"The Right Fight... with the Right Forces": Interview with Adm. Joseph W. Prueher commander in chief, U.S. Pacific Command

Sea Power, Dec 1998 by Hessman, James D, Peterson, Gordon I

Adm. Joseph W. Pr-ueher is the 17th U.S. naval officer to serve as the senior U.S. military commander in the Pacific and Indian Ocean areas. From his headquarters at Camp H.M. Smith, Hawaii, he leads the largest of the U.S. unified commands and directs U.S. Army, NaL=y, Marine Corps, and Air Force operations across more than 100 million square miles. A native of Nashville, Tenn., Adm. Prueher was graduated with distinc-tion from the U.S. Naval Academy. Prior to assureing command of U.S. armed forces under the Pacific Command, he served as the vice chief of naval operations. In addition to command of the U.S. Sixth Fleet, Adm. Pr-ueher commanded Carrier Group One in the U.S. Pacific Fleet from April 1991 until November 1993. He also served as the commandant of midshipmen at the U.S. Naval Academy. A former test pilot and flight instructor at the Naval Test Pilot School, Adm. Prueher has flown more than 5,500 hours in 52 types of aircraft, has more than 1,000 aircraft carrier landings, and holds a master's degree in international affairs. Editor in chief James D. Hessman and Senior Editor Gordon I. Peterson interviewed Adm. Joseph W. Prueher, commander in chief, U.S. Pacific Command, for this issue of Sea Power.

Sea Power: Admiral, what are the most distinctive political and military changes you have witnessed in the Pacific theater since you took the helm of the Pacific Command [PACOM] three years ago?

PRUEHER: There have been some significant developments in our AOR [area of responsibility]. To me, the most noteworthy was the 1996 election in Taiwan that precipitated China's missile exercise. The ensuing China/Taiwan Strait crisis led us to send two aircraft carrier battlegroups in response. What frustrated me at the time was that we had no military relationship with China, and so that situation got very tense, very fast. Our options for resolution were limited, and military communications channels were difficult. We have built better dialogue since then. We have a positive relationship with China's senior leadership. It still needs work, but we do have a good relationship. If something like the China/Taiwan Strait situation should start rumbling again, we now have better means of resolving the situation.

There also have been successful transitions of power in Japan, Korea, Thailand, and the Philippines. Japan's transitions of power-there have been many-have been orderly. Korea had its first peaceful election when Kim Dae Jung [president of the Republic of Korea] took over. That is a great plus for democracy in the region. The transition between Ramos [former Republic of the Philippines President Felix V. Ramos] and President Joseph Estrada was peaceful as well. In Thailand-which is a democracy but also a country of great internal military power-there was pressure for General Mongkon Ampornpisit [supreme commander of the Royal Thai Armed Forces] to take over militarily when the government fell about 18 months ago. But he did not do that-he supported the constitution; he supported democracy. Now we have Prime Minister Chuan Leekphai, and things are on track in Thailand. In Indonesia, where after 32 years President Suharto stepped down, B.J. Habibie took over constitutionally. The important things there are the restraint shown by Indonesian armed forces-the ABRI [Armed Forces, Republic of Indonesia]-and that the process of change is working constitutionally.

Another recent challenge has been the explosion of nuclear devices by India and Pakistan in the spring of 1998. I think the international system is absorbing this now. But India and Pakistan both exploded nuclear devices for domestic reasons; they are not rogue or pariah states-but it does potentially change the nuclear balance. The outcome is still uncertain.

OSD [Office of the Secretary of Defense], the State Department, and NSC [the National Security Council] are still very much involved in trying to ensure a good outcome. We are involved in the Indian part of the situation, and we stay in touch with Tony Zinni at CENTCOM [Gen. Anthony C. Zinni, commander in chief, U.S. Central Command] on the Pakistan part. Our commands are working very well together.

Finally, we have the Asia economic crisis which is now affecting the entire region along with an attendant impact on stability. From a military view, my discussions with defense leaders in the region over the last year have turned from plans for military modernization to ways to mitigate the effects of the economic downturn to, in some cases, concern for internal stability.

On the subject of forward-deployed forces, how do you assess their operational readiness? Are your component commanders having any problems?

PRUEHER: The readiness issue has been prominent lately with the CINCs [commanders in chief], with the service chiefs, with Congress, and with the secretary of defense. In PACOM, we have about 100,000 forward-deployed troops, but those troops represent the capabilities of the U.S. Seventh Fleet, III MEF [Marine Expeditionary Force], 5th and 7th Air Forces, the 8th Army in Korea, Army forces in Japan, and our SOF [Special Operations Forces] there. Those forces are up and ready. They are equipped, prepared, and trained. They can answer the bell.