All of the above changes persisted through our period and may be characterized as centralization, additional organizational structure and manpower, and a lengthening and deepening of the chain of command at all levels, whether operational, acquisition, political-military affairs, or personnel. The goals for these changes and outcomes will be addressed shortly. The US Navy that emerged from World War II as a distinct and independent government department, with its politically appointed leader a member of the cabinet, went through significant change. By 1960 the US Navy had worked extremely hard and diligently to comply with and be a team player within the ever-growing Pentagon bureaucracy that stemmed from the changes of 1947 and 1949—an Office of the Secretary of Defense and a large staff that supported the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The Navy sought to maintain its distinctive identity and to represent the strategic significance of maritime power. The Marine Corps in the Korea conflict added further distinction to its extraordinary battle honors and the Commandant of the Marine Corps, together with the Chief of Naval Operations, committed himself to making the relationship with the Joint Chiefs of Staff work as intended. However, the US Navy of 1960, as a national-security entity, had lost the preeminent position that it enjoyed at the end of World War II. Centralization and jointness had subsumed the Navy created by Congress in 1798. How well this has all worked in our fifty-five-year period bears close scrutiny and analysis, not for criticism’s sake and certainly not to hark back to past glories in some arcane nostalgic way, but to analyze what the impact has been, how well it has all worked, and what the future may bring.
Before we address these issues, let us turn to developments in the United Kingdom, so that a side-by-side comparison and analysis can be made. The UK Ministry of Defense as we know it today was not formed until 1964. Its creation was based on a perception that there was a requirement for greater cooperation and coordination between the three British armed services—the Royal Navy, the British Army, and the Royal Air Force. The Royal Navy has always been regarded in the United Kingdom as the senior service and referred to as such. The Royal Marines are part of the Royal Navy, and the Commandant of the Royal Marines enjoys the same status and prestige as the Commandant of the US Marine Corps. However, the Royal Marines have always been a fraction of the size of the US Marine Corps and therefore have not enjoyed the level of national recognition rightfully enjoyed by the Marine Corps in the United States. A Chiefs of Staff Committee had been formed much earlier, in 1923, though the idea of a unified ministry had been rejected by Prime Minister David Lloyd George in 1921. In 1936 a cabinet-level position of minister for the coordination of defense was created to provide oversight for rearmament in light of growing Nazi aggression. When Winston Churchill became prime minister in 1940 he created the office of minister of defense, in order to coordinate defense matters more effectively and to have direct control over the Chiefs of Staff Committee. It is important to note that Churchill had been First Lord of the Admiralty (the civilian political head of the Royal Navy, equivalent to the US Secretary of the Navy) from 1911 to 1915 and from 1939 to 1940 (the famous “Winston is back” period after war was declared in September 1939) before he became prime minister. It is equally important that the position of First Lord of the Admiralty was created in 1628, the Earl of Portland being the first incumbent. The list of First Lords of the Admiralty reads like a litany of hugely distinguished Britons; the last two incumbents, Lord Carrington (serving 1959–63) and the Earl of Jellicoe (1963–64) very much representative of their illustrious predecessors.
Winston Churchill assumed the joint role of prime minister and minister of defense for the duration of World War II. In 1946 the government of Clement Attlee (the Labor Party won the 1945 general election) introduced into the House of Commons and passed the 1946 Ministry of Defense Act. Prior to this the First Lord of the Admiralty had been a member of the cabinet. The new minister of defense supplanted the First Lord, the secretary of state for war (political head of the army), and the secretary of state for air (the political head of the Royal Air Force) in the British cabinet. Between 1946 and 1964 there was a hybrid organization in the United Kingdom, with five separate departments of state running defense: the Admiralty, the War Office (army), the Air Ministry (Royal Air Force), the Ministry of Aviation, and the nascent Ministry of Defense. In 1964 a monumental change occurred in the United Kingdom—the above departments were all merged in a single Ministry of Defense, and the historically powerful position of First Lord of the Admiralty was abolished. One final event occurred in 1971, when the Ministry of Aviation Supply became part of the Ministry of Defense. The first secretary of state for defense was Peter Thorneycroft, who was short-lived in office, from April 1964 to October 1964, in the Conservative government of Sir Alec Douglas-Home. In the new Labor government of Harold Wilson the position was occupied by Denis Healey, from October 1964 to June 1970, a very significant period. He was followed by Lord Carrington in the Conservative government of Edward Heath from June 1970 to January 1974. The ten-year period from 1964 to 1974 witnessed the full solidification of British defense policy under a single minister and a very large bureaucracy. We will examine the impact on the former Admiralty structure and personnel shortly.
The civilian bureaucracy grew exponentially. The permanent secretary (the most senior civil servant) at the Ministry of Defense became very powerful, as did the civil service assistant secretaries, all of whom were expected to be apolitical. The growth of the Ministry of Defense civil service added costs that had not existed at the height of World War II.
The former Chiefs of Staff Committee became immersed in the Central Defense Staff (CDS), and the incumbent Chief of the Defense Staff was made the professional head of all British armed forces, and the senior uniformed military adviser to the secretary of state for defense and the prime minister. The First Sea Lord and Chief of Naval Staff in the United Kingdom retained his position and title as the military head of the Royal Navy, but his political lead—the First Lord of the Admiralty, a cabinet member—was gone.
The Chief of the Defense Staff therefore became an increasingly important figure in British defense. There followed a pattern of succession whereby the first incumbent, Marshal of the Royal Air Force Sir William Dickson (1959), was followed by Admiral of the Fleet the Earl Mountbatten of Burma (1959–65), who was followed by Field Marshal Sir Richard Hull (1965–67). The trend for many years was to follow the succession of Royal Air Force, Royal Navy, and British Army until 1977, when an airman, Marshal of the Royal Air Force Sir Neil Cameron, broke the pattern. Since September 1979 the Royal Navy has had only three Chiefs of the Defense Staff: Admiral of the Fleet Sir Terence Lewin (served 1979–82), Admiral of the Fleet Sir John Fieldhouse (1985–88), and Admiral Sir Michael Boyce (2001–3). The Royal Air Force has had the same number of Chiefs of the Defense Staff (three), and the army has had seven. The latter number indicates significantly what happened in British defense between October 1982 when Field Marshal Sir Edwin Bramall succeeded Admiral of the Fleet Sir Terence Lewin and 2015, with General Sir Nick Houghton becoming Chief of the Defense Staff in July 2013. The British Army had seven Chiefs of the Defense Staff to the combined Royal Navy and Royal Air Force six.
Before we examine and analyze the implications of these organizational changes and then compare and contrast the US and Royal