Diversity Thursday

We are in the middle of a national moral panic, and it is bleeding over in the the USN. Like most moral panics, it starts with an actual event that soon morphs in to something completely unrelated and unhinged. I don't think I need to provide more of an outline than; a bad cop killed a man in Minneapolis, and as a result we are pulling down statues of Teddy Roosevelt, Columbus, scraping names off of historic ships, and slashing NYC police budgets in the face of a crime wave.

Before we dive in, let's review a few things I think we need to cover first.

As regulars here keep emailing me about, we have not done many DivThu lately. I've never liked the topic, and as of late, what was already a minefield has become even more dangerous. I've dialed up the gain a bit, so it takes a strong signal to break above the background noise to justify a DivThu, at least for me. I shouldn't let the threats and deplatforming attempts get under my skin, but I wouldn't be truthful if I didn't say it was part of it too. I'll spare you the details, but if I quit DivThu 100%, I'll let the bastards win, so it is time.

As we have new readers all the time, I guess I should outline some fundamentals. DivThu is based on one thing; people should be treated equally and as individuals. Group rewards and punishments based on race, creed, color, and national origin do nothing but divide nations. Individual bias against people based on race, creed, color or national origin is a cancer that needs constant monitoring and correction when discovered. In their frustration, there are some well meaning people who cannot accept that there are differences in people and cultures, there always have been, but they won't acccept this reality and want to blame differences on direct, malicious action, always. 

In trying to "make the metrics work" they propose actions which use the same bad behavior they think they are trying to correct; they discriminate on the basis of race, creed, color, or national origin. When this happens, someone has to speak up. This is 2020, not 1962. Sailors coming to boot camp today were mostly born after 911. The were in grade school when Barack Obama was elected President.

There are also bad players out there. They don't make mistakes from well meaning gestures and policies - they intentionally strive to stoke conflict. Their jobs or their entire world view are undermined if there is unity, reconciliation, and reason. They require emotion, strife, and lower brain stem grievance. When these people show up, people have to stand up or you will see your unit, service, or nation torn asunder as history shows us where this leads.

When it comes to our Navy, we have a lot to be proud of when it comes to being a merit based, inclusive organization - especially the last half-century. Since I became associated with it in the 1980s, concerns about inclusiveness and anti-discrimination have been a constant point of training, discussion and concern. As our intake is our host nation's outtake, we have to filter and adjust what our nation creates in its culture and education system as young men and women join us. As any review of demographic data will show, there are significant differences in different groups of people when it comes to educational achievement, crime rates, and desire to serve. The reasons are varied, but they are part of the entering equation. As such, our Navy and its various career paths will never "look like America" because that simply is not possible if you use balanced, fair, and objective criteria from accession to retirement with the raw material we bring in from society. The only way to do that would be to practice what you are fighting against - judge people by the superficial and useless characteristics of race, creed, color, or national origin (though, tbh, with some national origin there might be additional security interviews). We must ensure equal opportunity. All doors must be open. A close eye needs to be kept to make sure that the institution and those in power in it practice the same.

Those who say things such as "equal opportunity" and "color blind" are in some way bad are telling you one thing; they want unequal opportunity and to give preference by race. Those people are not well meaning people.

That is DivThu 101. In these delicate times, it needed to be reset. Now, back to where we started.

We are in a moral panic. As with most moral panics, it started with a legitimate complaint. In this case, the egregious killing of an unarmed African American man by the police.

Through history, moral panics grow when a legitimate issue is the spark that ignites larger mob action when the conditions are ripe for other players to throw gasoline on passions. These opportunists have grievances long-standing that they have been waiting for an opportunity to emerge that they can hijack, leverage, and pursue their agenda. These opportunists collect along the way a popular front that includes those who have legitimate concerns, a mass of a panicked herd looking for something to join to give meaning to their otherwise empty lives, and other people who just like to lash out.

These are the people you see; the popular front on the discontented.

There is also a larger mass of people who are either befuddled, unconcerned, or more likely just want to get on with their lives raising their families, making the mortgage payment, and making another day. There are organizations like that as well. They think they are doing the right thing, and when everything around them is in chaos, they want to make sure they are doing the right thing.

Regular checks are a good thing when done for the right reasons with the right people. I believe that is what led to the following;

The U.S. Navy stood up a special task force on June 30 to address the issues of racism, sexism and other destructive biases and their impact on naval readiness, the chief of naval personnel public affairs office said in a release.

“Task Force (TF) One Navy” will be led by Rear Adm. Alvin Holsey, who will report his findings to Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Mike Gilday via the Navy’s chief of personnel, Vice Adm. John B. Nowell Jr.

“As a Navy — uniform and civilian, active and reserve — we cannot tolerate discrimination or racism of any kind. We must work to identify and eliminate individual and systemic racism within our force,” Gilday said. “That is why we are standing up Task Force One Navy, which will work to identify and remove racial barriers and improve inclusion within our Navy.”

At first read, this seems fine ... but that opening paragraph made me wish the CNO had better writers and staff on these issues, as there are some problems. Let's pull this bit out,

...racism, sexism and other destructive biases and their impact on naval readiness

Is the implication ... or worse, assumption here that our Navy suffers from racism, sexism and other destructive biases to the point it impacts readiness?

If so, why are we waiting until now to act? Did we not see it before? The policies and actions for decades did nothing? If you think there is an entering bias here, you may be right.

The task force will seek to promptly address the full spectrum of systemic racism, advocate for the needs of underserved communities, work to dismantle barriers and equalize professional development frameworks and opportunities within the Navy.

This is when it should have been sent back for staffing. Are we assuming there is "systemic racism" in the US Navy? What barriers do they see? Define "equalize professional development."

This is not going in a productive way, but this could just be poor writing.

“We must use the momentum created by these events as a catalyst for positive change. We need to have a deeper inclusion and diversity conversation in our Navy and amongst our own teams.”

That is the political speak of "don't let a good crisis go to waste."

Well meaning people, given the volume of email I've received on this, are concerned - and I think their concerns are justified.

TF One Navy will focus their efforts in recommending reforms in several key areas. These areas include:

- Recruiting/barriers to service entry
- Pre-accession mentorship frameworks/scholarship opportunities
- Diversity of talent by community/talent management
- Training/education along the service member career continuum
- Detailing/milestone job opportunities
- Fitness reporting/evaluation systems
- Promotion/advancement processes
- Military justice analysis of racial disparity
- Health care and health disparities

This is a mixed bag. Some very solid things such as health care issues based on demographics are sound - and aligned with modern, but at times controversial, scholarship on this topic.

What is bad is the following; promotions, detailing and FITREPS are a zero-sum game. How are they getting their metrics? How are they going to balance them? If my mother was from Ireland and my father African American, my wife is half-Philippina, half-Ecuadorian and our son joins the military, how do we advise him to self-identify his race/ethnicity? If he doesn't, or chooses incorrectly, with all other things being equal, will his odds of promotion differ?

Is that productive? Is that good? Would such an environment be productive or counter-productive to unit cohesiveness?

The article ends with what really should be the only thing that needs to be said on the topic by the CNO or any Navy leader;

“We must demand of each other that we treat everyone with dignity and respect. If you won’t do that, then our Navy is not the best place for you,” Gilday said. “We are one team, and we are one Navy.”

No one can disagree with this, not a soul.

Hope isn't a plan, but here's my hope; the CNO and the admirals quoted here were poorly staffed and responded with inarticulate talking points. The task force will be staffed with well meaning professionals who understand the seriousness of their assignment, don't assume the worst of their Navy, and will produce a report that all Sailors can look at and feels good about.

We'll see.

Hopefully they will have better critical thinking skills than the Sierra Club.

Smart Thinking Down Under

Had a chance to see Australia's plans for her defense budget for the next decade?

Links, my thoughts, scratch-n-sniff - all over at USNIBlog.

Come by and let me know what you think.

LSC: Underperforming Even My Expectations

As per NAVADMIN 187/20, the first four LCS; USS FREEDOM (LCS 1), USS INDEPENDENCE (LCS 2), USS FORT WORTH (LCS 3) and USS CORONADO (LCS 4) are all being decommissioned on 31 MAR 2021.

That is roughly 12.5 years, 10 years, 8.5 years, and 7 years of commissioned service.

I think back to the first decade of this century, all the people who said what an embarrassment and waste this program would be - and how they were treated and their critiques were received.

It was so clear. It was predicted.

It is.

No more needs to be said but excuses.

Hat tip Chris.

No Shipmate, You Can't Go To Church/Synagogue/Mosque/Oak Tree

When you join the military you give up a lot. Your freedom is curtailed in ways that are almost unimaginable to the civilian. We know that, we accept it.

Can there be occasions where this steps over the line? In any large organization’s response to emerging crisis, well meaning leaders can overreach or make decisions that are in a grey area between can/should/maybe/shouldn’t.

For those with access to message traffic, I will refer you to the FRAGO as outlined in DTG R 232340Z JUN 20, SUBJ/CUSFF/NAVNORTH FRAGORD 20-024.013 IN RESPONSE TO CORONAVIRUS DISEASE 2019 (COVID19).

Here is just one of many copies of Page 13s that I’ve had Sailors, officer and enlisted, send to me over the weekend that has them concerned. Read it over.

Did you catch that? Here is the meat from para 1.a.vi;

Specific Prohibited activities: Service members shall not visit/engage in the following off-installation facilities/activities: …. Include(ing) indoor religious services

Anyone who served for any length of time knows that for many of our Shipmates who adhere to their confession of choice, one of the best things for them when they are home is that they can attend proper services that – try as they can – their Navy Chaplain simply cannot meet.

As such, a plan that bans off base religious activities justified by hopes they can be handled by base chapel services simply is non-executable.

What about those who live off base, 30-45 minutes or even an hour+ from base? What if, as is happening nationwide, their house of worship follows COVID-19 safety protocols of masks and social distancing? Why is attending there prohibited?

More importantly, why are we unnecessarily forcing our Sailors to choose between the free exercise of religion and the UCMJ.

“Support and defend the Constitution…” includes;

…Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

I am not a Constitutional lawyer, and in any event, this isn’t Congress doing the prohibition. This is the Executive Branch.

Give me two lawyers and I’ll get four answers, but when you boil it down what we have is the head of the Executive Branch, the Commander in Chief, through the US Navy he leads, is telling people they cannot attend religious services off base – regardless of where they or their family reside.

So even if Sailors may not go, but in religious households, their spouse and children will go. They will then return home after services to live, eat, sleep, and socialize with that servicemember. As such, does this really decrease the COVID-19 vectors Sailors are exposed to?

No, it doesn’t. As such, what is the cost/benefit lay out for this prohibition?

In the end, I’ll tell you exactly what will happen. A non-zero percentage of Sailors will chose their relationship with their God on their own time over the Navy’s UCMJ. They will intentionally violate the P. 13 they signed. There is the damage. This policy degrades the Sailor, the Navy, and their respect for the UCMJ.

Many will follow the thinking of Algernon Sydney as outlined in his 1698 Discourses Concerning Government,

'That which is not just, is not Law; and that which is not Law, ought not to be obeyed.'

That is the cost.

Want Better Communication Coming From Our Navy? There are Solutions.

One of my great frustrations I've shared with readers here and over at Midrats is the decade-long+ retreat from the public conversation by our Navy. 

I'm not sure where it started, but it was in the last few years of the previous decade where we saw less engagement and unscripted conversations with our Sailors, the public, press, and even Congress. 

It isn't just that the military of a free republic should communicate more and be more accountable to the people, it is we need to be in the marketplace of ideas. Most citizens do not appreciate the fact we are a maritime nation and what that means. It's not their fault on balance, our educational system has been off the rails for at least two generations. Most people are mal-educated on both their nation's history and its geography.

Our Navy has a great story to tell about it's critical role in maintaining a national and global order that enables its citizens to enjoy a standard of living unknown in human history. In order to maintain that security, the citizens need to let their elected representatives know they need to make it a priority. They won't do that if they don't know what their Navy actually does.

Our senior leaders have abandoned the conversation. Is being out there unscripted risky? Sure. Is it hard? Sure. Can everyone do it well? No ... but it can be taught or those who are good at it put to the front. Anything of value has some risk, but the risks are small and the gains are essential.

Instead of engaging, we largely retreated from the public conversation and with few exceptions, been satisfied with boilerplate talking points and reactionary damage control when things go south.

How can we expect our nation to support something it does not understand or respect something it only sees while protecting itself?

It doesn't have to be this way.

A lot of people see this problem and have solutions. One of them is our friend Bryan McGrath. Bryan had an opportunity to put a solution on the tee; all Navy had to do was give a swing at it, but the fates had other ideas.

I'll let Bryan give you the details in his guest post below.

Bryan; over to you.

---

I have watched for a number of years the Navy act as a poor strategic communicator. Part of it is bandwidth for senior leaders, part of it is familiarity with messaging and strategy, part of it is a fear of higher headquarters, and part of it is institutional laziness. The past three years have brought the Navy’s strategic communication deficits into sharp relief, although they were there before the destroyer collisions of 2017. In early 2019, I suggested to a senior Navy official the creation of the following position, and he asked me to write him a memo about it. I still think it is a good idea. I did not arrive at this idea because of the recent spate of bad press the Navy has had. I have written and spoken on the need for effective strategic communication from the Navy for years.

Director, OPNAV Office of Strategic Alignment

The Director, OPNAV Office of Strategic Alignment (DIROSA), is an Executive Schedule, Highly Qualified Expert (HQE) who reports to the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO).

DIROSA is the CNO’s primary assistant for the alignment of strategic communications and messaging. DIROSA will:

-- Monitor, coordinate, and align the activities of the OPNAV Staff, SYSCOMS, CHINFO, OLA, FMB, the Fleets to ensure message discipline, commonality, and coherence.

-- Devise, promote, and aid in the transmission of communications products to inform the American public and its representatives as to the role of seapower in U.S. national security.

-- Coordinate and engage with Navy Secretariat, Joint Staff, and the Office of the Secretary of Defense to ensure CNO and Navy strategic communications are aligned with leadership.

-- Coordinate and engage with cognizant U.S. Marine Corps organizations to promote Integrated American Naval Power narratives, message alignment and integration.

-- Devise and institute processes to promote strategic communications alignment in the Navy, to include closer linkages among programmatics, fleet operations and exercises, and research and development.

-- Assist CNO and CHINFO with crisis response themes and activities.

-- Assist CNO and OLA with Hill strategies targeted to Navy objectives.

The points above are the kinds of things that could eventually find their way into a formal position description. Here is a more informal description of what DIROSA does:

Currently, all the strategic communications alignment in the Navy happens in the mind of the CNO, where it competes with myriad other responsibilities. DIROSA takes custody of this responsibility and manages it for the CNO. DIROSA works side-by-side with SYSCOMS/CHINFO/OLA/OPNAV 3-Stars/Fleets/USMC to monitor, manage, persuade, cajole, influence, and shape messaging and alignment.

DIROSA and staff (1 or 2 others—TBD) are like the BASF Corporation motto—“We don’t make a lot of the products you buy, we make those products better”. For DIROSA to be effective, the organization must not only provide value to the CNO…it must do so for those who could potentially see it as bureaucratically threatening. DIROSA cannot be seen as grabbing “market share” from existing organizations. There will be very little “original work” coming out of DIROSA, as doing so would almost certainly “poach” someone else in the bureaucracy’s territory, no matter how skillfully they are currently executing the function. Where DIROSA comes in is in “checking the work” to ensure that CNO approved communication themes and messages are making their way into subordinate products, and that those messages are within themselves, consistent.

Current CNO special assistants (Speechwriter, OOZ) would remain as they are and continue to do their job. There would be a significant coordination nexus among DIROSA and these functions.

Some of the things I would expect DIROSA to manage for the CNO:

• The creation of annual communications campaigns that identify key themes and messages, assign responsibilities, and monitor outcomes.

• The re-invigoration of the “CHINFO Speaker’s Series” wherein Flags are provided with source material and encouraged to seek out opportunities for general interest speeches. Speeches would be tracked (and potentially assigned) centrally, with Flags required to provide feedback to CNO on how the message was received and the kinds of things in which members of the public seemed interested.

• The creation and management of an experimentation and demonstration campaign as part of the larger campaign. In this, SYSCOMs, and fleet experimentation schedules would be reviewed in advance to find opportunities to message emerging capabilities and concepts, or to make affirmative decisions NOT to message. There is currently no process in which these decisions are made in the context of a larger communications scheme.

• Unless the Director of the Navy Staff already serves this function, DIROSA would monitor crisis management for the CNO. CHINFO and OLA would continue to do what they do, but DIROSA would ensure that we are telling the public what we want, telling the Hill what we want, and telling the 3rd Deck what we want—and that all of those messages are as consistent as we desire.

• DIROSA would maintain a close relationship with three and four star “CAGS” throughout the fleet, reviewing material as desired and helping to provide centralized thematic inputs consistent with desired messaging goals.

• DIROSA would provide alignment and counsel to OPNAV organizations and Fleet organizations sponsoring/overseeing trade shows and forums.

• DIROSA would work closely with N3N5 to ensure Navy equities are represented to the “thinktank” community in DC, and that the CNO’s messages are central to those interactions.

DIROSA would—in conjunction with other CNO Special Assistants—represent the CNO in the creation/staffing of important recurring documents that come to be identified with CNO intent, such as CNOG, strategy documents, and congressional testimony.


Bryan McGrath is the Managing Director of The FerryBridge Group LLC. He counts the Navy among his clients.

China in the Post-COVID-19 World with Dr. Oriana Skylar Mastro - on Midrats

From the alpine lakes on the Indo-Tibetan frontier to the sweltering tropics of the South China Sea, China is on the offensive in response to the global COVID-19 pandemic. Aggressive and persistent in her pursuit of expanding her control and influence in her near-abroad and globally, she is challenging the distracted and slothish West to keep up with her.

What are the latest moves on the global chess board?

Our guest for the full hour this Sunday from 5-6pm Eastern covering the full range of China related challenges will be Dr. Oriana Skylar Mastro.

Oriana is an assistant professor of security studies at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. In August, she will join the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Stanford University as a Center Fellow where she will continue her research on Chinese military and security policy, Asia-Pacific security issues, war termination, and coercive diplomacy. She is also a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and an inaugural Wilson Center China Fellow. Additionally she serves in the United States Air Force Reserve as a Senior China Analyst at the Pentagon. She holds a B.A. in East Asian Studies from Stanford University and an M.A. and Ph.D. in Politics from Princeton University.

You can listen to the show at this link or below, but remember, if you don't already, subscribe to the podcast at Spreaker or any of the other podcast aggregators.

If you use iTunes, you can add Midrats to your podcast list simply by clicking the iTunes button at the main showpage - or you can just click here.

Fullbore Friday

Do you know who Bill Slim is? You should. Maybe this will help.

Lieutenant-General Sir William Slim, KCB, CB, DSO, MC ("Bill") is 53, burly, grey and going a bit bald. His mug is large and weatherbeaten, with a broad nose, jutting jaw, and twinkling hazel eyes. He looks like a well-to-do West Country farmer, and could be one: For he has energy and patience and, above all, the man has common sense. However, so far Slim has not farmed. He started life as a junior clerk, once he was a school teacher, and then he became the foreman of a testing gang in a Midland engineering works. For the next 30 years Slim was a soldier.

A reader sent along a recommendation of Slim's book, Defeat Into Victory: Battling Japan in Burma and India, 1942-1945, and reading up on the man - someone who I only read about in passing - all I could think of is, "More Slim."

Talk about a Vince Lombardi of leadership. I could do a years worth of FbF on the guy - so I'm not going to get in to any specifics. Let me just give you a few things to ponder in order to have you do some of your own research.

He began at the bottom of the ladder as a Territorial private. August 4, 1914, found him at summer camp with his regiment. The Territorials were at once embodied in the Regular Army, and Slim got his first stripe as lance-corporal. A few weeks later he was a private again; the only demotion that this Lieutenant-General has suffered.
...
Field Marshall Viscount Slim was referred to by Admiral of the Fleet Earl Mountbatten, who was Supreme Allied Commander of Southeast Asia, as "the finest general World War II produced". After the war he was head of the Imperial General Staff, Britain’s top military post, from 1948 to 1952, and was governor general of Australia from 1952 to 1960. This article is reprinted from a 1945 issue of Phoenix, the South East Asia Command magazine.

Again - not just he accomplishments on the field of battle - but his thoughts on leadership demand thought. Nothing radical or new - but they need repeating and if you want to know what makes successful people successful, listen to what got them there.

Want to be successful? Start by benchmarking the best.

Officers are there to lead

Then Slim relates at one critical point in the retreat in a jungle clearing he came across a unit which was in a bad way. "I took one look at them and thought ‘My God, they’re worse than I supposed.’ Then I saw why. I walked round the corner of that clearing and I saw officers making themselves a bivouac. They were just as exhausted as their men, but that isn’t my point. Officers are there to lead. I tell you, therefore, as officers, that you will neither eat, nor drink, nor sleep, nor smoke, nor even sit down until you have personally seen that your men have done those things. If you will do this for them, they will follow you to the end of the world. And, if you do not, I will break you."

The General stepped down from the ammunition box and replaced his hat. The division rose as one man, and cheered him. A few weeks later, these troops were to cross the frontier river at the point Slim had led his indomitable, ragged rearguard three years before. They dug up the tank guns which the old army had buried there when they abandoned their tanks, and they used those guns to blast open the road to Mandalay.

The spirit which Slim breathed into that division, on that blue, sunny morning in Palel inspires the whole of the 14th Army. His victorious host has now marched back a thousand miles, planted its battle flags on the citadel of Mandalay and above the capitol city of Rangoon, killing 100,000 Japanese on the way. Their achievement must be attributed in large degree to the character of their Commander. Slim does not court popularity, and he hates publicity. But he inspires trust. The man cares deeply for his troops, and they are well aware that their well-being is his permanent priority. The 14th Army has never been out of his mind since that day nearly two years ago when Mountbatten appointed him to the command. Of the Mountbatten-Slim partnership history will record that it was one of the rock foundations of our Jungle Victory.

Slim talks little and swears less, but one day at Army Headquarters the roof lifted when he received a demand that mules should be installed in concrete floor stables in a training camp, well in the rear. "My men are sleeping on earth, and often on something worse. What’s good enough for British soldiers is good enough for mules of any nationality." Slim set his Army hard tasks, but none have been beyond their power. After the great battles of Imphal and Kohima, where five Japanese divisions were destroyed, Slim called on his exhausted soldiers to carry on relentless, final pursuit. "So great were the dividends that could accrue," he confesses, "that I asked for the impossible - and got it!

Slim affirms "that the fighting capacity of every unit is based upon the faith of soldiers in their leaders; that discipline begins with the officer and spreads downward from him to the soldier; that genuine comradeship in arms is achieved when all ranks do more than is required of them. ’There are no bad soldiers, only bad officers,’ is what Napoleon said, and though that great man uttered some foolish phrases, this is not one."

What has a soldier got, asks Slim, and answers it himself. "He has got his country, but that is far away. In battle, the soldier has only his sense of duty, and his sense of shame. These are the things which make men go on fighting even though terror grips their heart. Every soldier, therefore, must be instilled with pride in his unit and in himself, and to do this he must be treated with justice and respect."

Slim says that when he was in civvie street he saw men who were fathers of families cringing before a deputy-assistant-under-manager who had the power to throw them out of their jobs without any other reason than their own ill-temper or personal dislike. "That, at any rate, can’t happen in the Army," he declares. "You don’t have to cringe in the Army, though it’s true some incorrigible cringers do. In the Army you don’t have to go out to dinner with a man if you can’t stand the sight of him."

People like to make fun, Monty Python like, of British General Officers, shame though - almost all I read about are more like Slim.

From January to August 1944 a series of decisive battles was fought along the India-Burma border which resulted in the turning point for that theater of war. After two years of failure the Allies wrested the initiative from Japan and destroyed the myth of Japanese invincibility.

The Allies were successful despite a number of challenges, many self inflicted. The first challenge was to organize and resource defenses of the India-Burma border. The second challenge was to train the soldiers to fight in the jungle clad mountains that typified the area of operations. Inextricably tied to this was the challenge of moving and supplying forces in the rugged environment. Developing a feasible and acceptable plan despite the absence of a coherent theater strategy was the next challenge. This challenge was made more difficult by the complex and dysfunctional command relationships. Finally, there was the challenge of defeating an aggressive and fanatical enemy who had an unblemished record of success in the India-Burma Theater.

Fortunately, the Allies had an answer to these challenges in Lieutenant General William Slim. It was Slim who established the training program that taught the soldiers to fight in the jungle, developed the tactics and techniques to move and sustain forces in the arduous terrain, provided the leadership to overcome the dysfunctional command relationships, and unified the theater strategy. Finally, and most importantly, it was Slim who developed and executed the plan that drew in and defeated the Japanese 15th Army thereby setting the conditions for the successful re-conquest of Burma in 1945.

Fullbore.

First published FEB 2012.