Did Bush Delay the USS Bataan? Nope.

Brave Sir Blogger Blog ^ | 9/6/05 | Brave Sir Blogger

[SmokeRing]

The USS Bataan, having just finished exercises off Panama, was in a position to shadow Hurricane Katrina as she headed for New Orleans. The Bataan boasts 6 operating rooms, beds for 600 patients, helicopters, and a crew of 1200 able sailors. Yesterday, Andrew Sullivan linked to a post on The Carpetbagger Report claiming that, once Katrina passed through New Orleans, the Bataan sat impotent some 90 miles south of the city awaiting President Bush's orders to help with the emergency. According to Carpetbagger, the Bataan needed permission to proceed:

<< Apparently, that permission could have been given right away, but it wasn't. Bush was on vacation, sharing some cake with John McCain , and pretending to play some guitar. >>

The Carpetbagger Report based its conclusion on a BBC interview with NorthCom Lt. Commander Sean Kelly. The transcript of the money quote from Kelly:

<< "Northcom started planning before the storm even hit. We were ready when it hit Florida, because, as you remember, it hit the bottom part of Florida, and then we were planning once it was pointed towards the Gulf Coast.

"So, what we did, we activated what we call 'defense coordinating officers' to work with the states to say, 'OK, what do you think you will need?' And we set up staging bases that could be started.

"We had the USS Bataan sailing almost behind the hurricane so once the hurricane made landfall, its search and rescue helicopters could be available almost immediately So, we had things ready.

"The only caveat is: we have to wait until the president authorizes us to do so. The laws of the United States say that the military can't just act in this fashion; we have to wait for the president to give us permission." >>

To Carpetbagger, this sounded like a subtle bit of whistle blowing. And indeed, the written word seems open to that interpretation. But upon listening to the actual interview, I came away with the impression that Lt. Commander Kelly, acting as an information official to the media, was merely offering his "caveat" as a friendly aside--as non-essential but useful information.

I e-mailed my concern to Carpetbagger and received news of a clarification from Kelly:

<< The President and Secretary of Defense did authorize us to act right away and are not to blame on this end. Yes, we have to wait for authorization, but it was given in a timely manner. >>

Is Kelly under pressure to tow the company line? That's always a possibility, but I don't think that's the case here. Kelly's statement is entirely consistent with a story in The Chicago Tribune, which sheds light on the operations of the USS Bataan in the days following the landfall of Katrina. The story is well worth reading, but a quick summary: The Monday of landfall was a wash. There were sighs of relief as people assumed that Katrina's turn to the east had spared New Orleans. Then the levees broke on Tuesday. The Bataan's helicopters were immediately in the fray, rescuing stranded residents. A 135-foot landing craft was sent 90 miles up the Mississippi to New Orleans:

<< It took a crew of 16, including a doctor, and its deck was stacked with food and water. The craft carries enough food and fuel to remain self-sufficient for 10 days. >>

The commander of the craft considered landing near Venice, La., but packs of roving dogs made him reconsider. The time line of the Tribune's story is unclear, but it seems that soon after the landing craft returned to the Bataan, FEMA redeployed the Bataan to Biloxi, Miss.

According to the Tribune:

<< The role in the relief effort of the sizable medical staff on board the Bataan was not up to the Navy, but to FEMA officials directing the overall effort. >>

From this I presume that the White House permission to which Lt. Commander Kelly had referred had indeed been granted; and operational control over the USS Bataan had been delegated to FEMA.

There's certainly an open question here: Why the redeployment of the Bataan to Biloxi when its hospital beds and emergency rooms could have aided New Orleans? Was this wise? Was it a mistake? Did Biloxi indeed have needs that trumped those of New Orleans? We can't really know at this point, can we? More to come, I assume.

Worth Noting: The Chicago Tribune story I refer to above is a bit misleading on a key point. In the fourth paragraph of the story, Stephen Hedges writes:

But now the Bataan's hospital facilities, including six operating rooms and beds for 600 patients, are empty. A good share of its 1,200 sailors could also go ashore to help with the relief effort, but they haven't been asked. The Bataan has been in the stricken region the longest of any military unit, but federal authorities have yet to fully utilize the ship.

The problem is that, at this point in the story, Hedges seems to be saying that the USS Bataan is still sitting off New Orleans--a jaw-dropping bit of information, if it were true. Casual readers who don't follow the story into its second page will leave not knowing of the redeployment to Biloxi.