Download The
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTI EXECUTIVE TUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH, COMMITTEE established in I 943, is a publicly supported, Herman J. Schmidt nonpartisan research and educational or Chairman of the Board ganization. Its purpose is to assist policy makers, scholars, businessmen, the press William J. Baroody and the public by providing objective President analysis of national and international is Charles T. Fisher III sues. Views expressed in the institute's Treasurer publications are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Richard J. Farrell staff, advisory panels, officers or trustees Richard B. Madden of AEI. Richard D. Wood COUNCIL OF ACADEMIC ADVISERS SENIOR STAFF Paul W. McCracken, Chairman, Russell Chapin, Edmund Ezra Day University Legislative Analyses Professor of Business Administration, Robert A. Goldwin University of Michigan Seminar Programs Kenneth W. Dam, Harold]. and Robert B. Helms Marion F. Green Professor of Law, Health Policy Studies University of Chicago Law School Thomas F. Johnson Milton Friedman, Paul Snowden Economic Policy Studies Russell Distinguished Service Professor of Economics, University of Marvin H. Kosters Chicago; Nobel Laureate in Government Regulation Economic Science Studies Donald C. Hellmann, Professor of W. S. Moore Political Science and Co111j1arative Legal Policy Studies and Foreign Area Studies, University Rudolph G. Penner of Washington Tax Policy Studies D. Gale Johnson, Eliaki111 Hastings Moore Distinguished Service Robert J. Pranger Professor of Economics and Provost, Foreign and Defense University of Chicago Policy Studies Robert A. Nisbet, Albert Schweitzer William]. Baroody, Jr. Professor of Humanities, Columbia Executive Vice President University G. Warren Nutter, Paul Goodloe Gary L. Jones Mcintire Professor of Economics, Assistant to the University of Virginia President for Administration Marina v. N. Whitman, Distinguished Public Service Professor of Economics, Edward Styles University of Pittsburgh Director of Publications James Q. Wilson, Henry Lee Shattuck Professor of Government, Harvard University THE U.S.NAVY: WHAT IS ITS FUTURE? John Charles Daly, Moderator Charles E. Bennett Patrick J. Leahy John Moore John Warner A Round Table held on October 6, 1977 and sponsored by the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research Washington, D.C. This pamphlet contains the edited transcript of one of a series of AEI forums. These forumsoffer a medium for informalexchanges of ideas on current policy problems of national and international import. As part of AEI's program of providing opportunities forthe presentation of competing views, they serve to enhance the prospect that decisions within our democracy will be based on a more informed public opinion. AEI forumsare also available on audio and color-video cassettes. AEI Forum 12 © 1977by American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, Washington, D.C. Permission to quote from or reproduce materials in this publication is granted when due acknowledgment is made. Printed in United Swtes ofAmerica Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Main entry under title: U.S.Navy, what is its future? (AEI forum 12) Transcriptof a round table discussion, participants: Patrick J. Leahy ... et al. I. United States. Navy-Congresses. I. Daly, John Charles, 1914- II. Leahy, Patrick]. III.American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research. IV. Series: American Enterprise In stitute for Public Policy Research. AEI forum ; 12. VA58.4.U 56 359'.0 3'0973 77-252 68 ISBN 0-8 4 47-2 113-1 OHN CHARLES DALY, former ABC News chief J and forummoderator: This public policy forum, part of a series presented by the American Enterprise In stitute, is concerned with the U.S. Navy and its future. Threaded through all history, ancient and modern, is the critical role of command of the seas and oceans in sustain ing nations and civilizations. From Xerxes' defeat at Salamis in 480 B.C., when Persia's fleet was destroyed by the Greeks, through Elizabethan England's victory over the Spanish Armada and Nelson's victory at Trafalgar over the French, to the Coral Sea and Midway in World War II, when American seapower broke the Japanese grip on the farreaches of the Pacific,the command of the seas and oceans has impressed its vital influence on the course of history. Drake breaking the Spanish Armada and Nelson at Trafalgar demon strated that mass and numbers alone ,do not victory make. The Coral Sea, Midway, and the Battle of the Atlantic against the Nazi submarine demonstrated that superior leadership, seamanship, tactics, technology, and intelli gence, supported by industrial capacity, do victory make. The question of naval supremacy always has rested on the mix of men and technology, and our question tonight is: The U.S. Navy, what is its future? Senator Leahy, weighing today's U.S. Navy against its mission, do you think its size should be increased? I PATRICK J. LEAHY, United States senator (Democrat, Ver mont): If the navy's mission is defined as the capability to fight simultaneous wars in just about every place where it presently sails, the answer is no, it is not large enough. Still, the basic question for the administration and the Congress is defining and redefiningjust what that mission is. MR. DALY: Congressman Bennett, as a member of the House fornearly thirty years, as chairman of the Seapower Subcommittee, and as the second-ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, do you feel that our present naval programs are realistically meeting the future needs of the navy? CHARLES E. BENNETT, United States representative (Demo crat, Florida): Decidedly not. There are many deficiencies. We certainly need two more nuclear carriers; we need cruisers with the new Aegis* radar and intercept missiles, and we need a lot more ships in various places. Many have to be small because we cannot affordto have all large ships, but we do definitely need the expensive ships I first men tioned, just to carry on the fundamentals of our own defense. MR. DALY: Secretary Warner, as under secretary and then secretary of the Navy for more than five years, your hand, so to speak, was on the tiller. Are there any alternatives to building an ever larger navy in the future? JOHN WARNER, former secretaryof the U.S. Navy: No, ab solutely not, so long as we find in the Soviet Union the desire to continue to develop a fleet that will challenge us on the high seas. *This term is explained on pp. 33-34. 2 MR. DALY: Captain Moore, as editor of Jane's Fighting Ships and the acknowledged authority on the world's navies, how do you assess the future role of the U.S. Navy? JOHN MOORE, editor of Jane's Fighting Ships and retired Royal Navy officer: The navy's role is very much the same as it has been over the centuries. In 1666, in Charles II's time, a preamble was put into the Naval Discipline Act which we still read today-that it is upon the navy, under the providence of God, that the health, prosperity, and safety of this country chiefly depend. I think that fills the bill. MR. DALY: All right. We have already heard some question as to the mission of the U.S. Navy. With nuclear capability, 200-mile economic exploitation zones offshore, various and arbitrary territorial offshore limits, and some discus sion of mining the ocean floor, has the mission of the navy materially changed? How would you define its changed mission? MR. WARNER: A new mission has been added-what I call a peacetime mission. Those of us who have studied our naval history tend to think in terms of war, but the U.S. Navy has the equally important peacetime mission of providing safe transit for our commerce through the sea lanes of the world. This is where I disagree with Captain Moore, who said the navy's mission is the same as it has been since 1600. Each day our nation becomes more dependent upon bring ing in the raw materials we manufacture and export for our economy: we are absolutely dependent on the freedom of the world's shipping lanes. CAPTAIN MooRE: I meant to say that the wealth, health, 3 safety, prosperity, and everything else in the country de pend upon the navy's protection. This is the same thing you are saying. Imports and exports are vital to the life of the United States. The inhabitants of this country do not realize how much they depend on the sea lanes for import ing materials. We are not at variance on this point; I think we are in agreement. MR. WARNER: Historically, people think of the navy only in the context of war. But since 1946, there have been more than two hundred "incidents" in which the United States has had to inject a military presence, and, of that number, more than two-thirds have involved the navy. We usually think of Korea and Vietnam, but those are only two out of many conflictsin which our navy has had to participate. CONGRESSMAN BENNETT: Mr. Warner and Captain Moore seem to be pretty much in accord. It may have been just semantics that tore them apart for a moment. But I do want to add to a statement by Captain Moore, who pointed out how dependent our country is upon the commerce lanes. I would like to add that 45 percent of all the oil this country uses for its industry comes by way of ship. Many of our essential defense materials, such as chrome, magnesium, cobalt, and tin, are 100-percent im ported. As chairman of the Strategic Stockpile Committee of Congress, I am aware that, because of the shortage of materials in our stockpiles, we have to import 100 percent of some materials that are vital to our national defense.