xerxes

I am a big fan of the US high command of as we offically call it the US Joint Chiefs of Staff and am also a big fan of various Command theatres. Before, the days of Wikipedia, I use to painfully, collect the names of the US officer that headed the various branches from the days of Omar Bradly

Anyways .. the current topic

In the past two years two main event happened that inconsistent with past events in terms of militay shuffeling:

1) A four-star Marine general (Pace) is appointed as the Chairman of US Joint Chiefs of Staff

2) A four-star Navy admiral (fallon) is appointed as the head of the Central Command

All the service head positions, chairman, and theatre Commanders have to be four-star general or plus, by law of Congress.

The first case (general Pace), is surprising to me, because it is the first time a Marine has been appointed to the highest military position in the US armed forces. This is surprising because Marine Corps is still officially part of US Navy, which makes the Commandant of Marine Corps a theoritical subordinate of the Chief of Naval Operations and actually before the presence of the Commandant of Marine Corps was always not offical on the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The second case, is less puzzeling, because a four-star officer of any branch can be appointed as the head of a threatre (i.e. Central Command), wether it be a Navy, Army, Marine or Air Force. But it still inconsistent sens it is the very first time that the central command has naval chief. To my knowlege only the US Pacific Command ususally has naval chiefs.

One answer could be that the Pentagon is using their Vietnam card in case of central command. During the vietnam war, the Pacific Command was headed by four-star Admiral Sharp who was the technical superior of the four-star General Westmoreland - who headed the MACV. So they probably are reducing the weight on the shoulders of the CENT COM chief and adding more on the shoulders of the Iraq Commander. Though one major difference exists between the two cases (Iraq and Vietnam): in Vietnam the MCAV was a FOUR-star Flag theatre whereas the Iraq Command is a Three-star Flag theatre


what do you guys think ....

wabpilot

Actually, the Commandant of the Marine Corps is one of four Chiefs, U.S. Code, Title 10, Subtitle A, Part I, Chapter 5. Further, the Commandant of the Marine Corps is not subordinant to the CNO, but to the Secretary of the Navy, a civilian. Thus the USMC is part of the Department of the Navy. Not, a part of the United States Navy. It is a separate chain of command all the way to SECNAV.

xerxes

^^^

has it always been like this sense 1947 ??

I remember reading on many occasions (books) regarding in the 60s and 70s that the commandant was subordinated to Navy. Perhapes, it was said Dept of Navy, and i mistaken it.

anyways thanks for the clarification ...