John Lehman, Secretary of the Navy from 1981 to 1987, has addressed “What the Navy Should Look Like” in response to the service’s current array of problems. Under Lehman’s guidance in the 1980s, the Navy almost reached his goal of 600 active ships, including 15 aircraft carriers and four battleships. He rejuvenated Marine aviation with both the F/A-18 Hornet and AV-8B Harrier, and provided modern aircraft and ships for the Naval Reserve.
Speaking at a Hudson Institute conference in Washington, D.C. that addressed Navy shipbuilding problems, Secretary Lehman called for a three-phase program to rebuild the Navy, maximize its capabilities, and boost its image.
First, the Navy “should look the same to everyone,” according to Lehman. He explained that everyone should realize that the U.S. Navy “can visit unacceptable violence from the seas.” That image should comfort actual and potential friends, and should intimidate and restrain actual and potential enemies.
As Lehman has indicated in the past, naval forces provide persistent presence, for sustained periods, without the need for overflight rights or foreign bases. This is in sharp contrast to those who propose “virtual presence” by long-range aircraft or missiles based in the United States.
Rating the Navy’s capabilities, Lehman gives the service high marks for strategic deterrence (i.e., Trident missile submarines). But at lower levels of warfighting, there are “lots of holes,” and “this is inviting potential enemies to move into the vacuum.“
Second, the former Secretary of the Navy called for “competence” in U.S. military and naval, strategy, and in developing and building ships, aircraft, and weapons. Problems in Navy hardware programs, he contends, are due to a lack of competence among program managers and engineers. “The Navy looks incompetent managing (its) resources,” he said. Lehman, however, is quick to point out that the other military services are worse.
The Navy should return to “simple line management and accountability,” cutting out layers of bureaucracy. And, he said, the service should concentrate on cost analysis and engineering, not sexual harassment counseling.
Third, Secretary Lehman believes that the Navy must (again) become an “elite organization.” It must be viewed as a glamorous service — “a calling,” and not simply a trade. The Navy must attract interesting and creative people.
In discussing the reasons this is not now being done, he cited the many uniform issues that have brought criticism from Navy enlisted personnel. Lehman was stronger in his criticism of the Goldwater-Nichols legislation that forces officers to have “joint” duty before they can screen for command. This takes them away from important assignments and experience, and it adds to “the constant bureaucratic growth” by increasing shore staffs.
In addressing fleet size — the principal subject of the Hudson conference — Lehman said, “Numbers do count,” and called for a fleet of 350 ships. This, he said, is the minimum needed to carry out the current and predicted Navy missions. But he believes that there will be continuing fleet reductions unless the Navy can develop a realistic shipbuilding strategy as a starting point.
{ 25 comments… read them below or add one }
While Lehman makes some very good points we should be VERY wary of the comment about harassment, which may be code language for “let’s bring back the good old days!”. If you want a USN which is just a boys’ club where female officers and other ranks can be treated as grope toys then say say; there are an awful lot of people in any field — and the Navy is no exception — who don’t think that women belong but hide it behind a lot of oblique arguments. (They will, for example, whine endlessly about conduct codes but refuse to admit that the tendency of their ilk to forget “don’t be a slimy jerk to your female colleagues” is the reason those codes exist in the first place.
When I was in, I used to think to myself, “The Navy should recruit more from churches and less from high schools.”
Quality of ethics is a problem, and that relates to respect for women, some of whom need good examples of men, themselves.
Problem is, gsak, you recruit from the churches and you run into the USAF problem: you turn your academy into an evangelical christian revival meeting rather than a service school.
I read this twice and I’m still not sure what Lehman’s proposals are to fix the fleet. The former secretary’s tenure at the Pentagon was both a blessing and a curse for the Navy. First, he won the Cold War, meaning, for a while at least, there would be no peer enemy at sea to threaten our drastically shrunken fighting forces.
On the minus side, Lehman solidified the continued building of only high tier, exquisite warships, like the Arleigh Burke destroyers, with a handful of very large and costly carriers as the core of the fleet.
None of the these platforms take advantage of the enhanced capabilities of precision weapons at sea. Instead of many small ships armed with standoff cruise missiles, and numerous light carriers spread around the world armed with UAVs and attack planes armed with smart bombs, we have a half-size Navy in which massive firepower in a few costly and vulnerable flattops that need constant escort, and whose spacious decks the Navy has continuous trouble filling with enough planes. These are good for deterring other major powers, but little good for elusive pirates in speed boats.
Other than that he was a pretty good Secretary.
Agreed. If people were honorable human beings we wouldn’t need to waste time on harassment counseling and could focus on warfighting. But a machine made of people that don’t work as one; won’t fight as one.
As for more ships, pegging everything on hull counts is highly misleading. I thought the mothball fleet was built up of old hulls that couldn’t go anywhere.
I think the transition of multiple SSBN’s to SSGN’s will help somewhat in the shore bombardment role. The role of Arsenal ship is somewhat fulfilled.
I am beginning to wonder if it would be better to switch to small carriers; or to perhaps design small UAV carriers that will lauch unmanned strike craft.
Perhaps working towards reducing crew burdens on the CVNs would help make them smaller and reduce their cost: would industrial robots to help re-arm and refuel carriers help, for instance?
I think we’re asking too much from LCS when it comes to “modularity”. A “modular” swiss army knife does a lot of things, but not too well. We should go back to specialization, rather than paying out the nose for modularity that isn’t going to give us flexibility in a realistic amount of time.
Eh. If you’re a world power and pirates in speedboats are your main concern, you’re doing alright.
I don’t honestly think that the armed forces ever forgot that their first mission was to protect this country…
I understand your view on Evangelical Christianity seeker6079. I get very upset & offended when people try to shove global warming & “Mother Gaia” down my throat, talk about crap I don’t want to hear about. The tree hugger environmentalists need to keep their “religious” views to themselves,because I’m not converting to their way of thinking.
Anyway,what’s wrong with the navy is what’s wrong with our nation. We are all totally rotten to the core. We are like a rotting corpse smelly & decaying. You have to repair our nation first before you can repair our armed forces.
@ Byron Skinner – Reagan’s fault? So the President who is credited, across most of the political spectrum, as ending the Cold War through the largest peace time military build-up in the post WWII era is to blame for the state of the Navy 21 years after he left office.
The procurement holiday for eight years under Clinton and his slashing of the procurement workforce had nothing to do with the current state of weapons acquisition?
I think I understand Former Sec. Lehman’s statement on harassment. I believe he is saying that the Navy took a step back and became overly cautious at that point and now focuses more on making sure that everyone is policing everyone else in the force rather than making sure that the rules and laws are followed as best as possible, punishing the perpetrators and focusing on making the navy into a competent fighting force.
To the person that said we should have a fleet of small ships armed with lots of cruise missiles and small flat tops armed with uavs and smart bombs…the uav in Lehman’s time was called a drone and was used to guide naval gun fire. Cruise missiles are not cheap. Taking out a 12k toyota truck driven by some jihadist with a half million dollar tomahawk is just not cost effective. Smart bombs also in that time were very expensive. Even in Desert Storm, 75% of our bombs dropped were unguided weapons, not smart munitions. So his thinking was big ships that can put lots of firepower on a conventional foe…the Soviet Union!
I think Mr. Lehman doesn’t know what the hell he is talking about with regards to the professionalism of Navy personnel. Who has been put in charge of major operations across the globe these days? Navy Admirals.
It must be “a calling” to want to join the Navy? I think you have to have a sense of adventure to join the Navy. That is why you don’t see Navy recruiters in chruches, but instead in high schools.
BTW, don’t ask about our professionalism while we are on shore.
I do believe he is correct in his view of project management teams. However, I believe competence isn’t the only issue. I do believe there aren’t enough personnel to properly manage these larger and more complex systems we are bringing to the military.
I only mentioned the SSGN’s as stating that hopefully the “Arsenal Ship” idea some people still kick around would stop coming up again. We should test the “missile truck” idea in real combat before we spend another billions on buying a custom-designed hull.
In his day the UAV was a spotter for the Iowas. He’s being a little cautious avoiding mentioning new tech, since we have no clear idea as to what the Navy will look like many years down the line. Will it be one full of UCAVs and cruise missiles or will it be a sort of return of the battleship days where lots of railguns will come into play?
Short of a crystal ball he settled on insisting on more hulls, which is generally a safe bet. As to saying we should move to small ships with boats, that was not necessarily my line of thinking. I did say that asking LCS to do a bunch of things meant buying a swiss-army knife that couldn’t do a lot of things effectively…and I stand by that comment.
In the real world, say an LCS is needed to be a minesweeper. So you have to go to one of America’s friendly ports and be outfitted with a minesweeper kit. God knows how long that takes; and I doubt it’s USB-esque plug & play. Or you buy purpose built minesweepers and forward deploy them to areas of anticipated need. The modularity aspect of things is increasing the cost of systems we need sooner rather than later.
However I’m still leaning towards squeezing life out of the Perry-class frigates. The Arleigh Burke is increasing in capability, and perhaps the Perrys need some attention in a similar fashion. I know they’ll never have much of a bite; but a better role than “anti-submarine” must be devised for them.
DC2 Jennings, you don’t have a clue what sorry shape the USN is in today. Lehman is dead on accurate, but didn’t go far enough.
There are fine people in the USN to be sure, but there is far more crap smothering any good the few hard workers try to do.
The USN is a joke of its former self, and ignorant attempts to blame it on Reagan are laughable at best, contemptible at worst. Its piss poor leadership at every rank, in today’s Navy, that has put the USN in the shitpile. Until the USN cleans house, or gets it clock cleaned in a shooting war, it will only get worse.
If you’re a world power with a nuclear navy that has been patrolling the oceans for more than 60 years(long peaceful stretch for Europe in history since the roman empire) and have more of the most powerful surface combatants ever built in human history … prepared to defend every square inch of the oceans the U.S. Navy sails from a potential future threat I dont see what sorry shape the USN is in today.The Navy is by the far the largest and most powerful projected battleship fleet in the world — likely larger and more powerful than all other navies’ battle fleets combined .There are encouraging signs that the American sea service is going to emerge from these tribulations healthy and ready for future challenges.I am still confident and proud that the NAVY is second to none…
.
test
IMHO, the navy leadership changed in mentality and corrupted because they relaxed, and they relaxed because after 1990 there was a lack of a serious threat: no USSR
@ Byron Skinner,
The keels for the Big Four Iowa class battleships weren’t laid until AFTER Pearl Harbor. The best thing the could’ve done, when they did the refit, would’ve been to put reactors in. You have to admit, even if their time has past, they can impress the hell out of the natives.
Mr. Lehman is an old man remembering another time and another plce that happened in the last century. The comments about the “diverse” carrier segragation is now. The enemy that they face is just like them too.
The other future is health care. 60% of personal bankruptcies are the result of illness and health care costs. Medicare/Medicaid is out of money right now as of this fall and the start of FY2010. It is in deficit spending then taking more money every day from then on.
That money and age issue will take most all the money from DoD. There is no other choice. The Navy today is just a taxi service for the Army and marines to CI wars. China is a merchant fleet that is buring the US in economic warfare that carriers and virginia subs have no power to stop.
This is not a replay of the Carter years. There is no money to fund health care and DoD both. Then throw in recession, energy, roads — DoD spending stands down because the enemy is large populations in marginal places with resource cartels that the developed world needs – and they export their people to the developed world at the same time across pouros borders.
A massive blue water navy is a relic of the past.
My point was, seeker6079, that recruiters should (and should be provided the resources to) creatively-focus their efforts on traditionally-moral subcultures within America. We don’t need a “religious revival” in the military, but we do need an ethics revival; and that can come from anywhere you’d like. Church was my idea. What’s yours?
Good Morning Drewb,
I can’t disagree with on the physical appearance of the Iowa’s. I worked on the U.S.S. Missouri when it was being fitted at the Naval Shipyard in Long Beach Ca. and yes, it was an impressive ship. I also san it in San Diego bay near the end of it last active life and it still cut an impressive figure as it steamed into the bay.
The question though is it’s operational value. In the end it had it’s nine 16″ Guns and Cruise Missiles. Since venery ship from Attack Submarine and DD on up became a Cruise Missile platform there seem little need for a 60Kt. Battleship. As for it guns, well the Navy long ago saw that the heavy artillery of the sea was of little tactical value to land forces and would unlikely ever again get close enough to another ship for a gun fight.
You are of course correct regarding the laying down of the Iowa’s keels, but the systems and ship design were of the 1930′s, which I guess might be called the “Golden Age” of the Dreadnoughts as far as design and development. In my opinion the post war Alaska Class Heavy Battle Cruiser, that never go built, is not even a close relative of the Iowa’s.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
gsak:
Thanks for the reply. Some points:
First, “traditional-moral subcultures” is a VERY loaded term. It is pretty much a synonym in the USofA for “conservative christian”, a group that is very over-represented in pretty much every power-leverage dynamic in America. The evangelization of the USAF caused waaaaaaaaay more problems than any potential benefits from its “traditional morality”.
Second, it sets one down a troublesome road in America. The word “moral”, in American parlance tends to have a specific religious tinge: what is godly, not a sin, (etc.). [ When I hear American christians talk to me about "moral" it's pretty much a game of "who sleeps with who" rather than the more social activist portions of the Gospels.] That in and of itself is tied into a much-exercised meme in American political debate: that there are no ethics outside of a religious frame. That too is in error and dangerous.
—
That said, I cheerfully rise to the challenge about where to recruit from.
A – From amongst university graduates for the officer corps.* Every repeat every profession produces a mind-set amongst its occupants. One wants to bring in people who already have alternative worldviews, who bring in perspectives and talents outside the traditional military frames. This would be especially useful when picking from the fields of international law, conflict of laws, sociology and anthropology. (One could count theology if seen as a subset of anthropology: not “how many angels dance on the head of a pin?” studies but “why do people believe in angels and how do we deal with them?” types.)
B – From social service and international aid organizations. The military hires doctors and nurses knowing damned well that they will never lead a platoon or man an MG position. Why not hire people whose primary training and preference is for the community cooperation work which is the bread and butter of COIN operations?
C – Integration of recruitment efforts with employment agencies, job retraining centres and the like. I work with such agencies and tell you bluntly that people who are reconsidering their lifecourse are open to at least carefully listening to an alternative that they had not heretofore considered.
D – More attention within the military to proper streaming of recruits to their areas of speciality. An aid worker who wants to build villages to win in Afghanistan isn’t interested in learning how to operate a tank, so don’t force him to do so. (For that matter, young people who want to operate the tank aren’t that damned interested in village wells, so why make them do it?)
E – The military should shed its preference for the GOP. (Just one example among many: conservative radio shows get carried on AF radio where liberal ones are rejected.) The US and its military and foreign policies are not synonymous with the Republican Party, much as the GOP and much of the command structure would wish it so. If you want to recruit more people then you should visibly and meaningfully drop the notion that you’re only interested in true-red-state soldiers.
* – I should point out, though, that if the materials produced by the students at the staff colleges are anything to go by then the US has the least to worry about here. They show amongst the Army and the Navy’s junior officers a depth of cultural, political and military understanding of a complex world that puts their political and many-starred masters to shame. Petreus seems to be a VERY rare example of that sort of multifaceted thinking that makes it to a command position.
John Lehman has an immense talent for uttering many words while imparting little or no content. No wonder he was appointed to be SecDef.
The vision thing he had back in the day has definitely evaporated. As I understand it from the post, here is what he said:
Point one: create a really good navy.
Point one and a half: its better to blow things up from up close than from far away, because its good to be close and diplomacy is hopeless.
Point two: hire people who don’t suck; who cares if they’re abusive perverts if they can cut through red tape?
Point two and a half: the Army and Air Force suck even more than the Navy does.
Point three: make people who don’t suck want to work for you with cool uniforms.
Point three and a half: Buy more ships.
This is a plan?
Strike SecDef. Secretary of Navy.
lehman about america's disrmament :
http://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en#hl=en&q=leh…