar vein, in the UK, serving officers were allowed to be elected to the House of Commons until, IIRC, after WW2. Which created some obvious problems: In parliament an officer could question what his service superiors were doing and there wasn't much they could do about it. This was famously an aspect of the feuding between Admiral of the Fleet Jacky Fisher and Admiral Charles Beresford around the turn of the 20th century.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Which supports my theory that the UFP is a semi-benevolent , militaristic, semi-democratic dictatorship.

You forgot imperialist.

 

[TommyR01D]

Other examples from the nineteenth century are Horatio Nelson and Arthur Wellesley, both of whom continued to lead military campaigns in person after becoming members of the House of Lords. The latter had previously been an MP, and went on to hold many government posts including two spells as Prime Minister.

In the twentieth century Kitchener, Brooke and Montgomery likewise held important military jobs after being ennobled.

 

[Ottens]

Isn't it a little concerning that making first contact seems to be exclusively handled by the military/space exploration service? That's something the politicians and diplomats should be extensively involved with.

Absolutely. If it's the case of a starship happening upon a new civilization, then it makes sense that starship would make first contact. But if a new civilization has been found and a starship is specifically dispatched to make first contact, they should be able to bring a diplomat on.

It's often said the idea of Star Trek has been based on the 18th century British Navy - lone exploration ships that had to rely on their own resources, long distances, not always possible to communicate with higher authorities back home, etc.

I agree Starfleet has that vibe in Kirk's time, but not by the time of Picard's, who can seemingly always communicate with Starfleet Command instantly.

If we're looking for an in-universe explanation, we could reason that customs from Kirk's era survived into Picard's -- but I would still find it hard to justify, especially in light of the Khitomer Conspiracy. It bears repeating that Starfleet officers, including top admirals, members of Starfleet Command, tried to assassinate their own president. Yet, from what we can tell, it had absolutely no effect on the enormous trust the Federation places in Starfleet.