Uncommon Authority Demands Strict Accountabiloity

High Levels of Authority and Responsibility Demand Strict Accountability——–

A commentary

By J. F. Kelly, Jr.

The forced early retirement of Vice-Adm. Tom Rowden, as the navy’s Surface Force Commander, following a string of other firings and early retirements after a grounding, two deadly ship collisions and other mishaps in 2017, demonstrates the high level of accountability required of navy commanders. Perhaps an even more vivid example is the announcement that the commanding officers (COs), their officers of the deck (OODs) and other personnel in the USS Fitzgerald and USS John S. McCain, the two guided missile destroyers that collided with merchant ships in congested waters off the Asian coast, will face charges that include negligent homicide, dereliction of duty and hazarding a vessel, charges which carry heavy penalties. While I feel that the charge of negligent homicide is inappropriate, almost impossible to prove and sets a terrible precedent, the other charges seem entirely appropriate and could result in severe punishments.

 

 Adm. Rowden was a highly regarded leader of the surface ship community with a long, distinguished career. His abrupt departure from the post a few days before a scheduled change of command and retirement ceremony must surely seem harsh by civilian standards. But naval commanders responsible for ships and crews are held to higher standards. It was inevitable that after a disastrous year in which 17 sailors died in ship collisions resulting from preventable human error, the surface boss, responsible for training and staffing the ships would be called to account. An investigation headed by Adm. James Caldwell, Chief of Naval Reactors, reportedly recommended that Rowden be relieved.

 

The COs and OODs of the two destroyers at the time of the collisions and certain other unidentified shipboard personnel will face serious charges which will be the subject of Article 32 investigations which in turn can result in trial by courts-martial. Civilians generally understand the responsibilities that the captain of a ship bears 24 hours a day throughout his or her entire tour in command but some may be less aware of the responsibilities of the OOD. The officer of the deck in a navy ship, like the mate of the watch in a merchant ship, is regarded as the officer in charge of a watch.

 

The OOD shares the captain’s responsibility for the safety of the ship and crew while on watch as prescribed in Navy Regulations. As the captain’s direct representative on the bridge, he or she is also delegated the captain’s authority while on watch when the captain is absent from the bridge. It is a unique role, unlike anything in civilian life. For the young junior officers who fill this role it is an awesome and challenging responsibility from which they cannot escape while they are on watch. It is clearly not for the faint of heart or the inexperienced. Those officers who are uncomfortable with the role should seek some other line of work or some other way to serve in the navy in the interest of safety at sea.  

 

Because of this shared responsibility, if the captain is relieved as the result of a grounding or collision, the OOD almost invariably suffers a similar fate. We all understood and accepted this when we become qualified to stand OOD watches or command a ship. It may seem like a harsh standard to civilians but such a high level of unquestioned authority and great responsibility simply must be accompanied by strict and unremitting accountability. The safety of our ships and sailors demands nothing less. I always assured each of my crews that when they turned in at night they could sleep soundly, secure in the knowledge that I would never permit an officer to stand watch as OOD that did not have my complete confidence and that I would always be on the bridge whenever the situation called for it.

 

The ship disasters of 2017 resulted in the firing or early retirement of four flag officers, a ship squadron commander, three commanding offers and their OODs, and other shipboard personnel. It has resulted in a flurry of activity to redesign and re-emphasize training in the basics of ship handling, seamanship, navigation and bridge resources management. This will result in an abundance of caution which will probably add to an already high level of adversity to risk. These actions alone, however, will not be enough to correct the underlying problem which is a lack of sufficient experience on the part of our young OODs and too much variation in how they are trained and certified. Compared to the licensed mariners that run the bridges of merchant ships in today’s congested waterways, they are, in fact, relative amateurs.

 

 Ship driving in the navy has become a part time job, a collateral duty. The navy has lost its mariner culture. Moreover, we are trying to train too many ensigns crowded onto our ships to stand bridge watches, most of whom have no intention of remaining in the surface navy, apparently under the notion that nearly everyone should become surface warfare qualified before moving on to some other specialty.  To change this requires a change in a now deeply entrenched culture which still promotes the notion that nearly anyone can be taught to drive a ship with a minimum of training and experience. Replacing leaders with more of the same will not change the culture.

January 26, 2018

 

(Kelly, a freelance writer based in Coronado, is a retired navy captain who commanded three San Diego-based ships and a naval laboratory. He teaches ship handling, seamanship and navigation at Naval Base, San Diego.)

National Security Threats

Prioritizing Threats to National Security——————————

                A commentary

                By J. F. Kelly, Jr.

In a perfect world, there would be no threats to anyone’s security and so we could convert all the world’s weapons into plowshares but history has taught us that this is unlikely to happen. Even if all the nations agreed to destroy their weapons it would be next to impossible to verify that they did and some would cheat as they have in the past. We must therefore maintain our defenses and deterrents and ensure that they can survive a first strike so that no rational party will be tempted to try it. That does not necessarily protect against the actions of an irrational actor such as a terrorist group or a hate-filled dictator or a radical religious  leader who believes that God is on his side. Therefore we have sought to prevent them from acquiring weapons of mass destruction. But we have failed in this endeavor and so our first priority must be to defend against the threat of weapons of mass destruction.

 

Nuclear weapons could destroy much of civilization and so this threat must trump all others. Allowing North Korea to acquire nukes has created an existential threat to America and to our Asian allies including Japan and South Korea where many of our forces are based. The Trump administration and its predecessors have allowed this to happen in spite of promises that they would not. We have stood passively by as other nations have joined the nuclear club but none governed by so ruthless and unpredictable leader as Kim Jong Un who has starved his people in order to become a nuclear power. This has happened because Mr. Trump, who boasts of his deal- making talents, has been unsuccessful in persuading China to do what only it can do to prevent the possibility of a bloody military conflict.

 

A related concern is the ageing and growing obsolescence of our own nuclear deterrent while other nuclear powers, notably China and Russia, update and improve theirs, including  hardening  underground sites, which could enable them to survive a first attack. Most Americans dismiss the problem of obsolescence believing naively that it only takes a few warheads to defeat or deter an enemy. But the theory behind a deterrent strategy is that a nuclear arsenal must be massive and defendable enough to survive a first strike. Both China and Russia believe that theirs is. We must ensure that ours is as well by upgrading our nuclear deterrent.

 

The third most serious threat in my view is the soaring national debt and the continuing annual deficits that add to it. This is a threat to our national security for the simple reason that the service on this debt is crowding out more discretionary spending each year including critically needed defense spending. This threat will be exacerbated by rising interest rates which will make borrowing more expensive.

 

Closely related to this threat is the rapidly growing economy of China which will surpass in size our own, possibly as soon as 2030. The downside for us will be that it will no doubt be accompanied by military expansion as it seeks to increase its global presence and influence to a level it considers appropriate to its evolving status as a superpower and protect its growing vital interests. For the first time the world’s largest economy and perhaps strongest military power will be a communist nation with a worldview and values quite different from ours. These differences can eventually cause frictions and even conflict. As China’s influence and power continue to grow, other nations are likely to find it to their advantage to align themselves with the world’s fastest growing superpower instead of us.

 

Another threat to our security is the worsening polarization in America making it difficult to agree on much of anything including spending priorities. Liberal coastal states with large urban populations are increasingly contemptuous of federal authority by, among other things, refusing to cooperate fully on immigration and border security issues. A nation so divided projects weakness and tempts enemies to take advantage of that weakness.

 

Finally, the dumbing down of the citizenry and the media poses a threat to national security. Americans are not so much divided by income and wealth as they are by education and ideology. There is a huge divide between people who read and stay informed on national and international issues and those who do not. American voters are woefully uninformed on the issues and many cannot differentiate between objective reporting and opinion. They have become attracted to celebrity candidates with no experience in government and are over-impressed by superficial attributes like charisma. Many are incapable of analyzing or debating an issue and offended by opposing views. The closing of the American mind is a grave threat to national security.

 

If you find this all terribly depressing, cheer up. It’s never too late to deal with our problems and every other nation has problems too, most far worse than ours.

January 22, 2018

 

 

A Kitchen Conference with the Cats

A Candid Conversation with the Cats———————-

               A cat commentary

                By J. F. Kelly, Jr.

                Some faithful readers have noted recently that I haven’t written a cat column in some time and have inquired about the status of my feline family members. Thanks for asking and I am happy to oblige. Mimi and Mewsetta, our two black female kitties, are just fine and they consented to another interview, so we gathered at (or on) the kitchen table where most of the intelligent conversation takes place in our house.

 

We reminisced over how we adopted Mimi and her long-haired sister Mewsetta as kittens from a local veterinary hospital. They recently celebrated their eighth birthday which they spent sleeping in a cardboard box. During family vacations we used to board them at the same place where we adopted them until one day we were advised that they were no longer welcome there. It seems they had scratched the young attendant who had administered their shots and then tried to bathe them. When they reacted with some alacrity, she declared that they were mean animals and no longer welcome.

 

Mimi and Mewsetta were crushed. Look at it from their purrspective. If you were a cat and someone stuck a needle in your behind and then soaked you with soap and water wouldn’t you be indignant and defensive? Anyway, they were declared purrsonna non grata so we hired a wonderful pet sitter whom they adore. The veterinary hospital is no longer in business now which Mimi and Mewsetta insist is no mere coincidence.

 

The first topic of business was the question of whether or not the Kelly household should adopt another dog. My wife and I have discussed this since our beloved rescued poodle Charlie died after a long and happy life. I’ve had a long and happy life as well and I’m not as agile as I used to be. Bending over frequently to pick up dog poop now falls under the category of strenuous exercise and in Coronado you have to pick it up almost before it hits the ground.

 

The cats were very fond of Charlie although they were quite frustrated over his failure to learn how to use the cat box in spite of their most earnest efforts to teach him. Neither cat, however, was receptive to the idea of adopting another dog, even a very small one. “The last thing we need around here is a yippy little punting dog,” said Mimi. “This is a cat house, not a dog house. Wait, that didn’t come out right. Well, you catch my drift.”

 

We decided to table that matter and turn to a news topic of interest. I expressed concern over the number of allegations of sexual harassment making the news involving prominent men in positions of power. Many of the allegations go back decades ago. While I agreed that all these complaints should be taken seriously and understood why some victims had been reluctant to risk their careers by speaking out at the time, I expressed concern that the relationship between men and women could suffer because of a new over-abundance of caution on the part of the men.

 

The cats stared at me in stony silence, Mewsetta scowling and Mimi lashing her tail furiously. “That’s a typical male reaction,” snarled Mewsetta, “blame the victims.” “I’m not blaming anyone,” I protested. “I’m just saying that there may be an unintended consequence.”

 

“Do you realize that we could accuse you of unwanted displays of affection?” Mewsetta asked. “How many times have you picked us up and hugged and kissed us without our consent?” “I thought you liked it, I gasped, profoundly shocked. “Did it ever occur to you to ask us first?” Mimi demanded. “Why didn’t you complain before?” I asked. “Like who would believe us? We’re cats, remember?” she replied.

“Well, it won’t happen again,” I promised.

“See, there you go again, overreacting, just like you do in some of your columns. We never said we didn’t like it,’ purred Mewsetta.

“Who are you talking to?” called my wife from another room.

“Nobody,” I said.

“Nobody?  We’re nobody? hissed Mimi.”

“I worry about you sometimes,” called my wife.

“This meeting is over,” I whispered to the cats.

“Good,” they mewed in unison.

January 11, 2018

Giving Credit Where Due

Giving Credit Where Due—————————

                A commentary

                By J. F. Kelly, Jr.

                As the new year begins, many political pundits are taking stock of President Donald Trump’s achievements and/or failures during his first year in office. There has been plenty of emphasis in the mainstream media on the latter so let’s focus on the underreported former while acknowledging that there have indeed been some failures. First and foremost, his unexpected, upset election victory changed the very direction of the nation both internationally and domestically.

 

Internationally, he made it clear to all nations that the United States would henceforth put its interests first in dealing with other nations. America would no longer be apologizing for doing so nor would it participate in treaties, agreements or trade deals which it viewed as placing America at an unfair disadvantage such as the Paris climate accord or the Pacific trade agreement. He served notice to NATO members that they had to increase spending on defense while at the same time proposing increasing the size of our own military. He defied world opinion by carrying out a campaign promise to finally recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, a promise that had been made by previous presidents of both parties but never kept. When the United Nations General Assembly responded with a vote of condemnation for exercising this right as a sovereign nation, Mr. Trump announced a long-overdue reduction in U.S. funding for the UN and U.S. Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley warned that Washington would remember those who voted to condemn us the next time they appealed to us for aid or support.

 

Domestically, Mr. Trump demonstrated that his unprecedented election as a businessman and outsider with no political experience would result in a major shakeup of government and a departure from politics as usual. In spite of a record number of staff changes, he managed to retain highly-competent cabinet level advisors like Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Defense Secretary James Mattis, White House Chief of Staff John Kelly and National Security Advisor H. R. McMaster. The long-delayed Keystone XL pipeline was finally approved and portions of the Alaskan Natural Wildlife Refuge opened for energy exploration, virtually ensuring that the U.S. will remain the world’s leading producer of energy.

 

The enactment of numerous business-friendly measures, the removal of many restrictive regulations and the promise of tax relief including a reduction in the corporate tax rate accelerated the economic growth that took off with his election. Final passage of the tax bill further accelerated it. Unemployment shrank to near-historic lows, workforce participation improved and the stock market reached new highs.

 

His appointment of Neil Gorsuch achieved the long-sought goal of a conservative majority in the U.S. Supreme Court and he has moved at a rapid pace place to appoint young, conservative judges to federal courts. These judges will preside long after Mr. Trump’s presidency ends, providing the gift that keeps on giving with respect to upholding the constitution and preventing legislating from the bench.  The president’s unequivocal support for the military, local law enforcement and border patrol has resulted in improved morale in those vital organizations. Nationwide there has been a reduction in violent crime although the murder rate in mostly black-populated, Democrat-governed major cities remains shamefully high.  The president remains committed to building additional sections of border wall where needed, adding to those which already exist. This should enhance border security and improve the safety of border patrol agents. His strong stand on illegal immigration has undoubtedly contributed to the sharp reduction in illegal border crossings.

 

This is only a partial list but there is much still that remains to be done. There have been failures of course, not the least of which was the clumsy effort to repeal and replace Obamacare. Another and potential more serious failure has been his inability to persuade China that it must do all that it will take to stop North Korean from continuing its nuclear weapons program if a bloody military response is to be avoided. In spite of the heavy sanctions in effect, China is still permitting North Korea to import enough of what it needs to survive.

 

The president’s tweets continue to provoke controversy and often confusion. They are frequently petty, peevish and un-presidential. They do, however, give the liberal mainstream media something to obsess and rant about while Mr. Trump just by-passes them and communicates directly with the people via social media and rallies. As I have said often, I didn’t vote for Mr. Trump and still feel that there were other Republicans better qualified. But let’s give the man credit for trying to do all that he promised he would and actually getting quite a lot of it done in just a year.

January 7, 2018