CONTENTS Letter of transmittal to Secretary of Defense_-- Authority of the Secretary of Defense.. The Secretaries of the military departments.. Page A. Legal opinion on the power and authority of the Secretary of Defense.. B. List of those invited to present their views to the committee_____ C. List of statements and communications reviewed by the committee... D. List of published documents considered by the committee_ - E. List of committee members, military consultants, and staff_ LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, Hon. CHARLES E. WILSON, Secretary of Defense, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. SECRETARY: The Committee on Department of Defense Organization has the honor to submit herewith its report, as you requested on February 19. It is pleased that its members have come to unanimous agreement on the recommendations contained herein. The Committee wishes to acknowledge with gratitude the important contribution made to its study by its three senior military consultants, Gen. George C. Marshall, Adm. Chester W. Nimitz, and Gen. Carĺ Spaatz, who brought to the Committee the benefit of their wisdom and experience. The Committee has discussed the major problems of organization and procedure in the Department of Defense with the former Secretaries of the military departments, with the military chiefs of the services, with civilians who have held high office in the Department of Defense, and with a number of eminent private citizens who have had close relations with problems of defense organization. In addition, it has had the benefit of formal statements, informal memoranda, and personal_testimony from principal officers in the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the military departments. It has studied the legislative history of the National Security Act, and has analyzed the reports and recommendations of previous surveys which bear on this problem. The recommendations embodied in the report submitted herewith are consistent with the basic principles of the reports of the Commission on Organization of the Executive Branch (the Hoover Commission) and its Task Force on National Security Organization, and the Citizens Advisory Commission on Manpower Utilization in the Armed Services (the Sarnoff Commission). The Committee believes that its recommendations would further the objectives indicated in such earlier studies. The Committee, as you requested, has concentrated its attention on the basic organization and procedures of the Department of Defense, especially with respect to the position of the Secretary of Defense and his relationships with his principal civilian and military officials. The Committee believes that the form of organization recommended in this report will establish a framework within which the Department of Defense can operate more effectively to attain the broad objectives toward which you and the President are working-to provide the Nation with maximum security at minimum cost, and without danger to our free institutions. We believe that it will be suitable not only for the present period of localized war, but also in time of transition to either full war or relatively secure peace. The organization of the Department of Defense must be adjusted from time to time to meet the needs of changing conditions. We believe that the organization recommended by this report is appropriate at the present time. In submitting this report on the top structure of the Department of Defense, we are convinced that you should provide through the Secretaries of the three Departments for a thorough analysis and possible revision of the organization and procedures of the military departments. With the submission of this report, the Committee requests that it be discharged, and it wishes you every success in the important tasks which you have undertaken. Respectfully, NELSON A. ROCKEFELLER, Chairman, Committee on Department of Defense Organization. REPORT OF THE ROCKEFELLER COMMITTEE ON INTRODUCTION The United States is faced with the continuing challenge of providing adequate national defense without wrecking the national economy. Since the National Security Act was enacted in 1947, the invasion of Korea and the repeated evidence of Communist hostility throughout the world has made it unmistakably clear that our Nation must maintain a strong military position or risk destruction by potential enemies enemies whose progress in the modern arts of war now match the ruthlessness of their political principles. Under these circumstances, we believe that the American people will support the President and the Secretary of Defense in establishing an organization in the Department of Defense which is capable of providing the Nation with maximum security at minimum cost and without danger to our free institutions, based on the fundamental principle of civilian control of the Military Establishment. A major step in this direction was taken with the passage of the National Security Act, which was intended to (1) provide through the Secretary of Defense a central organization for the exercise of direction, authority, and control over the entire Department of Defense, in order to establish policies and to assist the President in carrying out his responsibilities and functions as Commander in Chief; and (2) set up a decentralized organization for administration through the three military departments. It was not expected in 1947 when the National Security Act was adopted, or in 1949 when it was amended, that the national security organization should be closed to further improvement. While its fundamental principles are still sound, experience indicates that it needs to be amended, and that the organization and procedures of the Department of Defense need to be improved in order to attain four compelling objectives: (1) The lines of authority and responsibility within the Department must be made clear and unmistakable. (2) The Secretary of Defense must be able to clarify the roles and missions of the services. (3) Planning must be based on the most effective use of our modern scientific and industrial resources. (4) The organization of the Department must be able to effect maximum economies without injuring military strength and its necessary productive support. The Department of Defense cannot now attain these four objectives in full. They can be attained only if, by the necessary statutory amendments and necessary changes in organization and procedures, the Secretary of Defense is given the following tools of sound management: (1) Clear and effective authority over the entire defense organization, and control over the principal personnel, civilian and military, in the Department of Defense; 1 |