New Chairman Crowe May Boost Reorganization Efforts : Larger Role Seen for Head of Joint Chiefs

The arrival of Adm. William J. Crowe Jr. as the new chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff could boost lagging efforts to reorganize the Pentagon’s highest military leadership--a move opposed by current senior officers--or could bring about, unofficially, a strengthened role for the chairman, Pentagon officials and other military experts say.

Crowe, whose nomination was confirmed Wednesday by the Senate, will enter the uppermost level of a Pentagon stung in recent years by repeated disclosures of widespread military waste, the failure of the Iran hostage rescue mission and criticism of insufficient coordination during the invasion of Grenada--problems that experts say are related, at least partly, to inefficient and expensive rivalries among the Army, Navy and Air Force.

Military experts cite Crowe’s experience in heading so-called “unified commands” as key elements during a career in which he has, one former Navy official said, “shown a lot of initiative in getting people from diverse backgrounds to cooperate with each other.” As part of these commands, Crowe directed the work of Army, Air Force and naval forces in southern Europe, the Mediterranean and the Pacific Ocean.

‘Very Strong Chairman’

The official, R. James Woolsey, undersecretary of the Navy during the Jimmy Carter Administration, predicted that Crowe would be “a very strong chairman” and said that Crowe previously had expressed interest in “a more enhanced role for the joint commanders” of the major military units.

However, one officer familiar with the work and deliberations of the Joint Chiefs observed that “until he gets his hands dirty in this arena,” it will be difficult to predict what steps Crowe might take.

During his brief confirmation hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, the admiral indicated that he would approach the subject of reform with an open mind, but he said he would prefer to see how the current system works before deciding whether to recommend changes.

In the view of critics of the Joint Chiefs’ current operation--in which the chairman represents the consensus of the military chiefs and carries no authority to express differing opinions to the secretary of defense and the President--a chairman with enhanced authority could resolve rivalries over budget and military missions.

During the Pentagon’s preparation of the defense budget, a strong chairman could set priorities rather than pass along each services’ requests to the defense secretary, said Gordon Adams, director of the independent Defense Budget Project, which studies military spending issues.

“As long as you let everyone write their own ticket and do nothing to harmonize it, you boost the spending or leave it up to the office of the secretary of defense--and all they’ll do is accept the shopping lists because they’re not prepared to do any head knocking,” Adams said.

Reorganization Proposal

An expanded role for the chairman of the Joint Chiefs is a key element in a proposal, advanced by Rep. Les Aspin (D-Wis.), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, to reorganize the Joint Chiefs.

However, that plan and other efforts to reorder the work of the nation’s senior military officers have met with the resistance of the service chiefs, who believe that only “some streamlining” is needed, a senior Pentagon official said.

The Navy, considered the most independent of the services, historically has opposed proposals that might strengthen the chairman at the possible expense of the individual service chiefs, but Crowe “is not your typical Navy guy,” said another senior Pentagon official. This official described the reorganization of the Joint Chiefs as “the big issue” facing Crowe.

“A lot of problems have been hard to resolve because there isn’t any joint authority over there (at the Pentagon) that says, ‘If you don’t settle this, we will,’ ” said a former Army officer who is now a defense industry consultant. “There clearly are greater efficiencies and greater effectiveness by having greater cooperation between the services.”

Crowe, he said, “has been a strong proponent of joint operations--working together with the services--which is rare for a Navy guy.”

Rivalries Fading?

Army Gen. John W. Vessey Jr., the current chairman of the Joint Chiefs, has asserted that rivalries are fewer and less dramatic than have been reported. Indeed, Pentagon insiders with many years of experience view these disputes as greatly reduced over the last two decades.

Still, accounts of rivalries persist. Coordination in a variety of areas between the Army and Air Force is seen as “a tremendous problem,” said the defense industry consultant, who spoke on the condition that he not be named. He cited the services’ different approaches to air defense and requirements to identify friendly or enemy aircraft and said, with some exaggeration: “The Army feels you shoot ‘em down and sort ‘em out on the ground. The Air Force takes exception to this.”

The Navy, he said, “is concerned that if the joint system gets a stronger role, the services will have less.”

It is an environment marked by just such rivalries, competition and differing points of view that Crowe will find himself in when he leaves Honolulu, where he has been commander-in-chief of the Pacific Command, and moves to Washington.

“There is a good chance he can be one of those people who know how to make Washington work. He can understand the diverse pressures and work his way through them and come out in the end two steps forward instead of two steps back,” said Jerry Friedheim, Pentagon spokesman from 1969 to 1974.

Friedheim added: “He’s the kind of guy a President would like to have with him in the Situation Room in a crisis. He’s thinking presidential-scope thoughts.”