Goldwater-Nichols watch
I am about to get into real inside baseball, so skip this item unless you care about the plumbing of policymaking. The Goldwater-Nichols Act of 1986 governs the U.S. military chain of command. It was devised in response to operational problems seen in the botched hostage rescue mission in Iran in 1980 and the screwy ...
I am about to get into real inside baseball, so skip this item unless you care about the plumbing of policymaking.
I am about to get into real inside baseball, so skip this item unless you care about the plumbing of policymaking.
The Goldwater-Nichols Act of 1986 governs the U.S. military chain of command. It was devised in response to operational problems seen in the botched hostage rescue mission in Iran in 1980 and the screwy U.S. invasion of Grenada in 1983. There is no question that the act improved the "jointness" of the U.S. military, making the services work better with each other. The Iraq war has subjected the act to its first sustained test. "War is the great auditor of institutions," Corelli Barnett writes in his great history of military leadership in World War I, The Swordbearers.
So, how has the law done? My guess, based on a review of the formulation of strategy in the war is that it has been more of a hindrance than an aid in strategic decision-making. But this question needs a lot more study before any conclusions can be reached. I’d welcome reader suggestions on how to go about this. I think the question is especially important because so many government officials, especially at the Pentagon, talk about a "Goldwater-Nichols Act for the interagency" that would make different departments work with each other as well as the military services have under the act. Before we leap into that, I’d like to know how well this thing has really worked.
More from Foreign Policy

Saudi-Iranian Détente Is a Wake-Up Call for America
The peace plan is a big deal—and it’s no accident that China brokered it.

The U.S.-Israel Relationship No Longer Makes Sense
If Israel and its supporters want the country to continue receiving U.S. largesse, they will need to come up with a new narrative.

Putin Is Trapped in the Sunk-Cost Fallacy of War
Moscow is grasping for meaning in a meaningless invasion.

How China’s Saudi-Iran Deal Can Serve U.S. Interests
And why there’s less to Beijing’s diplomatic breakthrough than meets the eye.