[On September 7th, 1776, the Revolutionary forces employed the Turtle, the first submersible to be used in warfare. So this week I’ll AmericanStudy that event and other submarine stories in our history and culture, leading up to a special weekend tribute to one of my favorite people who has a special sub connection!]
On two contrasting and even contradictory wartime roles, and what the combination reveals.
The U.S. Navy didn’t really take extensive part in World War I, other than to escort convoys; but its leadership, like the rest of the world, saw what German U-boats did in that conflict, to the ships in those convoys and so many others, and clearly learned from the experience. In World War II, U.S. submarines were responsible for more than 50% of Japan’s merchant marine losses, a level of destruction that naval historian Michel Thomas Poirier argues “substantially reduced Japanese war production, and, ultimately, significantly reduced the Japanese ability to implement their preferred defensive strategy.” The U.S. subs were able to achieve those effects in large part because the U.S. Navy adopted a policy of unrestricted submarine warfare, one that at best skirted the rules of the 1930 London Naval Treaty and that certainly located this still evolving form of vessel and weapon outside of the conventions of naval warfare. But it’s important to note that both German U-boats and Japanese submarines operated in much the same way; in the 1940s, almost 200 years after the Turtle’s groundbreaking (well, waterbreaking) Revolutionary War attack, militaries and governments clearly were still figuring out how they wanted to define submarines, and as a result were free to use them in pretty shady ways.
But that freedom also meant that the naval and military leadership could find other unique uses for subs, and in early 1943 Rear Admiral Charles Alan Pownall proposed a novel such use: stationing subs near the targets of planned aerial raids, in the hopes that they could perform search and rescue missions for downed pilots. Known as the Lifeguard League, this mission initially met with significant challenges, particularly around communication; a number of times U.S. aircraft unknowingly strafed their own submarines, and it’s possible that both the USS Seawolf and USS Dorado were sunk by our own planes in such tragic actions. But those communication issues were ameliorated over time, and this program also produced countless successful search and rescues: from the sizeable, such as the USS Tang’s rescue of 22 airmen in April 1944; to the small but symbolic, such as the rescue of downed aviator and future President George H.W. Bush by the USS Finback in September 1944. Any one service member rescued during wartime is an important and inspiring achievement, and the Lifeguard League saved many more than one person.
So what do we make of that contradictory combination, of the fact that during WWII U.S. submarines committed what could plausibly be categorized as war crimes (and yes, those from other nations did so as well, but I’m not a big fan of whatabouting war crimes) but at the same time took part in one of the war’s most humanitarian and life-affirming missions? To me, the contradiction isn’t just about war’s horrors and humanities (although yes), nor just about the worst and best of human nature and how war brings both out (although also yes). I’d say it’s also a striking illustration of something I think about a lot these days—the ways that groundbreaking technologies can likewise, and even more ubiquitously, tap into the best of humanity or unleash our worst impulses; and how often the same new technologies do both things, often in the exact same moments. Between the late 18th century and the mid-20th century (up until that even more striking mid-20th century new technology, one that really didn’t tap into anything good), submarines were one of the most important such innovations, and we can see both sides of them particularly clearly in their WWII roles.
Next SubStudying tomorrow,
Ben
PS. What do you think? Sub stories you’d share?
Leave a Reply