Was the Pearl Harbor Attack a Military Success?

Was the Pearl Harbor attack a military success?

The Japanese Navy attack on the US naval fleet in Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941 resulted in 2403 Americans being killed, 1178 wounded, and twenty one ships sunk or damaged. Ships damaged included eight battleships, the USS Arizona, USS California, USS Maryland, USS Nevada, USS Oklahoma, USS Pennsylvania, USS Tennessee and USS West Virginia, as well as three cruisers, the USS Helena, USS Honolulu and USS Raleigh, and four destroyers. Fuquea calls the Pearl Harbor bombing the US Navy’s “greatest defeat …in its history”, and states that the “attack was successful beyond any expectation” and gave the Japanese “the breathing room they wanted … during their conquest of the Central and South Pacific” (p. 707). Yet, despite the attack’s success in damaging a large proportion of the US Navy Pacific fleets heavy armament ships, I believe the attack must be counted as a military failure.

Military operations have as their objective the achievement of strategic national goals which cannot be achieved by less costly means, such as commercial trade or diplomacy. A military operation which does not further the achievement of strategic national goals is either an adventure by an out-of-control military, or a military failure.

The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was agreed to by the Japanese government of Imperial Army Prime Minister Tojo. Tojo had been appointed Prime Minister in October 1941 when his predecessor had lost the confidence of the Imperial Army and Navy, which had agreed to begin a Southward expansion by fully occupying French Indochina against the former Prime Minister’s policies (Barnhard p.256,258). The Army had agreed to the Navy’s plan for Southward expansion in response to Washington’s embargo of trade with Japan in iron, steel, metal alloys and oil (Barnhard p.255). The Navy had long argued that Japan’s major military conflict in the Pacific was with the US, and that US Pacific naval power would have...