HOME / obit: Bringing out the dead.

Death of the Whiz KidRobert Strange McNamara, 1916-2009.

Robert McNamara.Robert Strange McNamara, who died today at age 93, was the personification of postwar America, the original and ultimate "whiz kid" who rose to power on the firm belief that arms and rationality can solve all problems—and tumbled to tragedy as the illusion shattered in the fields of Vietnam.

His ascent traced a path through Harvard Business School, where he was the youngest professor in its history; the Army Air Forces, where he pioneered the use of statistics to maximize the efficiency of bombing raids over Japan; Ford Motor Co., where he was promoted to president; and finally, in 1961 at age 44, to President John F. Kennedy's secretary of defense.

At the Pentagon, he hired a team of young "systems analysts" from the RAND Corp., the nation's leading think tank, and subjected the military budget, the nuclear-war plan—everything within his domain—to the statistical methods that he'd mastered with a brash confidence in the rightness of his views.

His early decisions transformed military politics, and almost entirely for the better. Kennedy's predecessor, Dwight Eisenhower, a former five-star general who knew well his brother officers' outsized appetites, had placed harsh limits on how much the armed services could spend but almost none on what they could buy. As a result, the defense budgets in the 1950s were teeming with redundancies and parochial pet projects. McNamara killed scads of these programs—to the horror of the generals, who had never been so challenged by civilians—saving tens of billions of dollars at no detriment to security.

(The generals reacted by recruiting their own systems analysts, so they could challenge McNamara on his own terms. The math, it turned out, could be massaged to yield almost any conclusions. But no longer could the service chiefs justify a cherished weapons program by merely declaring it to be a "military requirement.")

McNamara also imposed some discipline on the nuclear-weapons establishment. When Kennedy took office, the Strategic Air Command's official nuclear-war plan called for launching the entire U.S. nuclear arsenal—3,423 bombs and warheads, totaling 7,847 megatons of explosive power, which, it estimated, would kill 285 million Russians and Chinese and millions more in Eastern Europe—if the Soviets invaded West Germany, even if they hadn't fired any of their own nukes first. The U.S. Air Force and Navy were planning to build thousands more nuclear weapons over the next several years to keep up with projections of an arms race.

With Kennedy's support, McNamara altered the war plan to allow for "limited" nuclear attacks—and funded a buildup of non-nuclear forces in Europe—so that, in case of a Soviet invasion, the president might have options other than "surrender or holocaust." He also put the nuclear command structure under much tighter control. (Until then, the nightmare scenario of Dr. Strangelove and Fail-Safe—a mad general launching a nuclear war without presidential authority—was technically plausible.) He reined in the military's desires for a much-expanded arsenal (though not to the degree that his own analysis dictated). And privately he told his closest aides that he would never advocate a nuclear first strike.

But then, after Kennedy was killed and Lyndon B. Johnson became president, came the escalation in Vietnam—and the unwinding of everything that McNamara, and many Americans, believed.

At first, McNamara and his entourage blithely assumed that war, like everything else, could be rationally analyzed and tightly controlled, without the need for much insight into the enemy's aims, motivation, or culture. On May 22, 1964, three months before the Gulf of Tonkin crisis, McGeorge Bundy, the national security adviser, sent Johnson a memo (reproduced in the Pentagon Papers), informing him of a "small, tightly knit group" that was preparing an "integrated political-military plan" to broaden the war through "graduated action against North Vietnam." He went on:

Print This ArticlePRINTEmail to a FriendE-MAILShare This ArticleRECOMMEND...Get Slate RSS FeedsRSS
Fred Kaplan is Slate's "War Stories" columnist and author of 1959: The Year Everything Changed. He can be reached at .
Photograph of Robert McNamara by Yoichi R. Okamoto/White House Press Office/Wikipedia.
COMMENTS

I was coming into the military as McNamara was leaving. It was easy to see the incredible damage he had done to the US military (which took almost 25 years to overcome.) What had been a calling was turned into just another job - yes he upped the pay but he tried as hard as he could to destroy all the little things that made the military standout from civilian life. Before, the service tried to produce leaders, he wanted managers instead, and sadly that's what we got. He never to the end understood that there was a fundamental difference between Ford and the US military. No comprehension at all. But we all kept hearing what a genius he was.

How many of his ilk have we seen since in government? - incredible geniuses doing incredible harm?

-- businessanalyst
(To reply,
click here)

McNamara brought to the pentagon his style of "managing by metrics", that helped make Ford into the success it is today. He imagined he could measure military success by the then-modern MBA style -- relentlessly measuring process minutiae and applying simple algorithmic "solutions" onto those metrics. This is why he placed near-religious faith in the infamous "body count" and "kill ratio" numbers. He seriously thought this represented a rational -- and better! -- way to manage warfare. The thousands of killed Americans and Vietnamese seemed to be only abstractions to him -- regrettable debits on the ledger sheet that he could explain away at the next stockholders' meeting.

My understanding is that both McNamara and LBJ himself largely micro-managed the war, even to the point of making daily determinations of exact bomb targets, and berating military leaders when the metrics did not come up to scheduled quotas.

Every administration seems to have its "whiz kids" who dazzle the press and the public with their highly-publicized "intellect". Certainly, GW Bush had them in his neocons. To this day, they all insist their theories were flawless -- and never mind the actual results. Most of those neocons still hold lucrative positions and pontificate to the rest of us about their brilliance.

-- EbenCooke
(To reply,
click here)

What did you think of this article?
Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES
TODAY'S PICTURES
TODAY'S CARTOONS
TODAY'S DOONESBURY
TODAY'S VIDEO
Very superstitious.90/091113_TP.jpg
Cartoonists' take on unemployment.50/091113_TC.jpg
Streep 2.0-8.0. 1/122939/2183724/DoonesburyPlaceholder.jpg