Peace Through Strength – Community Driven – Membership Supported
Category: Analysis
The Analysis category will feature publicly available content published by the U.S. Navy. The Americans for a Stronger Navy will review and proviide to its members and subscribers, in-depth analysis, commentary, and insights on the latest developments and issues related to the United States Navy’s strategic direction. The category will cover a wide range of topics, including warfighting, operating forward, readiness, modernization, and people, as well as other issues related to the Navy’s mission and goals. The aim is to provide members and subscribers with valuable information and perspectives that can help them better understand the challenges and opportunities facing the Navy and how Americans for a Stronger Navy is working to support its strategic direction.
By Bill Cullifer Founder, Americans for a Stronger Navy Former U.S. Navy Destroyer Sailor (1970s)
There’s been a lively debate online between economic giants Larry Summers and David Sacks about tariffs, trade policy, and the consequences of decades of globalization. But while they spar over markets and presidential strategies, a bigger question goes largely unspoken:
Who picks up the pieces when economic policy becomes a national vulnerability?
As someone who served in the U.S. Navy in the 1970s and now leads Americans for a Stronger Navy, I’ve watched closely as the Navy quietly shoulders the consequences of decisions made far from the sea. While economists argue over the stock market’s reaction to tariffs, the Navy secures global trade routes, deters adversaries, and absorbs the burden of an offshored industrial base.
But the Navy isn’t alone. Entire sectors of American life—logistics, agriculture, energy, pharmaceuticals, entertainment, finance, and technology—depend on the smooth flow of global trade. From major ports and retailers to family farms and Fortune 500 companies, virtually every modern American business benefits from the stability the Navy helps provide.
The American economy is global because the U.S. Navy keeps it that way.
Yet in the recent debate, while Summers described trillions lost in market volatility and economic fallout, no one mentioned the ripple effects on military readiness, deterrence, or strategic capability. That absence reflects a dangerous blind spot.
When Wall Street stumbles, the Navy sails. When diplomacy falters or trade routes are threatened, the Navy deploys. But today it’s doing so with fewer ships, aging platforms, and underinvested shipyards—while our adversaries build, modernize, and maneuver.
This isn’t just a Navy issue. It’s a business issue. A national issue.
If your industry touches global trade—if you depend on international logistics, rare earth minerals, undersea cables, satellite access, shipping lanes, or simply consumer confidence—then you depend on a ready and capable Navy.
This is a message to American industry: You benefit. You must engage. You must contribute.
We need your voice—and your leadership—in support of:
Rebuilding our shipbuilding and repair base
Investing in drones, AI, and technologies that give our fleet an edge
Modernizing infrastructure and dry docks that sustain readiness
Funding advocacy and education to spark public awareness
The economic world order your industry thrives in exists because American sea power has kept the global commons safe for decades. That foundation is eroding—and silence is no longer an option.
At Americans for a Stronger Navy, we’re connecting the dots between civic awareness, economic strategy, and maritime strength. We’ve launched a 24-part educational initiative to help Americans understand what’s at stake and how to act.
Explore the series: Charting the Course – For Country. For Unity. For a Stronger Navy.
Whether you’re a CEO, policymaker, investor, teacher, or neighbor—this affects you. Now is the time to link economic resilience with strategic defense. To give the Navy the tools—not just praise—before the next storm arrives.
This is your moment to lead. Not from the sidelines—but from the front.
Use your platform. Leverage your influence. Show the next generation that prosperity is earned—and defended.
Because a secure economy doesn’t start with policy. It starts with power. And power starts at sea.
Learn more at StrongerNavy.org and join the movement to educate, equip, and engage.
A stronger Navy requires a stronger America behind it. Let’s get to work.
210728-N-FO714-1033 TAIWAN STRAIT (July 28, 2021) The Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Benfold (DDG 65) transits the Taiwan Strait while conducting routine underway operations. Benfold is forward-deployed to the U.S. 7th Fleet area of operations in support of a free and open Indo-Pacific. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Deanna C. Gonzales)
Introduction
In a recent Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, Senator Tom Cotton posed a sobering question to Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command: What would happen to the global economy if China attacked or invaded Taiwan?
The answer, echoed by both military and civilian experts, is nothing short of catastrophic.
Investor Ken Griffin warned that a rupture over Taiwan could send the world into “great depression circumstances.” Ian Easton of the Naval War College has long warned of China’s ability to disrupt global trade and exploit vulnerabilities in the Indo-Pacific. The U.S. Navy and our allies cannot afford to treat these concerns as hypothetical.
Why Taiwan Matters to the Global Economy
Taiwan is not only a leading global manufacturer of semiconductors—it is also a key node in international shipping. Roughly one-third of the world’s trade passes through the South China Sea. Any disruption caused by Chinese military action—especially a blockade or invasion of Taiwan—would choke critical sea lanes and sever the supply chains that power everything from cars to smartphones to critical defense systems.
What Ken Griffin Got Right
In January 2024, Griffin put it bluntly:
“If there were a rupture around Taiwan, it would be catastrophic to both the Chinese and to the American economy.”
Griffin wasn’t talking about market jitters—he was warning about supply chain collapse, capital flight, manufacturing shutdowns, and global financial panic. These effects wouldn’t just hit Wall Street—they would impact farmers, truckers, teachers, and service members alike.
Sea Power Is Economic Poweruh
This is why Americans for a Stronger Navy continues to sound the alarm. The U.S. Navy isn’t just a military force—it’s a shield for global commerce. Sea power ensures stability in the Indo-Pacific and protects the economic lifelines that Americans depend on.
Today’s tools of deterrence extend beyond warships. Ships, drones, AI—they all play a critical role in keeping trade flowing and conflict at bay. Without continued investment in these technologies and the people who operate them, our economy and our alliances remain vulnerable.
Blockade drills and military posturing by China are not symbolic—they are preparation. And we must respond with strategic clarity, industrial readiness, and unwavering public support for naval strength.
Conclusion: Americans Deserve to Know
This isn’t just a military issue—it’s an economic one. The American people deserve to understand what’s at stake, and what it means to be unprepared.
If we fail to invest in our fleet, fortify our alliances, and educate the public, we risk more than just ships—we risk our prosperity.
A Review of Heritage Foundation Report BG3902 by Americans for a Stronger Navy
Introduction
The Heritage Foundation’s latest report, “Arming for Peace: Expanding the Defense Industrial Base and Arming Taiwan Faster” (BG3902), echoes what Americans for a Stronger Navy has been sounding the alarm on: The threats facing the United States are real, escalating, and dangerously close to overwhelming our current naval capabilities. As Brent Sadler writes, the time for talk has passed. Action is overdue. If we don’t mobilize now, America risks losing the ability to deter war and defend freedom in the Indo-Pacific and beyond.
As Sadler states: “As Americans go about their daily lives unmolested, the world is accelerating in its change—much of it perilous to U.S. national survival.” He warns that “on the back of a decades-long sustained military build-up, China’s military is increasingly confident and willing to directly challenge the U.S.”
His call to action is clear: “The U.S. must restore ebbing national deterrence and prevent a war in Asia—while not ceding its democratic way of life and prosperity for the next generations.”
Key Findings That Should Wake America Up
China is preparing for war. Admiral Davidson’s 2021 warning that China could strike Taiwan by 2027 has not only proven prescient, it’s now backed by an unprecedented military buildup. China has conducted massive joint-force invasion rehearsals and increased provocations around Taiwan. As Brent Sadler put it, “Aggressive maneuvers around Taiwan right now are not exercises, as they call them. They are rehearsals.”
That warning was underscored this week when the Chinese military launched large-scale joint drills around Taiwan, including its Shandong aircraft carrier battle group. According to China’s own Eastern Theater Command, these drills are a “severe warning and forceful containment against Taiwan independence.” With missile forces, air strikes, and blockade rehearsals now unfolding, many in Taiwan — and around the world — are rightfully concerned. Sadler’s insights about China’s evolving risk tolerance add important context to these real-time developments.
Further validating the urgency, the U.S. Naval War College’s China Maritime Report No. 14 found that Chinese analysts themselves believe the PLA has narrowed the gap with the U.S. military, especially in its immediate region. “There is consensus in China that the PLA has narrowed the gap in overall military capabilities with the United States over the last two decades,” the report notes.
Russia and China are approaching U.S. shores. Testimony from U.S. Northern Command chief Gen. Gregory Guillot before Congress confirmed that joint Russian-Chinese military patrols have entered the U.S. Air Defense Identification Zone near Alaska — levels not seen since before the Ukraine war began. One coordinated flight last July saw Russian TU-95 and Chinese H-6 bombers test U.S. response time. This should serve as a wake-up call: our adversaries are not just projecting power near Taiwan, they’re probing U.S. airspace and waters closer to home. As Politico reported, Chinese “dual-use” vessels under scientific pretenses are mapping the Arctic for future military operations.
U.S. deterrence is fading. Years of underinvestment in shipbuilding and naval readiness have created dangerous gaps. Delays in weapons deliveries, inadequate port infrastructure, and a depleted missile defense stockpile are symptoms of a nation unprepared for a prolonged maritime conflict. As Sadler warns, “Failing to act… could result in the most destructive and consequential war the U.S. has ever had to fight.”
The Navy is stretched thin. The U.S. Navy has sustained an aggressive forward presence, but at great cost. Ship wear, sailor fatigue, and insufficient repair capacity are taking their toll. The grounding of the USNS Big Horn disrupted combat ops in the Red Sea, highlighting our logistical fragility. Sadler notes, “This comes at a cost in added wear on the ships and sailors reliant on a logistics infrastructure of ports, support ships, and dry docks too few to assure contested forward naval operations.”
The world is on fire. From Ukraine to the Red Sea to the Arctic, our adversaries are watching and testing U.S. resolve. China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea now operate more boldly, confident in America’s disunity and domestic distraction.
Taiwan is not a distant concern. More than 80,000 Americans live, work, or travel there. A war over Taiwan would drag us into conflict, devastate global supply chains, and send shockwaves through the U.S. economy. As Sadler puts it plainly, “Taiwan is where over 80,000 Americans live, work, or travel on any given day.”
China’s geographic advantage cannot be ignored. According to the CMSI report, Chinese military capabilities are particularly potent within the First Island Chain, which includes Taiwan. “Chinese capabilities may…contest U.S. supremacy in scenarios close to home,” the report warns. That’s where deterrence matters most—and where readiness is most urgently needed.
Why Americans Should Care
This is not just a Navy problem. It’s an American problem. Delays in defense production, weak infrastructure, and an uninformed public are national vulnerabilities. If Americans fail to understand what is at stake, we will fail to hold our leaders accountable. And if we fail to act, we will be forced to react under far worse circumstances.
A strong Navy protects freedom of navigation, global trade, energy security, and the American way of life. Without it, our adversaries will decide what happens in the Taiwan Strait, the Red Sea, the South China Sea — and now, even the Arctic.
What the Navy Needs Now
A modern Naval Act. We need a 21st-century version of the pre-WWII Naval Act to rapidly rebuild shipyards, expand production, and modernize our fleet. Sadler calls this “a promising first step to regain the ability to sustain a wartime economy in a prolonged war with China.”
Real investment in maritime infrastructure. Ports, dry docks, and logistics support are vital national security assets that must be revitalized now.
Faster arms deliveries to Taiwan. The delays in Harpoon, Javelin, and Stinger deliveries must be resolved. Taiwan’s ability to defend itself is our first line of deterrence. Sadler emphasizes that “how the new Administration responds and accelerates the arming of Taiwan will be key in sustaining the military balance and peace in the near term.”
A unified national strategy. We must operate differently — with diplomatic, economic, and military efforts aligned. Naval statecraft must be at the heart of this new Cold War strategy. Sadler emphasizes, “Naval statecraft is the recommended way forward; that is, a maritime strategic framework for using American power.”
The CMSI report reminds us that training, human capital, and logistics remain U.S. advantages. While China may be catching up in hardware, “Chinese training still lags. The gap in the software [human resources and development] is even bigger,” the report notes. But these gaps can close — unless we act now to protect and reinforce our edge.
An Engaged and Educated Public
At Americans for a Stronger Navy, we believe in peace through strength. But strength requires public awareness, buy-in, and civic action. That’s why we launched the Americans for a Stronger Navy Educational Series — to help Americans understand the stakes, the history, and the path forward.
We invite every reader to check out and sign up for the Educational Series on StrongerNavy.org. Learn what makes our Navy vital to our security and prosperity. Share it with others. Talk about it. Get involved.
Conclusion
We are not powerless. But we must not be silent. The Heritage Foundation, the U.S. Naval War College, and recent military testimony to Congress all point to the same reality: America is in the early stages of a long contest with near-peer adversaries, and we must prepare now.
It’s time for Americans to wake up, stand up, and demand a Navy that is ready not just for today’s threats, but tomorrow’s challenges.
America needs a stronger Navy. And the Navy needs a stronger America behind it.
On March 24, 2025, the USS Pinckney (DDG 91) made history. Off the coast of Kauai, Hawaii, the Navy successfully completed Flight Test Other-40 (FTX-40)—also known as Stellar Banshee—using the Aegis Combat System to detect and simulate engagement with a hypersonic missile threat. This test is a major milestone in the United States’ ability to defend against rapidly emerging threats from near-peer adversaries like China and Russia, both of whom are investing heavily in hypersonic technology.
Test Details: Simulating the Future of Warfare
A Medium Range Ballistic Missile (MRBM) equipped with a Hypersonic Target Vehicle (HTV-1) was air-launched from a C-17 aircraft. The USS Pinckney used a simulated SM-6 Block IAU interceptor and Lockheed Martin’s latest Aegis Baseline 9 software to detect, track, and engage the target. While no live intercept occurred, the simulated engagement offered critical insights and data collection, validating the system’s ability to counter maneuvering hypersonic threats.
This test also previewed the system’s scalability. Aegis can be deployed at sea or on land—key flexibility in a complex global security environment. The test utilized a virtualized Aegis software configuration, a leap forward in adapting the system for next-generation warfare.
Building on Momentum: Past Successes and What’s Next
FTX-40 follows the success of FTM-32, known as Stellar Sisyphus, in which the USS Preble (DDG 88) intercepted a MRBM with an upgraded SM-6 Dual II missile in a live-fire test. These continued advancements will pave the way for FTM-43, which will aim to perform a live intercept against an HTV-1 target.
The collaboration between the U.S. Navy, the Missile Defense Agency (MDA), Lockheed Martin, and other defense partners signals a renewed commitment to innovation and integrated missile defense.
Why Americans Should Care
Hypersonic missiles travel at speeds greater than Mach 5, can maneuver mid-flight, and are extremely hard to detect and counter with traditional systems. Adversaries like China and Russia are rapidly developing and testing these weapons. If successful, these weapons could bypass our current defenses and strike critical infrastructure, fleets, or even the homeland.
This test shows that the United States is not standing still. Our Navy is preparing for tomorrow’s battles—today. The Aegis Combat System’s evolving capabilities directly protect American service members at sea, allies abroad, and Americans at home. It’s another reason why investment in a stronger Navy isn’t optional—it’s essential.
Implications for the Navy
This test reinforces the Aegis system as the backbone of the Navy’s integrated air and missile defense strategy. With its growing flexibility, the system can support both forward-deployed naval units and U.S.-based missile defense installations. It also helps the Navy operate in contested environments—areas where hypersonic threats are expected to become commonplace.
Implications for Our Allies
Many of our closest allies—Japan, South Korea, Australia—also rely on Aegis-equipped ships or similar missile defense systems. Demonstrating this capability strengthens not only U.S. deterrence but also our credibility with partners. In a world where multilateral defense cooperation is key, proof of performance matters.
Closing Thought
FTX-40 didn’t just simulate a hypersonic intercept—it sent a clear message: The United States Navy is adapting and preparing to meet new challenges head-on. For Americans watching the headlines, this is a win worth knowing—and a mission worth supporting.
A stark reality: China’s naval task force is actively testing Australia’s response—militarily, politically, and diplomatically. A Chinese fleet operating near Australia’s waters isn’t just a message to Canberra; it’s a signal to the world that Beijing is expanding its reach.
For Americans, this should be a wake-up call. Australia, a key U.S. ally, has long enjoyed security from major conflicts. Yet, China’s maneuvers off its coast expose vulnerabilities in a way that should concern every nation reliant on maritime security, global trade, and naval power.
If China can challenge Australia’s sovereignty at sea today, what stops it from doing the same to America and its allies tomorrow?
China’s Strategy: Testing and Expanding
The deployment of a Chinese naval task group so close to Australia is no accident. It follows a pattern:
Probing reactions. Just as it has done in the South China Sea, the Taiwan Strait, and Latin American ports, China is assessing how the world will respond to its growing military presence.
Disrupting global security norms. Conducting live-fire drills near civilian air routes, refusing to issue proper warnings, and testing defense response times all serve a greater goal—normalizing an expanded Chinese naval footprint.
Challenging the free world. This is about more than Australia. China is signaling that it has the capability—and the intent—to pressure democratic nations and reshape global power structures in its favor.
This matters to the United States because we rely on the same global shipping lanes, trade networks, and security partnerships that China is testing right now.
Lessons for the U.S. Navy and America
Jennifer Parker’s article points out an uncomfortable truth: Australia’s navy is struggling to meet growing demands. Its limited number of warships, outdated replenishment capabilities, and defense spending shortfalls are now under the spotlight.
But let’s not pretend this problem is unique to Australia.
The U.S. Navy is stretched thin. With growing commitments in the Indo-Pacific, Middle East, and beyond, America is already balancing a smaller fleet against greater global threats.
Shipbuilding capacity is a bottleneck. While China launches warships at record speed, the U.S. struggles to maintain its current fleet.
Defense funding debates mirror Australia’s. At just 2% of GDP, U.S. defense spending is below Cold War levels, and ship procurement continues to face budgetary and political hurdles.
Australia’s vulnerabilities should be a case study for the United States. If a key U.S. ally is struggling to keep pace with China’s naval expansion, America cannot afford to take its own naval dominance for granted.
What Needs to Happen Next?
The right response is not panic—it’s preparation. America must learn from Australia’s situation and take the following steps:
Increase Naval Readiness
The U.S. must expand and modernize its fleet, ensuring it has the ships, submarines, and logistical support needed to deter threats.
Fleet maintenance and shipyard infrastructure must be prioritized so that existing assets remain operational.
Strengthen Strategic Alliances
The U.S.-Australia partnership is critical—joint naval exercises, intelligence sharing, and strategic basing agreements must be expanded.
Coordination with Japan, the Philippines, India, and other Indo-Pacific allies must also be reinforced.
Engage the American Public
Most Americans aren’t aware of how dependent the U.S. economy and security are on naval power.
China isn’t just flexing its military strength—it’s waging a long-term strategic contest to control global trade, technology, and resources.
If we don’t educate and rally support for a stronger Navy now, we risk falling behind when it matters most.
Final Thought: A Call to Action
Australia is waking up to the reality that it must invest in naval power to protect its interests. America should take this moment to do the same.
We don’t need alarmism. We need action.
The choice is simple: Invest in a stronger Navy today, or risk facing a crisis tomorrow.
An Open Letter: Forward Presence is Not the Problem—Fleet Size Is
To the Editors of War on the Rocks and Dr. Jonathan Panter,
Bill Cullifer, Founder
Your recent commentary argues that naval forward presence is to blame for the U.S. Navy’s inability to deter China and sustain high-end warfighting capacity. While your article correctly identifies the exhaustion and strain imposed by relentless deployments, it misdiagnoses the cause and proposes a dangerous solution.
The problem is not forward presence—it’s fleet size, maintenance shortfalls, and a lack of leadership advocacy for real change.
“It is both realistic and very necessary to maintain forward presence while preparing for high-end conflict.” — Captain Brent D. Sadler, USN (Ret.), Senior Fellow, Heritage Foundation
“The U.S. fleet size to support that deployment has significantly decreased since 1990.” — Captain Steven Wills, USN (Ret.), Senior Advisor, Center for Maritime Strategy
A Shrinking Navy, An Expanding Mission
The numbers tell the real story:
✅ In 1991: The U.S. Navy had 550 ships. Today, it has fewer than 290—a nearly 50% decline.
✅ During the Cold War: Only one-fifth of the fleet was forward deployed. Today, it’s one-third, meaning fewer ships are doing more work.
✅ Maintenance Shortfalls: The Navy has lost critical shore-based infrastructure, making it difficult to sustain current commitments—let alone expand.
Meanwhile, China’s threat has grown, not receded:
✅ China’s Navy: Surpassed 340 ships in 2023 and continues expanding.
✅ Indo-Pacific: Now the primary theater of strategic competition—where U.S. presence is more critical than ever.
The Wrong Solution: Scaling Back Presence
The argument that pulling back from forward deployment would somehow strengthen the Navy by reducing strain is not just wrong—it’s dangerous.
A reduced forward presence does not deter China—it emboldens it.
Beijing is already testing U.S. resolve in the South China Sea, Taiwan Strait, and beyond. A withdrawal would send a clear signal:
America is retreating.
That is not a path to deterrence—it’s a path to ceding maritime dominance to an adversary actively working to reshape the global order.
The Right Solution: A Bigger, More Sustainable Navy
Rather than abandoning forward presence, we must fix the real problem: our shrinking, overstretched fleet.
That means:
✅ Growing the Fleet: Expand to at least 355 ships—endorsed repeatedly by military leaders.
✅ Rebuilding Shore Support: Reinvest in shipyards, dry docks, and logistics infrastructure.
✅ Leadership Advocacy: Navy leaders must demand either more ships or fewer assignments, not accept the status quo.
✅ Congressional Action: Congress must prioritize fleet expansion over short-term cuts.
Conclusion: We Need More Ships, Not Fewer Commitments
Your commentary correctly highlights that the U.S. Navy is stretched thin and struggling to sustain global operations. But forward presence is not the problem. The real issue is that we are trying to maintain it with a fleet too small to sustain the mission.
For more than 75 years, forward-deployed U.S. naval forces have prevented conflict, reassured allies, and ensured maritime security. Scaling back presence does not fix the strain—it accelerates decline and weakens deterrence at the worst possible moment.
“If the United States is serious about deterring China, protecting global stability, and upholding its commitments, the answer is clear: Build a larger, more capable, and better-supported Navy.”
Educating the Public: Our Responsibility
The problem is not just military—it’s political and public awareness.
Too many Americans don’t realize how naval power secures our national and economic security. Without public pressure, there will be no political will to rebuild the fleet.
That’s why we at Americans for a Stronger Navy are launching:
“China, Russia, and America: Navigating Global Rivalries and Naval Challenges”
In our upcoming educational series, we will tackle the most pressing issues facing U.S. naval power, including:
✅ The Role of Naval Power in Preventing Global Conflict
✅ Economic & Strategic Impact of a Shrinking Fleet
✅ China & Russia’s Naval Expansion and the Strategic Threat
✅ U.S. Shipbuilding Crisis: Causes and Solutions
✅ Congressional Accountability: Who’s Responsible for the Shrinking Fleet?
This isn’t just a discussion—it’s a call to action.
To naval leadership, policymakers, and media: Stop pretending all is well. Demand action before the Navy reaches a breaking point.
To the American public: Get informed. Get involved. A strong Navy is not just for the military—it’s for every American who benefits from global stability.
The U.S. Navy’s forward presence is not a luxury—it’s a necessity.
The problem is not the strategy—it’s the lack of resources to sustain it.
If the U.S. wants to deter China, protect its interests, and maintain global stability, the answer is clear: Build a stronger, larger, better-supported, and more capable Navy.
We urge the administration, Congress, and military leadership to acknowledge reality:
Our commitments are not too big—our Navy is too small.
Sincerely, Bill Cullifer Founder, Americans for a Stronger Navy
The conclusion is clear: our nation’s strength at sea relies on a transformative, integrated approach. In short, WhenAmerica Ships, America Wins.
Why This Matters
For too long, the U.S. Navy has operated under a narrow warfighting mandate—a legacy of policies from the 1950s that prioritized combat readiness above all else. Yet history teaches us that true American sea power has always depended on two interlinked capabilities: a modern, formidable fleet and an engaged maritime domain that underpins commerce, diplomacy, and humanitarian efforts.
As Rep. Garamendi recently stated, “Today, less than 200 oceangoing ships fly the American flag; the SHIPS for America Act will empower our shipyards and marine merchants to uphold our country’s status as a leader in the maritime industry.”
Meanwhile, Senator Mark Kelly emphasized, “Strengthening America’s shipbuilding capacity and revitalizing our commercial maritime industry is critical to both our national security and economic resilience.”
These words capture the urgent need to reinvest in our naval statecraft while simultaneously enhancing our broader maritime strength.
Our Journey to Clarity Throughout my review, several key insights emerged:
Dissecting the Sources:Captain Sadler’s articlecalls for a revolution in U.S. naval shipbuilding. He writes, “For too long, needed investment in and action to bolster our nation’s maritime industrial base have been elusive. That luxury is no longer feasible given the threat from a revanchist and massively invested Chinese military.” His words, combined with insights from War on the Rocks and historical reflections, remind us that our Navy must once again balance combat readiness with essential peacetime missions.
Clarifying Terminology: We now clearly distinguish between “naval statecraft”—focused on rebuilding our fleet and shipbuilding capacity—and “maritime statecraft,” which encompasses the broader economic, diplomatic, and logistical roles at sea. Recognizing that these two concepts are mutually reinforcing helps create a coherent strategic message.
Refining Our Message: After extensive review and discussion, our distilled, bold message is: WhenAmerica Ships, America Wins. Coupled with the rallying cry, Wake up, America—our destiny depends on it, this encapsulates the urgent need to invest in our naval statecraft to secure our maritime future.
Key Takeaways and Implications
Integrated Mission for a Modern Era: A strong Navy is not just about preparing for war—it is the foundation of national security, economic prosperity, and global maritime influence. When America builds its ships, it reinforces its entire maritime domain.
Economic and Security Benefits: Investment in our shipbuilding industry creates high-quality jobs, revitalizes our manufacturing base, and ensures our fleet is capable of sustaining military operations and global trade. Without sufficient modern vessels, our ability to maintain critical supply chains is at risk.
Historical Lessons for Today: The interwar period showed that the U.S. Navy once balanced readiness for war with vital peacetime missions like humanitarian aid and diplomatic engagement. Recalling these lessons provides a blueprint for integrating naval and maritime statecraft in today’s complex environment.
In my efforts to understand the challenges facing the U.S. Navy and our maritime infrastructure, I have spent a fair amount of time reviewing the Jones Act and the range of views surrounding it. While there are differing opinions on how best to strengthen our domestic shipping industry, one thing is clear—America needs more ships, a stronger supporting infrastructure, and a Navy that is fully equipped to protect our national security. Regardless of where one stands on the specifics of maritime policy, we can all agree that a Stronger Navy is critical to American security and economic resilience. My focus remains on ensuring that we have the industrial capacity, shipbuilding capabilities, and logistics networks necessary to maintain U.S. maritime strength in an increasingly contested world.
Why Americans Should Care
For over two centuries, American maritime strength has been a cornerstone of our global leadership. Yet today, our domestic shipbuilding industry has shrunk from over 300 shipyards in the 1980s to just 20, and our U.S.-flagged commercial fleet has dwindled to fewer than 80 vessels. With China dominating global shipbuilding and maritime trade, the equation is simple: When America Ships, America Wins. Our shipyards are the engines powering our Navy, safeguarding our commerce, and securing our freedom.
Implications for the Navy and the Maritime Domain
For the Navy: Modernizing our fleet enhances operational readiness, supports a skilled and sustainable workforce, and allows the Navy to execute both war and peacetime missions. A modernized Navy is essential to deter adversaries and defend our national interests.
For the Maritime Domain: A thriving shipbuilding industry is vital for protecting American commerce, ensuring free navigation, and fostering economic resilience. Strengthening our maritime statecraft reinforces strategic partnerships and maintains our global influence.
The Legislative Response: SHIPS for America Act
Bipartisan efforts led by figures such as Senator Mark Kelly, Congressman Mike Waltz, Rep. Trent Kelly, and Rep. John Garamendi have culminated in the introduction of the Shipbuilding and Harbor Infrastructure for Prosperity and Security (SHIPS) for America Act. This comprehensive legislation proposes to:
Revive U.S. Shipbuilding: Offer tax incentives and targeted investments to rebuild our shipyards and attract private-sector growth.
Expand the U.S.-Flagged Merchant Fleet: Implement cargo preference laws to ensure more goods travel on American ships.
Strengthen National Security: Increase the supply of ships available for military logistics and rapid response.
Develop a New Maritime Workforce: Establish apprenticeships, trade school incentives, and recruiting programs to restore critical skills in ship maintenance and marine operations.
Forge Strategic Partnerships with Allies: Collaborate with trusted nations like Japan, South Korea, Finland, and Canada to enhance our shipbuilding capacity while ensuring American oversight.
This legislation is not about partisan politics—it’s about survival. With global supply chains vulnerable to disruption, the urgency to rebuild our maritime strength has never been greater.
Conclusion & Call to Action
History teaches us that nations fall when they lose control of the seas. Today, as our adversaries grow stronger and our industrial base shrinks, we cannot afford to dawdle. It’s not war we desire, but peace achieved through strength—and our enemies must know that America will not stand idly by.
Join us in this crucial mission. We call on policymakers, industry leaders, and every American who values freedom and prosperity to support transformative initiatives that invest in our naval statecraft. By strengthening our shipbuilding industry and modernizing our Navy, we secure a robust maritime future that benefits us all.
When American Ships, America Wins. Wake up, America—our destiny depends on it.
Visit StrongerNavy.org to learn more, get involved, and help ensure that our nation’s shipbuilding efforts pave the way for a secure and prosperous future.
At Americans for a Stronger Navy, we have long advocated for a robust maritime strategy that includes both a stronger U.S. Navy and a revitalized civilian maritime industry. Our commitment to this cause is rooted in a belief that America’s strength at sea is indispensable to its national security, economic stability, and global leadership.
Recently, the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) released findings from an investigation into China’s dominance in the shipbuilding, maritime, and logistics sectors, revealing practices that undermine fair competition and threaten American interests. This news reaffirms the urgency of revitalizing our shipbuilding industry—a call echoed by U.S. legislators like Senator John Garamendi and others who are leading efforts to rebuild our maritime capabilities.
What the Investigation Found
The USTR investigation, launched in response to petitions by five unions, highlights how China’s aggressive industrial policies have positioned it as a global leader in shipbuilding. According to USTR Katherine Tai, China builds over 1,700 ships annually—dwarfing the fewer than five built by the United States. The report emphasizes that Beijing’s practices displace foreign firms, foster dependencies, and create significant economic and security risks for the U.S.
Quoting Katherine Tai: “Beijing’s targeted dominance of these sectors undermines fair, market-oriented competition, increases economic security risks, and is the greatest barrier to revitalization of U.S. industries.”
Why This Matters
America’s maritime industry was once the backbone of our global influence and security. Today, it is a shadow of its former self, leaving us vulnerable to external dependencies. The decline of U.S. shipbuilding not only erodes our military readiness but also jeopardizes our economic security, particularly in the face of escalating geopolitical tensions with China.
The implications extend beyond shipbuilding. Logistics, supply chains, and the broader maritime ecosystem are critical to ensuring that America can sustain its global commitments and respond to crises effectively. As Alliance for American Manufacturing President Scott Paul aptly noted: “Failing to take decisive action will leave our shipbuilding capabilities at the mercy of Beijing’s persistent predatory market distortions.”
Legislative Efforts to Revitalize U.S. Shipbuilding
Amid these challenges, leaders like Senator John Garamendi are working to reverse the tide. Garamendi, alongside Senators Mark Kelly and Todd Young, recently introduced the SHIPS for America Act—a comprehensive, bipartisan effort to rebuild the U.S. shipbuilding industry and expand the U.S.-flagged fleet. Key provisions of this legislation include:
Establishing a national maritime strategy and a White House Maritime Security Advisor.
Expanding the U.S.-flagged fleet by 250 ships over the next decade.
Rebuilding the shipyard industrial base with tax credits, financial incentives, and funding for workforce development.
Strengthening regulations to ensure government-funded cargo is transported on U.S.-flagged vessels.
These efforts align closely with our own calls for a balanced strategy that integrates the needs of both the Navy and civilian maritime industries.
What Needs to Be Done
The USTR’s findings, combined with the SHIPS for America Act and related initiatives, offer a roadmap to reclaim America’s maritime leadership. However, this will require decisive action from policymakers, industry leaders, and the American public. We need to:
Invest in shipbuilding infrastructure and workforce development.
Expand the U.S.-flagged fleet to reduce dependence on foreign shipping.
Foster innovation in shipbuilding technologies to compete globally.
Unite bipartisan support for maritime legislation that prioritizes national security and economic resilience.
A Call to Action: Wake Up, America!
The stakes have never been higher. As we outlined in our recent open letter, the decline of America’s maritime capabilities is not just an industry problem—it’s a national security crisis. For too long, we have allowed complacency to erode our standing as a maritime power. It’s time to wake up.
We urge you to contact your representatives and demand support for legislation like the SHIPS for America Act. Share this message with your community, and join us in advocating for a stronger Navy and a revitalized civilian maritime industry.
America’s future at sea depends on it. Let’s make it happen.
Credit to AFP for their reporting on the USTR investigation and to the Alliance for American Manufacturing for their continued advocacy.
On Jan. 31, 1979, Vice Premier Deng Xiaoping and President Jimmy Carter sign historic diplomatic agreements between the United States and China. (Photos: Jimmy Carter Library
Introduction: A Decision Made in Haste
Bill Cullifer, Founder
The December 2024 renewal of the U.S.-China Science and Technology Agreement (STA) has left some Americans questioning its timing and rationale. While the original 1979 agreement aimed to foster collaboration and mutual respect, today’s geopolitical realities demand a more cautious approach. As an American deeply concerned about our nation’s security and technological leadership, I share the frustration of Senators Marco Rubio, Bill Hagerty, and Jim Risch, who criticized this rushed decision. Senator Risch aptly noted, “The era when this agreement made sense is long gone,” a sentiment that reflects the growing consensus among those wary of China’s strategic ambitions.
Historical Context: Cooperation vs. Competition
The STA, first signed under President Jimmy Carter and Premier Deng Xiaoping, symbolized a hopeful era of collaboration. It was a landmark moment in U.S.-China relations, with industries and policymakers believing that shared knowledge could lead to mutual prosperity. However, over the decades, successive administrations—Republican and Democratic alike—failed to reassess the agreement’s implications. Instead, they allowed industries to prioritize market access over national security, kicking the proverbial can down the road.
Now, as the stakes grow higher, the optics of renewing this agreement without public scrutiny are troubling. Worse, the decision was made just before a presidential transition, effectively denying the incoming administration an opportunity to weigh in. This lack of transparency is a glaring issue, especially given how previous agreements with China have often left the U.S. vulnerable.
The Costs of Neglect: Knowledge Shared, Power Shifted
The consequences of this complacency are clear:
Industrial Espionage: Cases like Motorola and Micron Technology illustrate how China has systematically exploited intellectual property to advance its technological and military capabilities.
Military Implications: From stealth fighters to missile technology, stolen innovations have directly bolstered China’s ability to challenge U.S. military dominance.
A Navy Left Holding the Line
While industries reaped profits, the Navy was left to address the fallout:
Countering Advanced Threats: The Navy now faces adversaries equipped with technologies once exclusive to the U.S., making global readiness more challenging.
Strategic Vulnerabilities: Decades of neglect have created gaps in naval capabilities, leaving our sailors to pick up the pieces without the tools they need.
A Call for Accountability and Action
The renewal of the STA should have been an opportunity for reevaluation, not a rushed decision made behind closed doors. While the updated agreement includes some safeguards, such as excluding critical technologies like AI and quantum computing, these measures fall short of addressing the broader risks.
As Dr. Steven T. Wills, Ph.D., Captain (USN Retired), author of Strategy Shelved: The Collapse of Cold War Naval Strategic Planning and Senior Advisor for American for a Stronger Navy, explains: “The renewal of the U.S.-China Science and Technology Agreement must be viewed with a critical eye, especially given China’s consistent exploitation of open collaborations to advance its military and technological objectives. As a former U.S. Navy officer and author focused on strategic naval planning, I’ve seen firsthand how seemingly innocuous decisions can have long-term implications for national security. This agreement, while framed as a step forward in modernizing cooperation, risks overlooking the broader strategic context. If we fail to adopt a comprehensive approach that aligns scientific collaboration with national security, we risk repeating the mistakes of the past—leaving our Navy and national defense community to address the consequences without adequate tools or support. The time for a unified, forward-looking strategy is now.”
Dr. Wills’ perspective highlights a critical point: this isn’t just about protecting intellectual property—it’s about ensuring that strategic decisions today don’t leave the Navy and the broader defense community vulnerable tomorrow.
The renewal of the STA should have been an opportunity for reevaluation, not a rushed decision made behind closed doors. While the updated agreement includes some safeguards, such as excluding critical technologies like AI and quantum computing, these measures fall short of addressing the broader risks.
It’s time to demand:
Comprehensive Evaluation: Policymakers, industry leaders, and defense experts must scrutinize agreements like the STA to ensure they align with national security interests.
Support for the Navy: Our sailors deserve the resources and tools necessary to address the consequences of decades of neglect.
A Unified National Strategy: The U.S. must adopt a cohesive approach to balancing innovation with security, ensuring industries that benefited from globalization contribute to safeguarding national interests.
Conclusion: Enough Is Enough
The optics of this renewal are undeniably poor. It sends the wrong message at a time when China has consistently exploited partnerships for strategic gain. Americans for a Stronger Navy stands for transparency, accountability, and vigilance. We cannot afford to be naïve or complacent when the stakes are so high.
As someone who served in the U.S. Navy during the Cold War, I’ve had enough of watching decision-makers prioritize short-term gains over long-term security. In upcoming podcasts, we will examine this agreement and its implications in greater detail, bringing together experts to discuss how America can reclaim its leadership in science and technology while safeguarding its future.
It’s time for all Americans—especially industries that have profited most—to step up and support the Navy and national security. This isn’t just about science; it’s about our freedom, our future, and our ability to stand strong in the face of growing challenges.
An F-35C Lightning II from the “Argonauts” Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 147 sits on the flight deck on Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70).
Now, in Part 3, we turn our attention to the future. The world of aerial combat is rapidly evolving with breakthroughs in drones, artificial intelligence, and hypersonic technology. The question before us: how do these advancements fit into the U.S. Navy’s strategy, and what role should the public play in shaping the future of defense?
Emerging Technologies: What’s Next for Aerial Combat?
The battlefield of the future is being shaped by cutting-edge technologies that promise to redefine the rules of engagement. Here are some key advancements poised to transform aerial combat:
Drones and Uncrewed Systems
Uncrewed aerial vehicles (UAVs) are revolutionizing military operations, offering cost-effective, stealthy solutions for surveillance and strikes.
Programs like the MQ-25 Stingray, designed for refueling and reconnaissance, demonstrate the Navy’s commitment to integrating drones into its operations.
However, drones cannot fully replace manned aircraft like the F-35. While they excel in certain missions, their limited autonomy and susceptibility to electronic warfare highlight the need for complementary systems.
Artificial Intelligence (AI)
AI is enhancing decision-making on the battlefield, from targeting systems to predictive maintenance for aircraft.
The integration of AI with the F-35’s advanced sensor systems could further enhance its capabilities, making it an indispensable tool in contested environments.
Yet, the ethical and security implications of relying on AI demand careful consideration.
Hypersonic Technology
Hypersonic missiles and aircraft are reshaping global military strategies with their unmatched speed and maneuverability.
The U.S. Navy is investing heavily in hypersonics to maintain a competitive edge, but these advancements also require robust defense systems to counter similar developments by adversaries.
The Role of Public Engagement
The future of aerial combat is not just a matter for defense experts—it’s a conversation that requires active public participation. Here’s why your voice matters:
Accountability and Oversight: Defense programs like the F-35 involve significant taxpayer investments. Public scrutiny ensures these funds are used efficiently and transparently.
Shaping National Priorities: The public has a vital role in influencing decisions about where resources should be allocated—whether to traditional programs, emerging technologies, or a balanced combination of both.
Building Trust: A well-informed citizenry fosters trust in the military’s strategic decisions, strengthening national unity and support.
Balancing Innovation and Readiness
The future of aerial combat will require a delicate balance between embracing innovation and maintaining readiness. Programs like the F-35 exemplify this challenge. While critics point to cost overruns and delays, proponents highlight the aircraft’s unmatched capabilities and its role in deterring adversaries.
At the same time, emerging technologies like drones and AI offer new opportunities to enhance efficiency and effectiveness. The key lies in integrating these advancements without compromising the proven strengths of existing systems.
Call to Action: Your Role in Shaping the Future
As Americans for a Stronger Navy, our mission is to raise awareness and foster public engagement in these critical discussions. The future of aerial combat impacts not just our military but every citizen who benefits from the security it provides.
We invite you to:
Stay Informed: Follow our blog for updates on defense issues and emerging technologies.
Join the Conversation: Share your thoughts on the future of aerial combat and the role of programs like the F-35.
Advocate for Accountability: Support efforts to ensure transparency, efficiency, and strategic foresight in defense planning.
Together, we can ensure that America’s Navy remains not only stronger but also smarter and more prepared for the challenges ahead.
