Evening star., 1949-07-05
johnson Seen Takinq
Narrow View Of u. ).
Defense Problem
Military Personalities
Held Not Involved in
Navy Big Corrier Fight
By David Lavrence

ny DuVtN AUWT SUtS
Secretary of Defense johnson
seems to think the main reason
for disputes between the armed
services is that the officers do not
know each other we'll enough. He
suggests that the heads Of the
services 90 away on vacations to-
gether and relax and talk things
over. He gives his views in an
article in the current issue OF
1.-The American Magazine"
But this Is an oversimplif1cation
Actually there aren't any person.
alities involved at all. 1t is simply
a case in which naval officers who
have spent their whole careers
in peace and war. familiarizing
themselves with what can be done
with ships in combat do not be-
lieve that Army officers who have
similarly spent their careers study
ing the use Of infantry or tanks
or artillery in combat could pos
sibly be expert in other branches
Of the armed services.
Mr.. johnson for the first time
explains publicly the reasoning he
used recently in cancelling con-
struction Of the carrier United
States" He writes:
THE justification for so large
a carrier was, among other things
that it would provide a floating
base for bombing remote targets
However. highest military plan
ners had previously agreed that
1ong-range strategic bombing was
the proper function of our land
based Air Force planes. Many
people felt that to permit the
Navy to engage in a duplicate
effort was an expensive luxury.
After obtaining and reviewing the
recommendations of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, and after discuss
ing the matter with the President.
/ ordered construction on the
carrier halted. I took the step in
the national interest. not on the
ground of service politics"
Joint Chiefs Split.
The Joint Chiefs did not agree
they split on the subject. Also
the foregoing words are at vari-
ance with the case justifying the
carrier which the Navy had pre-
pared for Secretary johnson s
reading but never was permitted
to present.
The Navy, moreover always has
agreed that long-range strategic
bombing is the proper function of
land-based Air Force planes. This
was spelled out specifically in the
Key West and Newport agree
ments which were adopted by the
unanimous action of the heads
of the three armed services.
What Secretary johnson omitted
to point out was that the Nays
PRIMARY function is control of
the seas, and 1t is entitled to what
ever weapons it thinks necessary
in order to assure that control.
One of the weapons it found use
full in the Pacific was the aircraft
carrier, which permitted it to
launch airplanes from distances
anywhere from 300 to 500 miles
away from land and to elude
land-based airplanes by moving
the carrier base from place to
place, protecting it with cruisers,
destroyers and battleships.
Unless the Navy is permitted to
have effective weapons to control
the seas. 1t cannot do its job of
attacking submarine pens or as
sisting in the landing Of troops.
The Navy wanted the larger
aircraft carrier because the smaller
carriers which had proved them
selves in the Pacific are not big
enough to handle the heavier
planes that have become necessary
in order to assure effective con-
troll Of the seas.
If the land-based planes OF an
enemy can go out to sea and at
tack the American Navy, it is
logical to develop carrier avia-
ton which can meet on even
terms the attacks Of those land
based planes. Today the Navy's
carriers can stand offshore only
800 to 500 miles and send their
planes to attack submarine pens
and to protect the landing OF
troops.
1,5O0-MiIe Reach.
With larger carrier, the Navy
would have been able to stand
off shore approximately 1,50C
miles. aiding in the concealment
of the location Of the carriers once
they have launched their planes
This would make it even more
difficult for land-based planes OF
the enemy to attack the carriers
successfully.
The purpose Of the heavier
planes on the decks of the car
riers, however. is not merely to
get q longer range. 1t is to be
able to carry a larger bomb load
at shorter ranges and to increase
lighting effectiveness even at short
range.
To say that the United States
Navy cannot have the weapon 1t
needs to control the seas, just
because that same weapon might
possibly arouse the jealousies of
the United States Air Force, Is to
allow service politics to dominate
the needs of the United States In
national defense.
To deprive the United States
Navy Of the proper sized carrier
and planes for use in carrier avia.
ton to keep control of the seas
Just because it might develop q
weapon that could be used ir
1ong-range bombing. too, in ar
emergency when the United State.
might need all the long-rang.
bombing 1t could possibly get, /.
fo take a narr0U view of the DO