________________________________________________________________________Richard S. Kem
of things I have to start here or he can't influence there. So, it was certainly something, as I
mentioned, that I didn't fully understand at the start. Even now we have people writing the
Chief letters asking him to get certain things done or complaining that something hasn't been
done quickly enough when it should be more properly directed here because I'm the one that
has that responsibility.
Q:
I realize this is a touchy question, but how is it being the commandant of the Engineer
School, sitting 20 miles south of a three-star Chief of Engineers? That present problems for
you, or him?
A:
Well, you'd have to ask him about problems for him, but I would guess his answer is
probably close to mine. I don't think it's been any problem for me at all. General
Richardson's first charge to me was, "You've got the responsibility to make all this happen
for the engineer force. You have to work out a relationship with the Chief of Engineers."
That was pretty clear to me. I'd been General Heiberg's deputy twice; I understood what I
needed to do to work with him. My own feeling was, "If it's right, we'll all buy it. If it's
wrong, then what am I trying to do to push it forward if it's not going to be acceptable to
him?" I mean, logic should prevail, and we should be doing the logical thing. It ought to be
able to be accepted by everybody.
Way back, when proponency was thought out and when people were talking about, early on,
the Chief of Engineers' role versus the commandants', I was in the ACE's office. I guess I
said at the time that I supposed the success of that arrangement would be partly due to the
personalities involved, but it should work because it was logical. In the past, personalities
have been a factor in some cases.
I don't think it's been a factor at all in this case, and I think General Heiberg has been most
supportive. He has sent down questions every now and then that he'd like to have answers
for so that he's well informed in his arena. He's suggested things that we ought to look at and
we've looked at them. He's had a lot of good ideas; that's been an influence here. By the
same token, when we've gone up there to seek his support, he's been very supportive.
The key to all that is recognizing the different arenas we play in, and TRADOC and AMC do
an awful lot at our level before it ever gets to the Department of the Army. It's very difficult
for the Chief of Engineers to play down at our level. When it gets up to the Department of the
Army, he has the opportunity to play in the arena and to support the programs or not support
them depending on whether he's there at the meetings or not there at the meetings or gets
involved. That's where he's got the ACE to take care of that.
Commandants do also play in the Department of the Army arena. That is, we're asked to take
our systems forward. I was present for the decision brief of the Under Secretary and the Vice
Chief of Staff for the M9 ACE. It's not that I don't go to the Department of the Army, but
I'm not there working on a daybyday basis, and the Chief should be. So, long as we sort
out the two arenas then I think it should be a supportive relationship.
351
Previous Page
