Michael A. Carambas

The Rise of the Admirals As Cocom Commanders Michael A. Carambas

Admiral Eric Olson assumed command of U. S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM), becoming the fourth Navy Admiral to be placed in charge of five "warfighting" COCOMs: U. S. Central Command (CENTCOM), U. S. Pacific Command (PACOM), and U. S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM). With these recent appointments the Navy has risen to command a preponderance of senior military leadership positions. Is this coincidence or "just the Navy's turn" in these leadership positions? Could one possible reason be that the Navy adapted to the current situation and the Bush administration's desire to "transform" the military better than her sister services? Could the ascendance of these officers' be explained by other reasons based on job experience or other political factors? What can explain the'rise of the Admirals?' Until recently, command of regional COCOMs appeared to be determined by either the service that provided the bulk of capability, either in peacetime, or in recent operations, or by the nature of the domain, be it primarily maritime, land, or mixed in nature--with few (explainable) exceptions. But recently, this trend has changed. I consider two potential explanations for this. The first is that the services that have been in the forefront of'transformation,' the use of information technology to make forces more accurate, lighter, and faster, have been rewarded with leadership positions in the combatant commands where such forces would most likely be utilized. The second explanation is that Navy officers merely happen to be the right man in the right place at the right time for these positions. I find that embracing transformation placed the Navy and the USAF ahead of the Army in contention for COCOM leadership while the personal qualifications placed the Navy ahead of the USAF. Hence, the combination of transformation and personal qualifications explains the rise of the Admirals.