Editor-in-Chief Note: This article is a special one from Captain Bill Hamblet, USN (Retd), the Editor-in-Chief of the US Naval Institute Proceedings (USNIP), possibly the oldest professional naval journal/magazine in the world to the newest, our own Indian Naval Despatch (INDES). The title we chose for this is perhaps more than a play on naval tactical terminology, it may signify the possibilities of cooperation between the two journals in years to come for robust discussions as well as where the INDES ought to find itself in due course as did the USNIP. The author fascinatingly conveys the essence of what the Proceedings stands for and how robustness, candour and intellectual rigour among sailors, soldiers, marines, coastguardsmen and airmen through its pages since 1873 may have helped the USA. The Proceedings has some advice to offer us!

Congratulations to the Indian Naval Despatch from Proceedings!

We, the staff of the US Naval Institute Proceedings, send our heartfelt congratulations and best wishes to the Indian Naval Despatch. Your theme, “Lighting Maritime Thought,” resonates perfectly with us and our readers.

Since 1873, the mission of the US Naval Institute has been to: provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security. Our vision has been to give voice to all who seek the finest Navy, Marine Corps and Coast Guard. While our main focus has always been on US naval forces and maritime security, over the decades we have welcomed our Army and Air Force brethren as well as international partners in discussions that run the gamut of joint, combined, and global security topics.

Eras of rising complexity, challenge and danger have been part of the history of the United States since the dawn of the republic. The nation’s sea services have always played a central role. Now and in the future, that role-above, on, and beneath the surface of the world’s oceans, and projecting power from those oceans-is indispensable. Yet, capable, powerful and ready naval forces are not a God given birthright of the USA or any nation. At times, the USA has let its sea services languish and did not invest sufficiently in ships, weapons, technology, manpower, training and education.

The stage was set for the US Naval Institute after the Civil War. The old Navy was dead. By nature, the service was decentralised. There were only nine shore establishments. The basic administrative unit was a single ship, and it was established policy for Washington to leave as many decisions as possible to individual Commanding Officers. In 1866, there were not only no effective fighting ships, but there were also no plans for new ships, guns and machinery. There were few new ideas and no visible source from which to draw them. The passing of sail had taken with it not merely a comfortable, uncomplicated routine of shipboard life, but also the customary practices on which the decentralised service leaned so heavily.1

The US Naval Institute was established on 09 October 1873, following a meeting of fifteen Navy and Marine Corps officers serving at the Naval Academy who were unwilling to see their service languish. Rear Admiral John L. Worden, who had commanded the Union Navy’s famous Ironclad Monitor in the Civil War, now Academy Superintendent, was one of the founders. Those in attendance at that meeting proposed to organise a society of naval officers for the purpose of discussing matters of professional interest. Officers who had special knowledge or information on particular subjects of professional interest would prepare papers to be read before the society.

By the end of 1873, the Institute had held four meetings and had adopted its permanent name and objective - “the advancement of professional and scientific knowledge in the Navy.” Some of the first papers presented were deemed to be of such value that it was decided to publish them. Captain Stephen B. Luces’ “The Manning of Our Navy and Mercantile Marine” was the lead article in Volume I, 1874 in The Papers and Proceedings of the United States Naval Institute, a journal which has been in continuous production to this day. Captain Luces’ lead article would establish the traditions of daring and impact. The US Congress would provide funds for a mercantile marine training ship and for the training of new US Navy seamen apprentices as a result of his article.

Lieutenant JC Soley, US Navy, also wasted no words in opening his 1878 Proceedings article, “On a Proposed Type of Cruiser for the United States Navy.” “For many years, we have perforce remained comparatively idle, without making any improvement to our Navy.” He contrasted the advances being made by European navies. He criticised the inadequacies of the current US fleet to include... “most are so slow as to be of very little service in time of war.” And he set forth in detail the design of his proposed new class of cruiser. In 2014, former Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Thomas B. Hayward would observe, “Pretty gutsy of a Lieutenant wouldn’t you say? But that’s what Proceedings is all about.” And it sounds like the Indian Naval Despatch also aspires to stir such critical debate.

From the first decade on, prize essay contests were an important dimension of the Institute’s work. The idea of an annual prize essay contest was first proposed in 1878. The subject was Naval Education. Winners would include Commander Alfred Thayer Mahan. In 1948, an enlisted prize essay contest was added. The first winner was Chief Machinist Mate Richard Mckenna, who would go on to write the best-selling novel, The Sand Pebbles, which was later turned into a popular Hollywood movie.

Throughout cycles of peace, crisis and war, dedicated Sailors, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen have dared to read, think, speak and write participating in the Naval Institute’s independent, non-partisan forum. They have debated, offered constructive criticism and published authoritative works on how best to improve and advance sea power. The relationship between Proceedings and official Navy policy has not always been agreement. In fact, it has often been the opposite, and we are proud of that legacy. Nearly every major change related to technology, weapons, leadership, personnel, tactics, strategy and even social issues has been debated in Proceedings, often for years before the Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard moved in that direction. Proceedings has been a change agent-and change often comes with difficulty. If we can offer any advice at all, it is to err on the side of rocking the boat. Dare to publish new ideas and give voice to junior officers and enlisted personnel. Let your readers and contributors debate and hone those ideas.

Societal changes directly impact the sea services; and while topics such as race relations, women in combat roles, and LGBTQ service members are controversial, Proceedings has never shied away from them. In the summer of 2020, in the midst of nationwide racial tension, the Naval Institute announced its first ever Diversity and Inclusion Essay Contest. The response was overwhelming with more than 120 entries from men and women of all ranks in the sea services and the Naval Institute Board of Directors and Editorial Board issued a statement, “On the Importance of Diversity and Inclusion.”2

In the following months, a number of readers contacted us about this topic in our pages. The statement by our Board of Directors and Editorial Board and the winning article of the contest, drew the most attention. Several readers asked, “When the Navy can’t even build a 355 ship fleet, why are you focussed on social issues?” Our answer has several parts. First, Proceedings has always included a debate about social issues-even when the operational and strategic problems facing the sea services have been daunting. During Admiral Elmo Zumwalt’s tenure as Chief of Naval Operations in the 1970s, the Navy struggled with the long term impacts of the Vietnam War and with serious racial problems within its ranks. Both topics were prominent in our pages during that decade. The role of women in the military was a prominent theme from the 1970s through the 2000s, and “Don’t ask, Don’t tell” was a significant topic for more than a decade.3

Secondly, because social issues impact the sea services, we do not want them to play out only in social media (dominated by fractured groups that shout past one another) or in the mainstream media, with its own sharp ideological divides. The professional journal of the Sea Services hosts these debates so military members can help shape them.

Last (but no less important), we publish on these topics because members of the profession write about them. As editors, we do our best to present different sides of the arguments, while also keeping the discussion “in bounds” - respectful, professional and thoughtful. We do not publish extreme views on any topic, but we welcome a spirited debate. From time to time, angry readers will ask why we published a certain article or opinion. Our answer is “Do you want Proceedings to publish only content with which you agree?” (most do not) and we always welcome counter arguments, if written professionally and thoughtfully, in our “Comment and Discussion” (Letters to the Editor) section.

The staff and members of the Naval Institute are proud of our legacy of publishing Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard thought leaders long before they reached flag or general rank. Lieutenants Ernest King (1909) and Chester Nimitz (1912) wrote their first Proceedings articles decades before they led the Navy during World War II. Lieutenant Hyman Rickover, later the Father of the Nuclear Navy, first wrote for the forum in 1935. Today, we have Petty Officers, Lieutenants, and Majors asking questions such as “What Does the Navy Need from the Marine Corps?”4 They also proclaimed, “Every Sailor is a Damage Controlman.”5 At times, the top brass has disapproved of content in our pages, but positive change requires vision and courage. The best ideas do not always come from the top, and even when they do, they must be sharpened by competing ideas and honed over time by the thoughts of those who must implement them.

Today’s global security environment is fraught with danger and uncertainty, necessitating a free and open debate among the best minds and key stakeholders. How will the naval forces of democratic nations ensure free seas and international maritime security for the remainder of this century? We do not yet know the answers, but publications such as the Indian Naval Despatch and Proceedings will be where those answers emerge and where future leaders will debate and refine them. We wish the staff and readers of the Indian Naval Despatch great success and the tenacity to weather the storms that will come your way.

Endnotes

  1. WH Russell, “Seventy Five Years of Progressive Naval Thinking,” US Naval Institute Proceedings (1948, October).

  2. “On the Importance of Diversity and Inclusion,” US Naval Institute Proceedings (2021, May). https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2021/may/importance-diversity-and-inclusion, accessed 25 August 2021.

  3. Ensign Sydney Frankenberg, “Sir, No Excuse, Sir!,” US Naval Institute Proceedings (2021, May). https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2021/may/sir-no-excuse-sir, accessed 25 August 2021.

  4. Brian Kerg, “What Does the Navy Need from the Marine Corps?,” US Naval Institute Proceedings (2019, November). https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2019/november/ what-does-navy-need-marine-corps, accessed 25 August 2021.

  5. John C Minor, “ Every Sailor a Damage Controlman,” ( 2019 , August). https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2019/august/every-sailor-damage-controlman, accessed 25 August 2021.