US Naval Institute Proceedings—January 2000
Restoring battleships—and battleship ethics—to the Navy. Published as a “Comment and Discussion” item in US Naval Institute Proceedings.
Re: “Keep the Big Guns” by John F. Lehman, Jr., and William L. Stearman in January 2000 Proceedings.
Captain Larry Seaquist, U.S. Navy (Retired), former Commanding Officer, USS IOWA (BB 61)-
It is fitting that the new century’s first issue of Proceedings features an article advocating the return of the battleships. Those wonderful ships were built decades too soon. We should rename them the BB-21 class. It is only recently that changes in the security climate at home and abroad have created an unmistakable requirement for a battleship-like capital ship at the center of our international operations. Thanks to their high-quality construction, we could continue to enjoy another decade of service from the two ships, IOWA and WISCONSIN, still being kept ready for reactivation. Ten years would allow plenty of time to design and build a new class of capital ships to carry us up to mid-century or beyond; plenty of time to come to a fresh understanding of what a capital ship is and what roles it could play on the 21st Century Navy-Marine Corps team.
Secretary Lehman and Dr. Stearman rest their arguments for the battleships on the traditional calculus of gunnery throw-weight in a land battle ashore. But a capital ship is more than firepower. To paraphrase John Paul Jones, it is not enough that a capital ship be heavily armed. The ship must marry that armament to qualities which deliver a heavyweight political punch. A capital ship is one whose movements are reported on the front page, tracked in the White House situation room, and watched by presidents and prime ministers in the countries off whose shores she is patrolling.
The battleships have all the right capital ingredients: firepower, staying power (a palpable capacity to carry the mission through even in heavy combat), and, well, charisma-the Hallmark Card quality: “when you care enough to send the very best.” That is where the vaunted Arsenal Ship fell down. Three sailors driving an automated missile magazine would deliver about the same political charisma in a crisis as a submarine-zero. Our future capital ships must signal something of the essential American character when they are on station. Battleships radiate a special mystique, a star quality needed now more than ever when our mission is to influence the people driving events ashore. So let’s bring the BBs back because we need capital ships at the center of our Navy-Marine Corps team, not just because we need more firepower.
Most important, let’s bring them back because the Navy wants them, not because they are forced on us by zealots. No matter how much we thousands of battleship fans hunger to see those magnificent ships sailing again (with all of us on board, of course!) it is not going to happen unless the Navy’s leaders and strategists rethink our naval missions and recapture an understanding of the central role to be played by genuinely capital ships in America’s national security. We desperately need such capital ships now and we will need them as far as we can see into the future. So, in my view, the real reason to bring IOWA and WISCONSIN back ASAP is to exploit them for a decade while we think through the design and operations of our next capital ship.
But, to be blunt, we all know that no such rethinking will take place until Navy’s leaders come to grips with the IOWA disaster. It is now ten years since 47 fine men died in the explosion in Turret Two — ten years in which one generation of senior leaders after another has pretended there was nothing wrong with the series of investigations which falsely accused a sailor of mass murder, trashed the crew, and cruelly tortured the men’s families with leaks, lies, and incompetence. Battleships send messages — big messages. And with their staying power, they keep on sending them. We could have had the battleships sailing the world, showing America and American sailors at our best — including our best efforts at investigating and fixing safety problems. Instead, the battleships silently signal from mothballs that our service has an unresolved ethics blemish of capital proportions.
It should be quite easy to step forward, since the disastrous investigations were completely at odds with our sterling professional standards. Information developed over the past decade by journalists, two expert book writers, and the families themselves indicates that there was an immediate decision by senior officers to steer the investigation away from themselves and their budget -gundecking, it might be called in the fleet. That is not us: senior or junior we all take pride in our accountability and in our rigorous accident investigations. The information further suggests that accusations of homosexuality and instability were deliberately conjured out of thin air and then leaked to a incredulous press. That is not us: we take great satisfaction in our consideration of our shipmates and their families. The information also suggests that senior officers deliberately misled the public and apparently even testified falsely to the Congress with manufactured “facts” while under oath. That is not us: we take enormous care to safeguard our tradition of trustworthiness.
I, too, want battleships back in the fleet. But even more, I want our capital ship pride back. I want the Iowa families enabled finally to bring their grief to a close, secure in the knowledge that we treasured those men and will always honor their sacrifice. And I want IOWA’s crew recognized for being the fleet superstars that they were.
Until our leaders decide that doing the right thing is an opportunity to be seized, not a problem to be ducked, there is no point in imagining the joys of having battleships and battleship sailors back at sea.