The Development of Combined Operations Headquarters and the Admiralty during the Second World War:

2019 ◽  
pp. 143-170
Author(s):  
C. I. Hamilton
Author(s):  
Frank Ledwidge

‘The Second World War: the air war in the Pacific’ describes the maritime and air operations in the Pacific that were truly epic in scale. It outlines the strategic bombing in the Far East as well as the two atomic raids carried out on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945. Prior to the atomic strikes on Japan, strategic bombing to coerce capitulation had failed in the combined operations against Germany. Even then, it seems likely now that the atomic raids contributed to rather than caused Japanese surrender. Command of the air was indispensable. However, air power alone could not deliver success. When used as a component of an integrated pragmatically founded strategy, it was nonetheless vital.


Author(s):  
C. I. Hamilton

The aim of this chapter, written by C.I. Hamilton, is to better understand the Second World War British Admiralty by looking at it via a small, connected organization, Combined Operations Headquarters (COHQ), and to approach the latter through some of the individuals involved, including not just its two famous heads, Sir Roger Keyes and Lord Louis Mountbatten, but also two important middle-level officers, Wing Commander the Marquis of Casa Maury and Captain R.M. Ellis, who were blamed for much. They lead one to look to administrative factors for explanations, in particular with regard to the take-over of part of COHQ's functions by the Admiralty in 1943. That entails a survey, mainly with relation to the Admiralty, of the administration of operational planning, supply, production, and of administration itself, and then a return to consider the 1943 take-over. It is proposed that with the unprecedented growth of Admiralty bureaucracy during the war, impelled by the development of maritime warfare, many more formal bureaucratic linkages were required, together with more local initiative, and these entailed Admiralty imperialism. The conclusion is that circumstances were primary, not personalities, and that there were implications for postwar defense reform.


2020 ◽  
pp. 153-166
Author(s):  
Harold R. Winton

This chapter explores the evolution of Canadian staff colleges from their inception during the Second World War to their integration into the Canadian Forces College (CFC) in 1966. In their first years, the Canadian services largely based their own staff college curricula on their British counterparts. The Canadian Army Staff College (CASC) and the RCAF Staff College differed, however in the focus of their content. While the CASC emphasized the tactical level, the RCAF Staff College focused on the nature of air power during the Second World War stressed joint and combined operations at an operational and strategic tier, more in keeping with the model of the USAF Air University. This broader higher-level approach meant that ultimately the RCAF Staff College would serve as blueprint of the joint programme of the CFC.


Author(s):  
Corinna Peniston-Bird ◽  
Emma Vickers

2016 ◽  
Vol 46 (185) ◽  
pp. 543-560 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingo Schmidt

This article draws on Marxist theories of crises, imperialism, and class formation to identify commonalities and differences between the stagnation of the 1930s and today. Its key argument is that the anti-systemic movements that existed in the 1930s and gained ground after the Second World War pushed capitalists to turn from imperialist expansion and rivalry to the deep penetration of domestic markets. By doing so they unleashed strong economic growth that allowed for social compromise without hurting profits. Yet, once labour and other social movements threatened to shift the balance of class power into their favor, capitalist counter-reform began. In its course, global restructuring, and notably the integration of Russia and China into the world market, created space for accumulation. The cause for the current stagnation is that this space has been used up. In the absence of systemic challenges capitalists have little reason to seek a major overhaul of their accumulation strategies that could help to overcome stagnation. Instead they prop up profits at the expense of the subaltern classes even if this prolongs stagnation and leads to sharper social divisions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document