Russia–China Naval Patrol Near Japan: Official Assurances vs. Strategic Reality

Introduction

Russian and Chinese naval forces completed a coordinated patrol through the strategically vital Soya Strait near Japan on August 8, following their Joint Sea 2025 exercise. The three-ship flotilla—including China’s destroyer CNS Shaoxing, supply ship CNS Qiandaohu, and Russia’s destroyer Admiral Tributs—sailed eastbound from the Sea of Japan into the Sea of Okhotsk, demonstrating growing operational coordination between America’s two primary maritime rivals.

What the Numbers Tell Us

The data reveals an unmistakable pattern of escalating military cooperation:

113 joint military exercises conducted by China and Russia since 2003. The Joint Sea exercise series, launched in 2012, has now been conducted 10 times and has become what China calls “a key platform for China-Russia military cooperation.” This latest exercise (August 1-5) included sophisticated joint air defense, counter-sea, and anti-submarine operations.

While China’s Defense Ministry insists this cooperation is “not aimed at any third party” and dismisses criticism as “groundless speculation,” the operational reality speaks louder than diplomatic assurances.

Why This Matters for American Naval Power

Public statements aside, these are not ceremonial sail-bys. China and Russia are systematically deepening their operational coordination in waters that form part of America’s strategic defense perimeter in the western Pacific.

The Soya Strait—positioned between Russian Sakhalin Island and Japan’s Hokkaido—represents more than a shipping lane. It’s a critical chokepoint in the maritime geography that has historically allowed the U.S. Navy and its allies to maintain sea control in the region.

Geographic reality check: Japan, Taiwan, and the Philippines aren’t just treaty allies—they’re the geographic anchors of America’s first island chain strategy. When hostile naval forces operate in coordinated fashion near these positions, it directly challenges the maritime supremacy that has underpinned regional stability since 1945.

Strategic Implications: What the U.S. Navy Must Consider

For Naval Planning: The U.S. Navy must now prepare for scenarios where China and Russia function as an integrated maritime threat in the western Pacific. This means developing tactics for simultaneous multi-axis threats, ensuring our Pacific Fleet can maintain sea control against coordinated opposition, and investing in platforms and weapons systems designed for high-intensity naval combat.

For Alliance Management: Japan’s latest defense white paper already warns of China’s “swift” military expansion and “intensifying activities” around disputed territories. This patrol reinforces Tokyo’s concerns and validates Japan’s own naval modernization efforts.

For other regional allies, the message is clear: strategic cooperation with Washington must evolve as rapidly as the threat. Beijing and Moscow are not standing still—neither can we.

The Broader Context: Russia’s Pacific Return

Russia’s renewed naval activism in the Pacific, combined with China’s expanding blue-water capabilities, represents a fundamental shift in the regional balance of power. The Russian Pacific Fleet’s stated objectives—”maintaining peace and stability” while protecting “economic assets”—mirror the language China uses to justify its South China Sea expansion.

Bottom line: When two authoritarian powers with global ambitions coordinate naval operations near democratic allies, American naval strength becomes the decisive variable in maintaining regional stability.

What This Means Going Forward

The August 8 transit may have occurred beyond Japan’s territorial waters, but the strategic message was unmistakable. As these exercises become more frequent and sophisticated, the U.S. Navy faces a new operational reality: preparing not just for individual threats from China or Russia, but for their coordinated maritime power projection.

The choice is stark—maintain naval superiority through continued investment in platforms, training, and alliance coordination, or watch strategic competitors reshape the maritime order in the world’s most economically vital region.

For Americans who understand that naval power remains the foundation of global stability, the time for half-measures has passed.

Americans for a Stronger Navy advocates for the naval capabilities required to maintain American maritime superiority and protect our allies worldwide.

Americans for a Stronger Navy Response to Battle of Savo Island Anniversary

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

Introduction

On this solemn anniversary of the Battle of Savo Island, Americans for a Stronger Navy joins our Australian allies in remembering the courage and sacrifice of those who gave their lives in the dark waters off Guadalcanal on August 9, 1942.

The loss of HMAS Canberra and her 84 brave sailors, alongside over 900 American naval personnel, represents more than numbers—it represents the ultimate sacrifice made by free nations standing together against tyranny. This battle, while tactically a defeat, demonstrated the unbreakable bond between Australian and American naval forces that continues to secure the Pacific today.

The lessons of Savo Island—the critical importance of naval readiness, advanced training, and technological superiority—remain as relevant now as they were 82 years ago. As we face new challenges in the Pacific, from contested sea lanes to emerging threats, we honor these fallen heroes by ensuring our Navy maintains the strength, capability, and resolve they died defending.

Their sacrifice reminds us that freedom of navigation and maritime security are not abstract concepts, but principles worth defending with our lives. Today, as then, a strong Navy remains America’s first line of defense and our greatest tool for preserving peace through strength.

We stand with Australia in remembering these heroes and recommit ourselves to the naval strength that protects both our nations.

A Salute to Those Who Remember

To all who pause today to honor these fallen sailors—veterans, families, historians, students, and citizens both American and Australian—thank you. Your remembrance keeps their sacrifice alive and their lessons relevant. Whether you’re a descendant of a Savo Island survivor, a naval history enthusiast, or simply someone who understands that freedom isn’t free, your attention to this anniversary matters.

Special recognition goes to our Australian friends, military historians, naval societies, and educators who ensure these stories continue to be told. In an age of shortened attention spans, those who preserve and share naval history perform a vital service to both our nations.

Why Average Americans Should Care About the Battle of Savo Island

Economic Security The Pacific carries over $1.4 trillion in annual trade vital to American prosperity. These are the same trade routes where sailors died in 1942. Today, 40% of America’s imports cross these waters, along with critical shipping lanes for oil, gas, and renewable energy components that power our economy.

Historical Lessons for Today Savo Island showed the cost of being caught unprepared—a lesson directly applicable to current Pacific tensions. The battle demonstrated why strong allies like Australia are essential to American security, and how technological superiority matters. Japanese superiority in night-fighting capabilities led to their victory; today’s tech gaps could prove equally costly.

Personal Connection Many American families have ancestors who served in the Pacific Theater. Understanding what military service truly costs helps inform decisions about defense spending and foreign policy. The battle reminds us that the freedoms Americans enjoy came at tremendous cost and weren’t guaranteed by geography alone.

Current Relevance The same strategic waterways remain crucial to American interests today. Modern tensions in the South China Sea echo the naval competition of WWII, and historical battles like Savo Island inform current debates about naval funding and capabilities.

Strengthening Allied Partnerships

The Battle of Savo Island reminds us that America’s security depends not just on our own naval strength, but on the strength of our alliances. Today, this means:

The AUKUS Partnership with Australia and the UK builds on the naval cooperation forged in battles like Savo Island, sharing submarine technology that strengthens all three nations. Joint training exercises with Australian, Japanese, and other Pacific allies ensure we won’t repeat the communication failures of 1942 that contributed to the defeat.

Shared intelligence networks and integrated defense relationships born from WWII sacrifices now provide early warning and coordinated responses to regional threats. Allied shipbuilding and defense manufacturing strengthen both nations’ naval capabilities, creating an industrial base that supports deterrence.

The Battle of Savo Island isn’t just history—it’s a reminder that American prosperity and security depend on naval strength and strong alliances. The sailors who died there died protecting the world we live in today. Their legacy lives on not just in our memory, but in the enduring partnerships their sacrifice helped forge.

If we want peace, we must master this new domain.

It’s time to embrace it. It’s time to invest. It’s time to lead.

That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter—a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.

Let’s roll.

An Open Letter: The Real Story Behind USS Harry S. Truman’s Red Sea Deployment

By Bill Cullifer, Founder, Americans for a Stronger Navy

I write today in response to the deeply troubling article titled “It Was Supposed to Be a Show of Force — USS Harry S. Truman’s Return From the Red Sea Has Become a Humiliation for U.S. Navy,” published by Indian Defence Review, which fundamentally mischaracterizes one of the most challenging naval deployments in recent memory.

Whether this represents clickbait journalism or genuine editorial perspective, it raises several critical concerns that extend far beyond this single article. First and foremost: Is this the thanks we give to the men and women who spent over eight months away from their families, conducting combat operations in one of the world’s most dangerous maritime corridors?

The Real Numbers Tell a Different Story

Let’s examine what the USS Harry S. Truman and her crew actually accomplished:

  • Over 250 days at sea in a combat environment
  • 11,000 sorties flown against legitimate military targets
  • 1.1 million pounds of ordnance deployed with precision
  • Zero pilot fatalities despite equipment challenges
  • Continuous protection of one of the world’s most critical shipping lanes

These are not the metrics of failure. These are the achievements of professional sailors executing their mission under extraordinary circumstances.

The Human Cost of Service

Behind every sortie, every watch standing, every maintenance cycle, there are real people. Sailors who missed birthdays, anniversaries, and holidays. Young men and women who wrote letters home while dodging Iranian-supplied drones and missiles. Chiefs and petty officers who worked around the clock to keep aircraft flying and systems operational.

When equipment failed—as it inevitably does in the harsh maritime environment—these same sailors adapted, improvised, and continued the mission. When accidents occurred, they responded with professionalism and ensured their shipmates survived.

Understanding Modern Naval Warfare

The article’s characterization of the deployment as a “humiliation” reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of 21st-century naval operations. The Houthis, backed by Iran, represent exactly the kind of asymmetric threat our Navy faces globally. There are no clean victories against an enemy that hides among civilians, uses commercial vessels as shields, and employs disposable drone swarms.

The fact that commercial shipping continues to face challenges doesn’t diminish what the Truman accomplished—it highlights the complexity of the threat environment and the limitations of any single military response to a multi-faceted geopolitical problem.

Equipment Losses in Context

Yes, three F/A-18 Super Hornets were lost during the deployment. Each represents significant cost and operational impact. But let’s be clear about what this means: In over 11,000 sorties, with zero pilot fatalities, we experienced a loss rate of 0.027%. By historical standards of naval aviation, particularly in combat operations, this is remarkable.

More importantly, each incident led to immediate safety reviews, procedural improvements, and lessons learned that will protect future sailors and aviators. This is how professional military organizations operate.

The Broader Information Warfare Concern

This incident highlights a troubling trend in how military operations are portrayed in global media. The USS Truman’s heroic service received minimal positive coverage during their deployment, yet a sensationalized critique gains international attention through platforms like Google News.

Recent investigations have documented serious concerns about foreign influence in news distribution. Three CCP-controlled media outlets enjoy hosting and promotion privileges on Google’s flagship news platform, according to reporting by the Washington Examiner. Additionally, Google has blocked more than 1,000 Glassbridge sites from Google News and Google Discover since 2022 due to coordinated pro-China influence operations.

American taxpayers funded the development of these information distribution technologies, yet we now see them potentially weaponized to undermine public confidence in U.S. military operations. Whether intentional or not, sensationalized coverage that diminishes American military achievements serves the strategic interests of our adversaries.

Our Sailors Deserve Better Recognition

The truth is that our sailors’ remarkable service barely made the news during their deployment. While they were conducting combat operations under dangerous conditions, the media largely ignored their daily acts of courage and professionalism. Yet sensationalized criticism spreads quickly through algorithmic news distribution systems.

The Truman’s deployment served multiple strategic purposes beyond immediate tactical outcomes:

  • Alliance building: Working alongside international partners in a coalition environment
  • Deterrence: Demonstrating sustained American presence in a critical region
  • Experience: Providing irreplaceable combat experience to a new generation of sailors
  • Intelligence: Gathering critical data on enemy capabilities and tactics

These strategic benefits don’t fit neatly into headlines, but they represent the real value of sustained naval presence operations.

A Call for Perspective

Military operations are complex, multi-dimensional endeavors that rarely produce clean victories or clear defeats. The men and women of the USS Harry S. Truman served with distinction in a challenging environment, accomplished their assigned missions, and returned home safely.

They deserve our gratitude, not sensationalized criticism that reduces their service to clickbait headlines.

As supporters of our military personnel, we can and should hold our military leadership accountable for strategic decisions, equipment readiness, and operational effectiveness. But we must do so in a way that honors the sacrifice and professionalism of the sailors who execute these missions.

The crew of the USS Harry S. Truman didn’t return home in “humiliation.” They returned home as combat veterans who served their country with honor in one of the world’s most dangerous regions.

That’s a story worth telling accurately.


Americans for a Stronger Navy, an organization dedicated to supporting U.S. naval personnel and advocating for robust maritime security. He can be reached at [contact information].

The Autonomous Revolution: Naval Warfare’s Exponential Leap

Introduction

The future isn’t coming—it’s already here, patrolling our oceans with no human hands on the wheel.

Personal Reflection

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

As someone who stood watch on a destroyer’s deck for years, I’d love nothing more than for every young American to feel the salt air, a wooden helm at their fingertips, the roll of the ship beneath their feet and the breathtaking vastness of the sea. That experience shaped my life and the life of many others that I respect and admire.

But sentiment won’t secure the future. The world has changed—and it’s time we face some hard facts.

We’re now witnessing the dawn of a radically new era in warfare. One that demands we embrace and invest in the technologies that will define the next generation of naval power.

From Science Fiction to Sea Trials

Less than a decade ago, the idea of fully autonomous warships seemed like the stuff of sci-fi. Today, the U.S. Navy’s USX-1 Defiant—a 180-foot, 240-ton vessel designed without a single human accommodation—is conducting sea trials off Washington state.

No bunks. No heads. No mess halls. Just a steel-clad, AI-powered war machine optimized purely for mission.

This isn’t incremental change. It’s an exponential leap.

The Compound Effect of Convergent Technologies

What’s driving this revolution isn’t just a single breakthrough. It’s convergence.

AI Decision-Making at Machine Speed

Ships like USS Ranger and Mariner aren’t just autonomous—they’re operational. They’ve logged thousands of miles, fired missiles, and executed missions without direct human control. Real-time, tactical adaptation is already replacing human-triggered decision trees.

Swarm Coordination Beyond Human Capability

With programs like Ghost Fleet Overlord, we’re moving toward fully integrated autonomous networks—surface, subsurface, aerial. Swarms of unmanned systems coordinating at machine speed, executing joint missions across domains.

New Physical Designs, New Possibilities

When you remove the human factor, new design freedom emerges. The NOMARS program optimizes for function over form—rapid payload reconfiguration, longer endurance, fewer constraints. Defiant doesn’t compromise. It adapts.

The Multiplication Factor

Each of these capabilities amplifies the others:

  • AI enables swarm tactics
  • Swarms generate operational data
  • That data trains the next-gen AI
  • Which enables even more sophisticated missions

The cycle is accelerating. Consider DARPA’s Manta Ray, an autonomous glider designed to “hibernate” on the seabed for months. Now picture that working in tandem with unmanned surface vessels like Defiant, and traditional submarines—all coordinating without a single sailor onboard.

The MASC Paradigm: Speed Over Paperwork

The Navy’s new Modular Attack Surface Craft (MASC) program exemplifies this exponential thinking. Instead of designing ships around specific missions, MASC creates standardized platforms that gain capabilities through containerized payloads—like naval smartphones that become powerful through modular “apps.”

With an aggressive 18-month delivery timeline and emphasis on commercial standards over “exquisite” platforms, MASC represents a fundamental shift in how the Navy acquires capability. As Austin Gray, Navy Reserve Intelligence Officer & Co-founder/CSO, Blue Water Autonomy observed: “The way Navy is approaching MASC—procuring fast, iteratively, and with focus on speed over paperwork—should offer us hope that the future of U.S. seapower is not so dim.”

This isn’t just about new ships—it’s about new thinking. MASC vessels can be missile shooters one day, submarine hunters the next, simply by swapping standardized containers. The high-capacity variant could carry 64 missiles—more firepower than many destroyers, at a fraction of the cost.

Beyond the Horizon

In 2016, Sea Hunter launched with basic navigation. By 2021, converted vessels were firing missiles. In 2025, purpose-built unmanned warships are conducting sea trials. By 2026, MASC prototypes will be delivered for fleet operations.

What’s next?

The Pentagon is backing this future with a $179 billion R&D investment focused on AI, drone swarms, and autonomous systems. The revolution isn’t limited to ships—it extends to autonomous aircraft, land vehicles, and space-based platforms.

The Inflection Point

This may be the most transformative shift in warfare since the atomic age.

But unlike nuclear weapons, which stagnated under treaties and deterrence doctrines, autonomous systems evolve constantly—learning, adapting, improving. The next five years will likely deliver breakthroughs we can’t yet fully comprehend.

We’re not just upgrading platforms. We’re creating entire ecosystems of autonomous coordination that outpace human decision-making and redefine how wars are fought—and deterred.

Welcome to U.S. Navy 3.0—a new era defined not by bigger ships, but by smarter ones.

We’ve discussed this evolution before: Navy 1.0 was sail and steel; Navy 2.0 brought nuclear power and carrier dominance. Navy 3.0 marks a transformational leap driven by artificial intelligence, autonomy, and multi-domain integration. It’s not just about replacing crewed vessels with unmanned ones—it’s about rethinking naval power from the keel up. From swarming tactics to predictive logistics and machine-speed decision-making, Navy 3.0 is our opportunity to regain the edge in a world where adversaries are building faster, cheaper, and without rules.

The Legacy Challenge

This transformation faces significant resistance. Naval culture, built around centuries of seamanship and command tradition, doesn’t easily embrace unmanned systems. The defense industrial base, optimized for billion-dollar platforms with decades-long production cycles, struggles with MASC’s 18-month timelines and commercial standards.

But operational necessity is forcing evolution. When China builds ships faster than we can afford traditional platforms, alternatives become imperatives. The question isn’t whether to change—it’s whether we can change fast enough.

The Future Is Now

This isn’t a concept. It’s not theory. It’s happening:

  • Autonomous vessels are already patrolling the Pacific
  • Underwater gliders are proving months-long endurance
  • Unmanned surface warships are rewriting the rules of naval architecture
  • Containerized missile systems are operational
  • MASC solicitations are active with near-term delivery requirements

The revolution is not ahead of us. It’s around us.

And we’ve only just left the pier.

Why Americans Should Care

Autonomous warfare isn’t just a military story—it’s a national security imperative. Adversaries like China are racing to seize the advantage in unmanned systems. Falling behind means more than losing battles—it risks losing deterrence, freedom of navigation, and geopolitical influence.

The economic implications are equally significant. Navy 3.0’s emphasis on commercial standards and distributed production could revitalize American shipbuilding, creating jobs while strengthening national security.

Implications for the Navy

To remain dominant, the U.S. Navy must rethink everything: shipbuilding timelines, training paradigms, procurement processes, and alliances. Naval power in this new era will favor speed, adaptability, and distributed lethality.

Officer career paths built around commanding ships must evolve to managing autonomous swarms. Training programs must balance traditional seamanship with algorithmic warfare. Most critically, the Navy must maintain its warrior ethos while embracing radical technological change.

A Final Word

Let’s not confuse nostalgia with readiness. The romance of the sea will always have a place in our hearts—but it won’t protect our shores.

The wooden helm and salt air that shaped naval officers for generations remain valuable experiences. But future naval leaders will find meaning in different challenges: commanding autonomous fleets, coordinating multi-domain operations, and outthinking adversaries at machine speed.

If we want peace, we must master this new domain.

It’s time to embrace it. It’s time to invest. It’s time to lead.

That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter—a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.

Let’s roll.

Beyond Silent: The CCP’s Brazen Wrecking Ball Campaign

24 Months of Evidence Supporting Admiral Studeman’s Warning

How Americans for a Stronger Navy’s research reveals the CCP has escalated from silent infiltration to brazen assault

A Courageous Voice Speaking Essential Truth

When Rear Admiral Mike Studeman tweets about the Chinese Communist Party’s “silent invasion” of the United States, he demonstrates the courage and expertise that made him one of America’s most respected intelligence leaders. As the former commander of the Office of Naval Intelligence and director for intelligence (J2) of the Indo-Pacific Command, his assessment carries the weight of unparalleled access to classified intelligence and strategic analysis.

Admiral Studeman’s characterization of a “silent invasion” accurately captures the sophisticated nature of CCP operations and Beijing’s remarkable success in suppressing American awareness of these threats. We deeply respect his expertise and his willingness to speak plainly about dangers that many prefer to ignore.

However, our 24 months of intensive research at StrongerNavy.org suggests the CCP has escalated beyond “silent” operations into something far more brazen and destructive. What we’re witnessing isn’t just sophisticated infiltration—it’s an increasingly overt wrecking ball campaign against American sovereignty, institutions, and security.

From Silent to Brazen: The Evolution We’ve Documented

From Silent to Brazen: The Evolution We’ve Documented

Since early 2023, Americans for a Stronger Navy has been tracking what appears to be a deliberate escalation in CCP operations. While these campaigns retain sophisticated elements that justify Admiral Studeman’s “silent invasion” framework, our evidence reveals increasingly brazen and openly destructive tactics.

The CCP seems to have calculated that they can operate more aggressively without meaningful American response—and unfortunately, they appear to be correct.

The Brazen Infrastructure Assault

Our documentation reveals systematic, increasingly bold attacks on America’s most critical systems. These aren’t subtle probes—they’re aggressive penetrations designed to establish persistent access and demonstrate vulnerability.

The infiltration of presidential communications represents just the most visible example of operations that have grown remarkably brazen. Our research indicates comprehensive targeting of government communications at all levels, conducted with a boldness that suggests confidence in American inaction.

Recent attacks on energy grids, transportation networks, and telecommunications systems show a pattern of escalating aggression. These operations extend far beyond intelligence gathering into active preparation for disruption and destruction.

Open Information Warfare

Perhaps most brazenly, we’ve tracked sophisticated information warfare campaigns that no longer attempt to hide their foreign origins. These operations openly work to disrupt American elections, amplify social divisions, and undermine public trust in democratic institutions.

The CCP’s information warfare apparatus has grown increasingly confident in conducting operations that would have been considered unthinkably brazen just years ago. They’re betting that Americans won’t respond effectively even to overt manipulation—and so far, they’re winning that bet.

Economic Wrecking Ball Tactics

Our monitoring reveals systematic efforts to damage American economic competitiveness through increasingly overt means. This goes beyond traditional espionage into active economic warfare designed to weaken American industrial capacity and technological leadership.

The brazenness of these operations reflects Beijing’s assessment that America lacks the will to respond proportionally to economic aggression, even when it’s conducted openly.

Congressional Validation: The Scope of Brazen Operations

Recent congressional investigations validate our assessment that CCP operations have grown increasingly bold and destructive:

  • More than 60 CCP-related espionage cases documented from February 2021 to December 2024 across 20 states
  • The FBI reports that roughly 80 percent of economic espionage prosecutions involve conduct that would benefit China
  • Despite congressional warnings 25 years ago, federal agencies continue to treat these operations as manageable rather than the existential threat they represent

These statistics represent only discovered and prosecuted cases. The true scope of brazen CCP operations likely extends far beyond public acknowledgment, precisely because their boldness makes them harder for American institutions to process and respond to effectively.

The Wrecking Ball Strategy: Why Brazen Works

Intelligence analysts have identified the six broad domains of Chinese political warfare that Admiral Studeman’s assessment encompasses:

  1. Intelligence operations – Now conducted with unprecedented boldness
  2. Cyber operations – Increasingly destructive rather than just penetrative
  3. Information and disinformation operations – Openly aggressive narrative warfare
  4. United Front work – Brazen influence operations in academic and political institutions
  5. Irregular military actions – Escalating gray zone operations testing American resolve
  6. Economic coercion – Open use of economic relationships as weapons

Our research shows escalating aggression across all domains. The CCP appears to have concluded that brazen operations work better than subtle ones because they overwhelm American decision-making processes and exploit our institutional reluctance to acknowledge the scale of the threat.

The Suppression Paradox: Hiding in Plain Sight

Here’s where Admiral Studeman’s “silent invasion” framework remains critically important: Beijing has achieved the remarkable feat of conducting increasingly brazen operations while maintaining effective suppression of American awareness.

This represents a sophisticated understanding of American psychology and institutional dynamics. By operating brazenly while simultaneously suppressing discussion, the CCP creates a psychological disconnect that paralyzes American response.

The suppression operates through:

  • Institutional capture – Leveraging relationships to discourage acknowledgment of the threat’s scope
  • Information overwhelm – Creating so much noise that clear signals get lost
  • Psychological warfare – Making the threat seem too large and complex to address effectively
  • Economic leverage – Using business relationships to discourage honest assessment

The result is that brazen operations continue while most Americans remain unaware they’re living through an unprecedented assault on American sovereignty.

Admiral Studeman’s Essential Service

Admiral Studeman’s willingness to speak publicly about this threat performs essential national service. His credibility as a former intelligence chief makes it harder to dismiss these concerns as partisan hysteria or threat inflation.

His “silent invasion” framework captures the sophisticated suppression campaign that keeps most Americans unaware of what’s happening. Our research builds on his foundation by documenting how these operations have escalated into increasingly brazen territory.

Together, these perspectives reveal the full scope of the challenge: sophisticated suppression campaigns enabling increasingly brazen destructive operations.

The Wrecking Ball Reality: Beyond Traditional Competition

What we’re documenting isn’t traditional great power competition or even sophisticated espionage. It’s a comprehensive wrecking ball campaign designed to weaken American society, institutions, and capabilities from within.

The “wrecking ball” metaphor captures several essential elements:

  • Destructive intent – These operations aim to damage, not just gather intelligence
  • Brazen execution – Increasingly overt operations that test American resolve
  • Systematic targeting – Coordinated assault on multiple critical systems simultaneously
  • Escalating aggression – Growing boldness as American responses prove inadequate

This represents something qualitatively different from the Cold War competition or traditional espionage. It’s political warfare designed to achieve strategic objectives through systematic destruction of American capabilities and confidence.

Our Continuing Documentation Mission

For 24 months, Americans for a Stronger Navy has been documenting this escalating campaign because we understand that naval readiness cannot be separated from broader threats to American sovereignty. A stronger Navy requires a society capable of recognizing and responding to unprecedented challenges.

Admiral Studeman’s courage in speaking publicly about the “silent invasion” creates an opportunity to educate Americans about both the sophisticated suppression campaigns and the increasingly brazen operations they enable.

Our research at StrongerNavy.org will continue documenting these operations, providing Americans with evidence-based analysis of threats that combine sophisticated concealment with brazen execution. This isn’t about creating panic—it’s about enabling the informed, strategic response that this unprecedented challenge demands.

Breaking Through: From Silent to Seen

Admiral Studeman’s public warnings represent a crucial first step in breaking through Beijing’s suppression campaign. His “silent invasion” framework helps Americans understand how sophisticated operations can remain hidden in plain sight.

Our “wrecking ball” analysis builds on his foundation by revealing how these operations have escalated into increasingly brazen territory. Together, these perspectives provide a comprehensive understanding of threats that are simultaneously sophisticated and destructive, subtle and brazen.

The silent invasion is real—and it has evolved into something even more dangerous. The wrecking ball campaign is underway. Thanks to leaders like Admiral Studeman, Americans are finally beginning to see what’s been happening on their home soil.

The first step in defending American sovereignty is recognizing that we’re facing something unprecedented: a campaign that combines sophisticated suppression with brazen destruction. Admiral Studeman has provided the framework for understanding the suppression. Our research documents the escalating brazenness.

Together, we can help Americans see the full scope of the challenge—and the urgent need for a response equal to the threat.

Americans for a Stronger Navy has been documenting evidence of escalating foreign political warfare operations at StrongerNavy.org since early 2023. Our mission is to educate Americans about the maritime and national security challenges facing our nation while advocating for the naval capabilities needed to address them.

That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter—a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.

Let’s move beyond slogans. Let’s build understanding, accountability, and strength—before the next crisis comes knocking.


Follow our research at StrongerNavy.org and join the conversation on social media @StrongerNavy

MASGA Marks a Critical Milestone—But the U.S. Navy Still Needs Urgent Industrial Surge

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

Introduction

From Waltz’s Warning to MASGA’s Launch

On September 27, 2023, Congressman Mike Waltz published “America Needs a National Maritime Strategy,” warning that the United States lacked the shipbuilding capacity and strategic alignment needed to counter China and sustain a maritime advantage.

Nearly two years later, that warning has materialized into policy.

On April 9–10, 2025, the White House issued the executive order “Restoring America’s Maritime Dominance,” launching the Maritime Action Plan and creating the new Office of Shipbuilding under the National Security Council.

Then, on July 31, 2025, South Korea’s Finance Minister confirmed the formal launch of Make America Shipbuilding Great Again (MASGA)—a $150 billion industrial partnership investing in U.S. shipyards, workforce development, and dual-use naval-commercial platforms.

What MASGA Does

MASGA is the largest public-private shipbuilding effort since the Cold War and includes:

  • Investment from South Korean giants like Hanwha Group into American yards (including the acquisition of Philly Shipyard)
  • Joint U.S.–ROK workforce training programs to close skilled labor gaps
  • New production of replenishment, patrol, and logistics vessels for both Navy and commercial use
  • Maintenance and drydock support for U.S. Navy ships on U.S. soil

It’s a big step forward—but one that must be matched with urgency.

Admiral Caudle’s Stark Warning: “We Need a 100% Industrial Surge”

On July 29, 2025, during his confirmation hearing for Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Daryl Caudle delivered a sobering message to the Senate Armed Services Committee.

To meet U.S. obligations under the AUKUS agreement—selling up to five Virginia-class submarines to Australia while sustaining our own fleet—the Navy must double its submarine output:

  • Current production: ~1.3 Virginia-class submarines per year
  • Required output: 2.3 per year

“We need a transformational improvement,” Caudle testified. “Not a 10 percent improvement, not a 20 percent—a 100 percent improvement.

He added that international partnerships would be essential as the U.S. works to rebuild its organic capacity:

“There are no magic beans to that. The solution space must open up. We need ships today.”

Committee Chairman Roger Wicker stressed creativity, outsourcing, and urgency. Admiral Caudle agreed, calling for “an all-hands-on-deck approach.”

This is precisely where MASGA comes in.

Why MASGA Matters for the Navy

MASGA’s structure provides the kind of foreign capacity support and workforce relief Caudle explicitly called for. It aligns directly with the Navy’s urgent need for:

  • Surge production of submarines and surface combatants
  • Expanded maintenance infrastructure
  • Shipyard partnerships to relieve domestic pressure

Congressman Waltz anticipated this crisis in 2023. MASGA is the first large-scale step toward solving it.

The Broader Navy Production Challenge

Submarines aren’t the only problem. The Navy’s broader industrial needs remain acute:

  • Destroyer production has slipped behind plan; the Navy aims to buy 51 new destroyers over the next 30 years, but current yards are falling short.
  • Aircraft carriers like the USS John F. Kennedy (CVN‑79) are years behind schedule.
  • The Navy’s long-term fleet goal of 381 ships by 2042 will remain aspirational without massive industrial acceleration.

And even with MASGA, the Navy is still contending with an aging Military Sealift Command, an undersized Merchant Marine, and shipyard repair backlogs.

Modernization Means Autonomy—And We’re Behind

Modernizing the fleet doesn’t just mean more hulls—it means smarter platforms. The future of naval warfare will be shaped by autonomous surface and undersea vehicles, from uncrewed missile boats to AI-enabled minehunters and refueling drones. China is already fielding swarms of semi-autonomous systems in contested waters. Meanwhile, the U.S. Navy’s efforts under programs like the Medium and Large Unmanned Surface Vessel (MUSV/LUSV) remain limited by slow procurement and industrial bottlenecks. MASGA can accelerate the integration of autonomous systems by expanding modular shipbuilding capacity, repurposing civilian infrastructure, and enabling faster tech deployment across the fleet. Without autonomy, we fall behind—not just in numbers, but in survivability and battlefield adaptability.

What Must Come Next

MASGA is a launchpad, not a destination. To restore maritime power, the U.S. must:

Expand submarine production
Reach 2.3 attack subs/year by 2030. This requires labor, capital, and process modernization on a scale not seen in decades.

Accelerate surface fleet output
Ramp up destroyers, amphibious vessels, and support ships. Congress must deliver multi-year procurement and budget certainty.

Fix regulation and finance
Incentivize private capital to flow into U.S. shipyards, not Chinese ones. Close loopholes and create new maritime investment channels for Americans.

Grow the skilled workforce
Welders, naval architects, systems engineers—we need tens of thousands more. Joint international training must be paired with U.S. educational investments.

Modernize the Merchant Marine
We once had over 5,000 ships. Today, we have fewer than 80 engaged in international trade. This is a critical national vulnerability.

Closing Message: MASGA Is a Start, Not a Solution

MASGA validates the vision Mike Waltz articulated in 2023. It meets Admiral Caudle’s call for relief through allied partnerships. It aligns with the Navy’s production and readiness needs.

But China is still building. Delays persist. And the decision space for national security continues to shrink.

Let’s not wait another decade to act like a maritime power. Let’s build, now.

That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter—a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.

Let’s move beyond slogans. Let’s build understanding, accountability, and strength—before the next crisis comes knocking.


Join us at StrongerNavy.org
Let’s roll.

China’s Military Expansion in the South China Sea: A Growing Strategic Challenge: Mischief Reef

Introduction

The South China Sea, one of the world’s most strategically important waterways, has become the epicenter of a remarkable military transformation. Recent satellite imagery reveals the stunning scale of China’s military build-up across disputed islands and reefs, fundamentally altering the regional balance of power in ways that would have been unimaginable just two decades ago.

The Scale of Transformation

New satellite images from the Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative (AMTI) paint a picture of unprecedented military expansion. China now operates a sprawling 3,200-hectare network of military bases across the South China Sea, transforming once-submerged reefs into fortress-like installations capable of hosting advanced military aircraft, including nuclear-capable bombers.

The transformation of Mischief Reef exemplifies this dramatic change. Satellite comparisons show that what was merely underwater reef in 2004 has become a massive military complex featuring:

  • Sprawling runways capable of handling large military aircraft
  • More than 72 fighter jet hangars across major island bases
  • Surface-to-air missile installations
  • Anti-ship cruise missile emplacements
  • Extensive radar and communications infrastructure
  • Large harbors for naval vessels

As Gregory Poling, director of AMTI, describes it, these bases represent “the result of the quickest example of mass dredging and landfill in human history.”

Strategic Military Assets

China’s military presence in the region has grown to encompass 27 outposts total: 20 in the Paracel Islands and 7 in the Spratly Islands. Of these, four have been transformed into fully operational naval and air bases. The sophistication of these installations became particularly evident in May 2025, when satellite imagery captured two Chinese H-6K bombers—aircraft capable of carrying nuclear weapons—stationed on Woody Island in the Paracels.

This deployment marked the first confirmed presence of China’s most advanced bombers in the region since 2020, signaling Beijing’s growing confidence in projecting power far from its mainland bases. The H-6 bombers represent a significant strategic capability, with the range to threaten U.S. military installations throughout the region and the versatility to support various military scenarios.

Regional Tensions and International Law

China’s expansion occurs against a backdrop of competing territorial claims. Beijing asserts sovereignty over nearly the entire South China Sea through its “nine-dash line” claim, which overlaps with territories claimed by Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Vietnam. Crucially, a 2016 international arbitral tribunal ruled that China’s sweeping claims have no basis under international law—a decision Beijing categorically rejected.

The militarization of these features directly contradicts China’s earlier assurances. Chinese officials had previously promised that the island-building activities would not result in militarization, making the current reality particularly concerning for regional stability.

Broader Strategic Implications

These developments represent more than territorial disputes—they signal a fundamental shift in regional power dynamics. The South China Sea carries approximately one-third of global maritime trade, making control over these waters economically as well as strategically significant. China’s ability to project military power throughout the region from these fortified positions gives Beijing substantial leverage in any future crisis or negotiation.

The speed and scale of this transformation have caught many observers off guard. What began as seemingly modest construction projects has evolved into a comprehensive military network that extends China’s defensive perimeter hundreds of miles from its mainland coast. This “fait accompli” strategy has proven remarkably effective, creating new realities on the ground—or rather, on the water—that are difficult for other nations to reverse without risking major conflict.

The Challenge Ahead

For the United States and its regional allies, China’s South China Sea expansion presents a complex strategic challenge. The installations are now permanent features of the maritime landscape, defended by increasingly sophisticated military capabilities. Any attempt to challenge China’s presence directly would likely trigger a major regional crisis.

Instead, the focus has shifted to maintaining freedom of navigation, supporting allied nations’ territorial claims through diplomatic means, and developing military capabilities that can operate effectively in this new environment. The recent deployment of advanced bombers to these bases suggests that China views its South China Sea positions not as defensive installations, but as platforms for power projection throughout the broader Indo-Pacific region.

Looking Forward

The militarization of the South China Sea represents one of the most significant geopolitical developments of the 21st century. In less than two decades, China has fundamentally altered the strategic map of one of the world’s most important waterways. The satellite images that document this transformation tell a story not just of engineering prowess, but of strategic ambition that will shape regional dynamics for generations to come.

As tensions continue to simmer and new military capabilities are deployed, the South China Sea remains a critical barometer of great power competition in the Indo-Pacific. The question is no longer whether China can build and maintain these installations, but how the international community will adapt to this new strategic reality.

The implications extend far beyond the immediate region, serving as a case study in how technological capability, strategic patience, and determined action can reshape international boundaries and power balances in the modern era. For observers of international relations, the South China Sea serves as a real-time laboratory for understanding how the global order is being challenged and potentially transformed in the 21st century.


Sources: Analysis based on satellite imagery from Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative (AMTI), reports from The Independent, Defense Mirror, and other verified news sources.

That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter—a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.

Let’s move beyond slogans. Let’s build understanding, accountability, and strength—before the next crisis comes knocking.


The Indo-Pacific Imperative: America’s Interests, China’s Ambitions, and the Navy’s Role”

Introduction

The vast expanse of the Pacific Ocean may seem distant to many Americans, but the security and prosperity of our nation are inextricably linked to the intricate geopolitical currents thousands of miles away. As part of our “Charting the Course” series, this post explores why the Indo-Pacific—particularly the islands in and around the Philippines and the South China Sea—is a linchpin for American interests and why a strong U.S. Navy is essential.

A Brief History of the RegionPre-Colonial Era:

The South China Sea was historically traversed by traders from China, India, Arabia, and Southeast Asia. Ancient maritime kingdoms like Srivijaya and Majapahit relied on its waters for commerce and influence. – Colonial Period: Spain colonized the Philippines in the 16th century, later replaced by the United States after the Spanish-American War in 1898. Western colonial powers mapped and administered many islands, including disputed features. – World War II: Japan used the region as a springboard for its Pacific conquests. The Philippines was a central battlefield and strategic objective. – Post-War and Cold War: The U.S. maintained bases in the Philippines (Subic Bay and Clark Air Base) to counter Soviet influence and guarantee maritime stability. – Modern Tensions: In 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration rejected China’s vast claims over the South China Sea—yet China has continued militarizing the area.

The Indo-Pacific: A Region of Vital Importance Trade Route Overlay – Maritime shipping lanes through the South China Sea)

The map above highlights Southeast Asia, the Philippines, the Sulu Sea, and the contested Spratly Islands. Far from being remote specks on a globe, these are the crossroads of global commerce, strategic power, and vital resources.

Why This Region MattersGlobal Economic Lifeline: Over half the world’s commercial shipping—including oil, gas, and manufactured goods—flows through Indo-Pacific sea lanes. Disruption means global economic instability. – Resource Richness: The South China Sea holds untapped oil, gas, and some of the richest fishing grounds on Earth. Control equals economic leverage. – Geostrategic Chokepoints: Straits like Malacca are arteries of global trade. Blockages would have ripple effects worldwide. – Territorial Disputes: China’s sweeping claims under its “nine-dash line” ignore international law and threaten stability.

Why Every American Should Care U.S. Navy Carrier Strike Group – Indo-Pacific deployment)Your Wallet:

Disrupted shipping means rising prices—on everything from electronics to gasoline. – Your Security: The U.S. alliance with the Philippines is decades old. Honoring it deters aggression and upholds American credibility. – Our Values: Freedom of navigation and rule of law are at stake. China’s defiance of the 2016 arbitration ruling threatens global norms. – Countering Global Threats: U.S. naval presence helps deter piracy, illegal fishing, and extremism.

Understanding China’s Interests: Chinese Artificial Islands – Aerial military outposts on Fiery Cross Reef or Subi Reef)

Sovereignty Claims: China insists on “indisputable sovereignty” over nearly all the South China Sea. – Economic Control: Energy reserves and fishing grounds are key to China’s survival and growth. – Strategic Depth: Artificial islands serve as military outposts, helping China create an Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) zone. – Regional Dominance: China aims to push out U.S. influence and replace it with its own.

The Indispensable Role of the U.S. Navy: Humanitarian Aid – U.S. Navy delivering disaster relief in the Philippines)Guardians of Global Trade: Ensuring freedom of navigation is a core Navy mission. – Projecting Power and Deterrence: A visible, capable Navy deters conflict. – Supporting Allies: Exercises and operations with partners like the Philippines extend U.S. influence. – Responding to Crises: From disaster relief to piracy, the Navy leads with humanitarian action. – Upholding International Law: FONOPS challenge China’s excessive claims. – Logistics and Access: Bases in allied nations ensure global reach and readiness.

Regional Flashpoints & Hot Zones (Image Placeholder: Annotated Philippines Map – Highlighting Palawan, Sulu Sea, Spratlys, and Scarborough Shoal)Scarborough Shoal: Site of repeated standoffs between Chinese and Philippine vessels. – Second Thomas Shoal:

Philippine Navy outpost continually harassed by China. – Spratly Islands: Militarized by China; claimed by Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, and others. – Palawan: Launch point for Philippine patrols and likely U.S. logistics hub. – Sulu-Celebes Seas: Transit corridors threatened by piracy and terror networks.

Recent Developments Philippine Navy with U.S. Navy – Joint patrol or port visit in PalawanChina’s Harassment:

Philippine vessels have been targeted with water cannons. – Philippine Pushback: Manila is strengthening its Navy and deepening alliances. – U.S. Support: Building Navy facilities, co-hosting exercises, and providing missile systems.

Regional & Global Context: First Island Chain Map – Taiwan, Philippines, Japan highlighted)First Island Chain: The Philippines is part of the geographic arc vital for deterring Chinese expansion. – Gray Zone Tactics: China uses militias and coast guards to pressure neighbors without direct war. – Environmental Damage: Artificial islands harm coral reefs and biodiversity. – U.S. Navy’s Shipbuilding Challenges: While China expands its fleet, America must overcome delays and cost overruns.

Conclusion: Why This Matters Now The Indo-Pacific is not a distant concern—it’s a frontline in the battle for economic freedom, rule of law, and strategic stability. The U.S. Navy is not just a military force; it’s a pillar of national and global resilience. Investing in its strength is not optional—it’s essential for charting America’s future course.

This region—stretching from the Spratly Islands to the Sulu Sea, from Palawan to Palau—is where alliances are tested, supply chains are secured, and adversaries are deterred. The Philippines and surrounding waters are more than a map—they’re a mission.

At Americans for a Stronger Navy, we don’t advocate fear—we advocate responsibility. We believe war is preventable, but only if America wakes up and acts.

That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter—a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.

America’s Fleet Readiness Crisis: What 80% Really Means

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

Introduction

If you’ve been following along, you know we’ve been sounding the alarm for some time now—raising concerns not out of fear, but out of duty. At Americans for a Stronger Navy, we don’t profit from defense contracts or feed the industrial complex. We’re here because the facts are in: the Navy is falling short of the readiness our nation demands—and we must do better.

The U.S. Navy is aiming for 80% surge readiness by 2027—but it’s stuck at 60%. That 20% gap could determine whether America deters conflict—or invites one.

Brent Sadler, Senior Fellow for Naval Warfare and Advanced Technology at The Heritage Foundation and author of U.S. Naval Power in the 21st Century: A New Strategy for Facing the Chinese and Russian Threat, put it bluntly:

“It won’t happen until more ships enter the fleet to drive operational tempo down to 30%.”

Top Navy leaders have echoed this urgency. As one Navy official said plainly:

“We must increase our fleet readiness to 80% by 2027 to meet global security demands and deter peer-level threats.”

That’s the heart of the problem—and a major reason we’re sounding the alarm.

From the Indo-Pacific to the U.S. Southern border, the Navy is being stretched dangerously thin. The ships we have are aging, overworked, and under-maintained. Meanwhile, new construction is lagging—leaving sailors to shoulder an impossible burden, and the nation exposed.

At Americans for a Stronger Navy, we don’t advocate fear—we advocate responsibility. We believe war is preventable, but only if America wakes up and acts.

That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter—a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.

Let’s move beyond slogans. Let’s build understanding, accountability, and strength—before the next crisis comes knocking.


America’s Cyber Crisis Hits the Deck: The Tech Sector, China, and Why a Stronger Navy Matters 

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

Introduction

This week, we saw confirmation of what we’ve feared—and been warning about—for over 18 months: America’s digital defenses have been compromised, and it’s our Navy that’s left exposed.

According to Politico, a sweeping cyberattack has been launched by at least three Chinese state-linked hacking groups: Violet Typhoon, Linen Typhoon, and Storm-2603.

Their target? Microsoft’s SharePoint servers—used widely across the federal government, including DoD and Navy-linked systems.

Microsoft, in a Tuesday blog post, acknowledged the severity of the breach. Independent security experts at Mandiant and Censys corroborated the finding: more than 100 organizations globally are believed to be affected—including multiple U.S. federal agencies, some tied to national defense.

The flaw? An unpatched vulnerability in Microsoft’s on-premise SharePoint product.
The result? Remote access into sensitive systems.
The fallout? Still spreading.

And it’s not the first time. In 2023, Chinese actors breached the emails of the U.S. Ambassador to China and the Commerce Secretary, also by exploiting Microsoft misconfigurations. It’s a pattern—and one we can no longer afford to ignore.

Why Americans Should Care

Here’s the hard truth: this breach is a symptom of a larger failure—one that involves the defense-industrial complex, Big Tech, and complacency at the highest levels of oversight.

  • Pentagon systems supported by China-based engineers
  • Software flaws ignored or inadequately patched
  • Critical U.S. infrastructure reliant on foreign nationals in adversarial countries

And now? The U.S. Navy, tasked with protecting global stability, must operate with compromised tools—while companies like Microsoft continue to make billions from government contracts.

It’s not just bad policy. It’s a national security liability.

Implications for the Navy

  • SharePoint vulnerabilities can compromise logistics, intel coordination, and real-time decision-making.
  • At least two Navy-related systems are believed to be among the dozens affected.
  • The breach arrives as the Navy pushes toward a critical readiness benchmark.

Acting Chief of Naval Operations Admiral James Kilby put it plainly:

“We must exercise strategic discipline, increase surge readiness, and protect scheduled maintenance. Our goal is to achieve an 80% combat-surge ready posture by 2027. We are currently at 60% readiness—and that gap is unacceptable.”

The Navy wants to prevent war, not provoke it. But readiness is the only deterrent adversaries understand. And right now, we are dangerously behind.

My Message: Fix, Educate, Mobilize

I’m not writing this to indict. I’m writing to fix and educate.

This crisis has serious implications. The threats are real. And the probability of conflict is rising.

I don’t believe in fear-mongering—but I do believe in calling things by their name. What we are seeing—again—is a system-wide breakdown in how we protect the digital backbone of our military.

This is what I’ve been shouting about for 18 months. Not because I enjoy sounding the alarm—but because someone must.

The taxpayers are left holding the bill.
The sons and daughters of those I served with are left to face the danger.
And the Navy is left to grovel for support to do what only they can—protect this nation at sea and abroad.

What We’re Doing About It

That’s why I launched Americans for a Stronger Navy—to demand accountability, readiness, and real reform.

And that’s why we’re rolling out:
Charting the Course: Voices That Matter—a 24-part educational series exploring:

  • The outsourcing of our military tech infrastructure
  • The erosion of our domestic workforce
  • The choke points in our digital and maritime defenses
  • Concrete ways to fix what’s broken

We’ll spotlight reforms in procurement, workforce development, public-private partnerships, and cybersecurity strategy.

Because the tech sector is culpable—and I call on them now to help us fix this. They helped get us into this mess. They must help get us out.

Final Word

  • Big Tech failed.
  • Oversight failed.
  • The Navy must now bear the consequences.

We’re not just talking about ships and steel—we’re talking about the servers, systems, and software that power warfighting in the 21st century.

And if we don’t wake up, the next war won’t wait.

👉 Join the movement at StrongerNavy.org
Support those who serve. Strengthen what they stand for.