United States Naval Institute: Some Thoughts by Dr. Richard Kohn

The following thoughts on the mission change suggested by the Board of Directors of the U.S. Naval Institute come from Dr. Richard Kohn. Dr. Kohn, currently a Professor of History and Peace, War, and Defense at The University of North Carolina, has previously served as the Chief of Air Force History. He has been called one of America’s top military historians, and has written about the value of dissent, and proper expression of that dissent, in the military. Dr. Kohn has serious reservations about the Board of Directors’ desire to change the United States Naval Institute and has given permission to reprint this anecdote:

Whether the Navy deserves it or not, the US Naval Institute, its "Proceedings," and its other programs (not least the book program) have been the most active, independent, professional, useful, and respected institution and journal among the armed forces for many decades. Tom Wilkerson has been an outstanding leader.

Such a change would be catastrophic for the Navy, and its professionalism.

When I was Chief of Air Force History in the 1980s, Barry Goldwater and I were chatting one day in the Secretary's conference room, at a promotion, decoration, or retirement ceremony (I don't remember which), and he turned to me and with passion said, "We need a Naval Institute; the Air Force needs an institution like that!!" I explained to him briefly why we did not have such an institution and why we didn't need one (knowing that its independence, above all, would not be possible given the Air Force's history and "DNA" about air power, and the need to foster independence of viewpoint among the institutions already operating in the Air Force). He wasn't having any, and indeed badgered the Air Force Director of Public Affairs on the subject, in addition to me.

Those who are advocating such a change ought to ponder this anecdote--it's quite meaningful in a number of ways.

The United States Naval Institute is the envy of the other service branches. The open forum for ideas has been lacking in the defense world for members of the Army and Air Force while the Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard have benefitted greatly from the ideas generated by the Institute’s "open forum."

Is it time for USNI to become like the Air Force Association (which “educates the public about the critical role of aerospace power in the defense of our nation; advocates aerospace power and a strong national defense”) or the Association of the United States Army (which to “support all aspects of national security while advancing the interests of America's Army and the men and women who serve”), organizations which have little standing in the arena of ideas?

I think not.