Abolish SECDEF and OSD?

BySteeljawscribe

Interesting proposal in the most recent Joint Forces Quarterly centers on abolishing the position of Secretary of Defense and OSD. The full article is here.  Salient points include:

  • The office has too broad a span of control;
  • JCS advice is too often limited or distorted;
  • It has proved to be a source of unending conflict within and outside of the Executive Branch

The author makes some compelling points, and setting aside YHS’ own predilection to grind a particular axe, it would appear to merit further discussion.Comments?

 

Similar Posts

| | | | |

“Air Raid Pearl Harbor. This is Not A Drill.” *

BySteeljawscribe

* Telegraph from Patrol Wing Two Headquarters warning of the attack on Pearl Harbor Mr. Vice President, Mr. Speaker, Members of the Senate, and of the House of Representatives: Yesterday, December 7th, 1941 — a date which will live in infamy — the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and…

| |

The Solomons Campaign: Guadalcanal 7-9 August, 1942 — Assault and Lodgment

BySteeljawscribe

This week we get down to brass tacks – the kickoff of what would become the Solomons Campaign. UltimaRatioRegis once again provides this week’s post with the opening stages of the invasion and occupation of Guadalcanal, on this, the 67th anniversary of this signatory battle. And while we’re about remembering, if you haven’t signed the…

| | |

Iran, Venezuela and MRBMs

BySteeljawscribe

According to some reports from various locations (I’ll begin with Hudson Institute’s as that is where I first read it with a h/t to Xformed for his heads-up) it would appear that back in October, Iran and Venezuela signed an agreement that, among other things, would establish a joint base in Venezuela as well as…

4 Comments

  1. Eliminate the OSD and SecDef – would equal more power to the White House staff, even less chance of differing opinions reaching the President’s ear.

  2. Not if the Service Secretaries were re-instated as full up cabinet members as they were prior to the 1947 National Security Act which created the position of SecDef and OSD organization. Some valid concerns that may be raised by such a move, however, would include JCS morphing into a General Staff, concerns over what to do with the plethora of agencies that operated under SecDef (DIA, MDa, etc.) and their role, or potential role as Combat Support Agencies and, of course, inter-service rivalries, though one can argue that aspect has been and always will be with s in one form or another forever.

    The author’s point, if I got it right, was that the current office has ill-served the Presidency since its inception and too often overrides advice and recommendations from the JCS, especially in a time of war.

    – SJS

  3. Why should we fear a General Staff? JCS is for all intents and purposes that-without the ability to herd the CINCS. As a result we have a subordinate flag officer being publicly featured at Congressional hearings while his boss is no where to be found.

    Maybe the solution is to keep Secdef and reform the COCOM system. Also a 30% cut in the number of flag officers across the board would be a good thing.

Comments are closed.