P L A N S , P O L I C I E S , A N D O R G A N I Z A T I O N
terms, were in the nature of a general guide rather than of a specific
directive. All armed forces of both nations serving in the United
Kingdom and British home waters (including Iceland) were to be
under the strategic direction of the appropriate British commander in
chief; all U.S. forces were to be under the immediate control of the
commanding general of the U.S. Army Forces in Great Britain (or
British Isles-USAFBI) .74 What that would mean in actual practice,
no one knew; an American general could write somewhat perplexedly
in September I 94 I :
I find certain terms not susceptible of standard interpretation by our own
people, with the general result of a somewhat cloudy issue. I keep struggling
with “strategical direction,” “operational control,” and “administrative com-
mand”, . . . I am not trying to start an argument but I am trying to call
attention to the need for evolving a practical and efficient command system
under circumstances for which I know no p r e ~ e d e n t . ~ ~
RAINBOW No. 5 had vested the commanding general of USAFBI
with the duty of developing such a system, giving him “authority to
arrange with the Air Ministry and the War Office concerning the or-
ganization and location of our task forces and operational control.” ‘‘
Until war should invoke RAINBOW No. 5 , there would of course
be no USAFBI commander, but as an interim means of liaison, the
two nations had agreed to exchange military missions: the British
Joint Staff Mission a t Washington, the American Military Mission
at London.” The American mission was to consist of offices known
respectively as the Army Special Observer Group (SPOBS) and the
Naval Special Observer Group (SPENAVO) .
Ostensibly the establishment of SPOBS merely regularized a prac-
tice already in operation, for in 1940 the Air Corps had sent a number
of officers of various grades to watch the Battle of Britain.” Among
the senior officers was Maj. Gen. James E. Chaney, a man of wide
military experience; his tour was especially appropriate in view of an
earlier assignment as a military attach6 in Europe and of his current
dual command over the Air Defense Command and what was to be-
come the vital Northeast Air District.* After six weeks in England,
Chaney had returned in November 1940 to render an optimistic re-
port on Britain’s chance of surviving the air blitz.TvIn the following
April he was ordered back to London as commander of SPOBS, with
Brig. Gen. Joseph T. McNarney as his chief of staff.*’ The choice of
+ See above, pp. 152-53.
577