The later naval court of inquiry ordered under James Forrestal revisited responsibility for Pearl Harbor. The account connects its findings to secret codebreaking information and its conclusion that the army and navy had cooperated adequately given what they knew. Forrestal judged the court too lenient and held that Kimmel and Stark had failed to show the judgment their commands required. Dr. Clarke disputes that assessment, arguing that it demanded inferences from intelligence the commanders had not received. His explanation attributes the subsequent blame to a failure to confront earlier mistakes and rejected warnings. He explicitly rejects the claim that officials wanted the attack or knowingly allowed it to happen, instead arguing that they did not believe Japan would attack.
Notable Point · 4:06:26-4:09:17
Pearl Harbor inquiries and the disagreement over Kimmel
The naval inquiry's conclusions and Forrestal's criticism raise a dispute over intelligence access, command judgment, and responsibility for Pearl Harbor.