John Jefferson
Throughout American history, an aura has surrounded Navy secretaries like in no other service. Although the entire joint force matters, looking back, it’s difficult to immediately name an Army or Air Force secretary who proved as transformative as the greatest civilian leaders of American sea power.
President Donald Trump’s nominee for the position, businessman John Phelan, has not yet undergone the ritual senatorial grilling, but we know enough of his strengths to conclude he would serve his nation with distinction. As a co-founder of successful investment companies, Phelan understands how to cultivate talent and fresh thinking—resources desperately needed in today’s Navy, which too often seals itself off from both.
A British naval officer, quoted in The Papers of Admiral Sir John Fisher, once reflected: “If the Navy is to be abreast of the times, it must be turned inside out every 50 years, and the personnel reconstructed from the very foundation.” Phelan, a political outsider not tethered to hidebound traditions, is well-positioned to do just that. If confirmed, he might even prove as impactful a Navy secretary as some of his most distinguished predecessors.
Josephus Daniels fathered a progressivism in naval education and training that transformed the branch, bringing common sense about talent and merit to a quasi-aristocratic establishment. Then there are Claude Swanson and Frank Knox: We owe much of American naval readiness before and during World War II to their far-sighted political acumen. Decades before Paul Nitze negotiated nuclear arms control agreements with the Soviets, he served ably as Navy secretary, improving quality of service and raising pay for commanders. In the 1980s, John Lehman fashioned a comprehensive naval strategy that offset Soviet ground forces with a dominant fleet offshore—helping President Ronald Reagan win the Cold War.
The global role and national necessity of American sea power made such prescient and energetic leaders matter. Still, doubts about the Navy’s utility have been around since America’s founding, which is why the importance of naval forces to national security and prosperity has so often needed an explicit defense. In the Federalist Papers, Alexander Hamilton advocated for the creation of a strong navy, and his arguments became more urgent near the end of the nineteenth century in justifying the growing costs of a blue-water fleet. It’s important for the American public to understand why a strong secretary of the naval services matters so much for their security, economy, and way of life.
Naval power is not only a necessary military instrument of deterrence (both nuclear and conventional) and offshore power projection, but an instrument for economic and even diplomatic power. “You have no idea how much it contributes to the general politeness and pleasantness of diplomacy when you have a little quiet armed force in the background,” quipped George Kennan in 1946. He likely had in mind the plains of Europe, but his insight applies equally to the waves of Asia or those surrounding Central America.
As for economic power, only the Navy can secure faraway trade lanes, fisheries and strategic energy reserves. A strong American Navy assures not only that we cannot be choked out economically, but that, if needed, we can choke anyone who threatens us (our adversaries, well aware of this, are working feverishly to build their own naval forces). If the United States needs to deter an enemy by means of economic warfare, the Navy secretary ought to know something about global economic flows, as Phelan undoubtedly does.
Great Britain built its empire on the strength of its Navy, as its statesmen well knew. In 1925, one Baron Redesdale declared: “To secure the great road of the sea for its own people and to refuse it to its enemies—that, and not the fighting of great naval actions, is the primary and essential function of a Fleet.”
The necessity of enduringly dominant naval power is a message that a civilian secretary must deliver to the American people, who can be skeptical about the benefits of robust military power. But the secretary must also stand up to defense contractors to ensure Americans’ tax dollars aren’t wasted. On that score, Phelan has the experience and gravitas needed. Who is better equipped to understand procurement contracts and stand up to the titans of shipbuilding and weapons development: career naval officers, or someone who has mastered markets and bested competitors?
Phelan’s gravitas would also come in handy when dealing with Congress. The uniformed leader of the Navy, the chief of naval operations, often needs help on that front. A uniformed Army chief of staff could likely convince Congress to raise troops in times of danger, but it takes a Navy secretary to make cogent arguments to sustain naval power in periods of relative peace.
Finally, naval leadership is a potential driver of much-needed coherence in policy formulation, execution, and indeed, the entire disparate national security establishment. Very few government officials can take in so many facets, but a business leader may be able to.
The second Trump administration has brought a renewed commitment to the Monroe Doctrine, which holds that the U.S. will not tolerate interference by foreign powers in its hemisphere. American naval power, well-managed and strategically deployed, will be key to fulfilling that commitment. In this moment, a strong Navy secretary is required, and John Phelan is the man for the job.
Read the full article here