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.
China and Russia are pushing closer to our northern doorstep — and Alaska is the front line.
Introduction
Over the past year, U.S. Coast Guard cutters have repeatedly intercepted foreign “research” ships operating just beyond the 200-mile line off Alaska’s Arctic coast. At the same time, the U.S. Navy has kept up under-ice submarine operations, while Russian aircraft test our air defense zone and Sino-Russian flotillas sail through the Bering Strait.
Map Legend Dashed Red Lines – Patrol routes and foreign vessel tracks monitored by the U.S. Coast Guard near Alaska’s Arctic coast. Solid Blue Lines – Projected Arctic shipping lanes, including the Northern Sea Route (along Russia) and emerging trans-Arctic corridors. Shaded Blue Zone – Exercise Northern Edge 2025 training areas, where U.S. and allied forces conducted joint, multi-domain operations. Black Ship Icons – Locations of recent intercepts of foreign “research” vessels near Utqiaġvik. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) – U.S. waters extending 200 nautical miles from Alaska’s coast, where America exercises sovereign rights over resources.
The takeaway is simple: America’s Arctic is no longer quiet. It’s contested.
Why Americans Should Care Alaska is not a remote outpost. It is our Arctic front yard, rich in resources, with thousands of miles of shoreline and a narrow strait that connects the Pacific to the Arctic. When Chinese “research” vessels map our seabeds or Russian aircraft enter the Air Defense Identification Zone, they’re probing how close they can get to our homeland. What happens off Alaska affects energy security, trade routes, and even the protection of undersea cables that carry the world’s internet traffic.
RAND’s latest study underscores this point. In The Future of Maritime Presence in the Central Arctic Ocean (July 2025), RAND concludes that as sea ice retreats, the Arctic will draw in both Arctic and non-Arctic actors for economic, political, and military gain. They warn that competition will intensify in phases: first commercial, then political, and ultimately strategic. For the U.S., that means maritime presence is not optional — it is essential to prevent rivals from dictating the rules of the Arctic.
Implications for the Navy Day-to-day patrols fall to the Coast Guard, which provides the only regular surface presence in the Arctic. But the Navy’s role is no less critical. Its submarines operate beneath the ice, practicing for deterrence and warfighting in a domain where rivals are gaining ground. The Navy also views Alaska as part of the defense-in-depth of the United States — the first line of detection and deterrence against missile submarines, long-range bombers, and other threats moving south from the Arctic.
This year’s Northern Edge 2025 exercise made that point clear. More than 6,400 U.S. and Canadian service members, 100 aircraft, and seven warships, including USS Abraham Lincoln and her carrier strike group, trained across Alaska. Running alongside Arctic Edge, the exercises brought together INDOPACOM and NORTHCOM to practice joint, multi-domain operations — from the Aleutians to Adak. In other words: Alaska is not just about defending the homeland, it is a launchpad for projecting U.S. power into the Indo-Pacific.
The challenge remains that America’s icebreaker fleet is thin, while Russia operates dozens and China fields new polar-capable vessels. Without recapitalization and greater presence, the U.S. risks falling behind in its own backyard. RAND echoes this warning: presence and infrastructure — from icebreakers to domain awareness — are key to avoiding strategic surprise.
Implications for Our Allies The Arctic is no longer an American issue alone. NATO allies — Canada, Denmark, Norway — all face the same northern pressure. China brands itself a “near-Arctic state” and seeks influence in waters that directly border allied territory. Coordinated exercises like Northern Edge and Arctic Edge are proof that alliances matter. Shared domain awareness and investment in icebreaking and seabed security will be vital. If America steps back, allies are left exposed — and adversaries will fill the gap.
The Bottom Line Alaska’s Arctic waters are an overlooked but critical front in U.S. homeland defense. The Coast Guard may be on point, but the Navy’s presence under the ice and in the chokepoints is just as important. Together, they demonstrate that the U.S. is watching, ready, and committed to protecting its northern approaches.
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.
How one Naval officer’s warning and one strategist’s vision show us the path forward
Introduction
In June 1943, the USS Essex arrived at Pearl Harbor, followed shortly by the USS Yorktown. These weren’t just two more ships—they were harbingers of American naval dominance. By August 1945, the U.S. Navy commanded 6,768 ships, dwarfing every other navy on earth. For a brief, shining moment, America achieved total maritime supremacy.
That moment, as Commander Benjamin Armstrong reminds us in his prescient Proceedings article, was fleeting. More importantly, it wasn’t inevitable. “American naval dominance is not a birthright,” Armstrong writes. “It cannot and should not be assumed in the 21st century.”
The Choice Before Us
Today, we face another inflection point remarkably similar to the one Alfred Thayer Mahan confronted in 1890. Then, as now, America had to choose between maritime greatness and strategic irrelevance.
Mahan saw an America that had grown economically powerful but remained strategically vulnerable. His solution wasn’t just to build ships—it was to educate the American people about why naval power mattered. Through articles in The Atlantic, books that shaped presidents, and tireless public advocacy, Mahan created the intellectual foundation for American naval expansion.
The result?
White Fleet, the Panama Canal, and the naval infrastructure that would prove decisive in two world wars.
History’s Pattern: The Sine Wave of American Naval Power
Armstrong’s analysis reveals a crucial truth: American naval strength has never followed a straight line. Instead, it follows what historian Craig Symonds calls a “sine wave”—peaks and troughs dictated not by strategic logic, but by how Americans view their role in the world.
After the War of 1812, when the Royal Navy had blockaded American ports and burned Washington, Congress appropriated $8 million for naval construction—the largest appropriation to that point. Americans had felt vulnerability firsthand, and they acted.
But by the 1850s, southern politicians saw the Navy as a tool of federal overreach. The fleet shrank. After the Civil War, America turned inward, focusing on western expansion. The Navy withered to just 38 ships by 1886.
Then came the 1890s economic expansion, Mahan’s influence, and renewed American ambition. The Navy grew again, reaching its “Second to None” peak during World War I, only to shrink again during the peace dividend of the 1920s.
The pattern is clear: American naval power rises and falls based on American choices, not strategic necessity.
The 1940 Moment: When America Chose Dominance
The most instructive parallel to today came in June 1940. As German forces overwhelmed France, Chief of Naval Operations Harold Stark requested $4 billion to increase the fleet by 70 percent. Congress didn’t just approve it—they doubled it, appropriating over $8 billion for the Two-Ocean Navy Act.
That wasn’t a military decision or even an executive branch decision. It was the American people, through their representatives, choosing naval dominance. Three years later, that choice manifested as the Essex and Yorktown sailing into Pearl Harbor, beginning America’s brief moment of total maritime supremacy.
Today’s China Challenge: Mahan’s Nightmare Realized
Mahan warned that America’s geographic advantages were temporary. He feared a day when a rising power could challenge American access to global markets and trade routes. That day has arrived.
China launches a new warship every month. We launch one every two years. By 2030, China will field 460 ships to our 290. More troubling, they’re building in contested waters—the South China Sea that carries $3.4 trillion in annual trade, including the supply chains that stock every American store and factory.
This isn’t just a military problem—it’s an economic catastrophe waiting to happen. Every iPhone, every car part, every prescription drug that crosses the Pacific depends on naval power to guarantee safe passage. When China can stop our ships, they can stop our economy.
The Mahan Model for Modern Advocacy
Just as Mahan educated Americans about naval power’s economic importance, we must connect naval dominance to modern prosperity. The tech industry that depends most heavily on Pacific trade should lead this effort—after all, they collectively enabled China’s rise through technology transfer and manufacturing partnerships.
Apple’s entire business model assumes free navigation of sea lanes China now contests. Tesla’s Shanghai factory means nothing if Chinese warships can interdict the ships carrying Tesla vehicles to American ports. Amazon’s global supply chain collapses without the Navy to keep shipping lanes open.
These companies have the resources and self-interest to fund a sustained campaign for naval investment. A small fraction of their cash reserves could support the kind of public education that creates political will for a 500-ship Navy.
The Choice Point: Repeating 1940
Armstrong’s historical analysis points to an uncomfortable truth: “The size and shape of the fleet have ebbed and flowed across history. American naval dominance is not a birthright… American naval dominance is a choice.”
We are at such a choice point now. Like 1940, we face a rising challenger, contested sea lanes, and an American public largely unaware of the stakes. Like 1940, we need both strategic vision and public will.
The strategic vision exists—military leaders have clearly articulated the need for over 500 ships and increased naval spending. What’s missing is the public education and political mobilization that translates vision into funding.
The Path Forward: GDP and Political Will
Currently, America spends roughly 1% of GDP on naval forces. In 1940, when we chose dominance, we spent over 8%. Even achieving a modest increase to 2% of GDP would fund the 500-ship Navy our strategists say we need.
But that requires the American people to make the same choice their grandparents made in 1940: that naval dominance isn’t a luxury, but a necessity.
Like Mahan 130 years ago, we must educate Americans about the connection between naval power and their daily prosperity. We must show them that the choice isn’t between military spending and domestic priorities—it’s between naval investment and economic vulnerability.
Conclusion: The Mahan Moment
Alfred Thayer Mahan changed how Americans thought about naval power through sustained public advocacy. He connected abstract strategic concepts to concrete economic interests. He made the case that naval power wasn’t optional for a trading nation—it was essential.
Commander Armstrong’s warning gives us the historical framework. Mahan’s example gives us the method. China’s challenge gives us the urgency.
The question isn’t whether America can afford naval dominance. The question is whether we can afford to lose it. In 1940, Americans chose wisely. The prosperity and security of the next 50 years depends on whether we choose as wisely today.
American naval dominance isn’t our birthright. But it can be our choice—if we make it while we still can.
Sign up for: 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.
Introduction Most people don’t realize it yet. We are already in a quiet w@r. Not with bombs. Not with missiles. But with fentanyl, with financial schemes, and with cyber attacks. These are not random hacks — they are deliberate intrusions aimed straight at America’s lifelines.
Targeting America’s Core Systems They target our banks — draining trust from the financial system. They map our pipelines — threatening the flow of oil and gas that heats our homes. They burrow into our power grids — carrying the ability to shut down American cities. They test our hospitals and emergency networks. They infiltrate our communications — preparing to cut the way America speaks, trades, and defends itself.
And now, they even target our homes and businesses. The devices we plug in. The networks we rely on. Even solar panels and batteries made overseas — carrying hidden back doors that could one day flip a switch against us.
Banks. Grids. Solar.
Why Americans Should Care This is not only about us. Our allies are targeted too. These attacks seek to divide, to weaken the bonds that keep freedom strong. A crisis in one corner of the world can ripple across oceans — and into our own homes.
The Navy and the Nation Our strength rests on both our sailors and our civilian maritime industry. Civilian ships move the goods America needs. Our Navy protects those ships and the sea lanes they travel. Together, they keep our nation alive and our economy moving.
As Rear Admiral Mike Studeman, U.S. Navy (Retired) has said: “The reality is that adversaries have insinuated themselves in our homeland… and continue to exploit our society from the inside out.”
A Call to Action That’s why today I am asking you: Call Congress. Tell them to support our sailors. Find your Representative or Senator at USA.gov. Use your voice. Every call is logged. Every message counts.
Demand that Congress fund emergency shipbuilding. And strengthen the Navy’s fleet.
Conclusion The future of America depends on us — on our sailors, on our civilian maritime, on our citizens, and on a Navy that protects them all.
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.
As a former destroyer sailor from the ’70s, a Navy veteran who served on the Henry B. Wilson (DDG 7), and later a telecom and web technology executive, I don’t take words like “war” lightly. But we need to face facts: the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has already launched a quiet war against America and our allies.
It doesn’t look like Pearl Harbor or Midway. Instead, it comes as millions of cyberattacks, poisoned streets, disinformation campaigns, and infiltrations into our critical infrastructure. The weapons are different, but the intent is the same: weaken America from the inside out until resistance collapses.
Two voices recently captured this reality:
Retired Rear Admiral Mike Studeman, former Commander of the Office of Naval Intelligence, warned: “The reality is that adversaries have insinuated themselves in our homeland and continue to exploit our society from the inside out. This is the quiet and costly national crisis we have insufficiently mobilized to address.”
Another security analyst summarized it bluntly: “Massive list of aggressive actions against the US by China, but two stand out: 1) cyber attacks on critical infrastructure, and 2) subsidizing fentanyl to addict our citizens. The CCP is an existential threat to our democracy and we must treat it as such.”
These aren’t exaggerations. They’re the facts on the ground — and in cyberspace.
Cyber Siege: The First Strike of Modern Conflict
The Hudson Institute’s August 2025 policy memo makes it plain: Taiwan now faces an average of 2.4 million cyberattacks per day. These intrusions target energy grids, logistics, medical systems, and semiconductors. Hudson’s conclusion is chilling: in a crisis, Beijing could disable Taiwan’s systems “without expending a single missile.”
This isn’t theory. It’s the same playbook Russia used against Ukraine in 2022, starting with cyberattacks to degrade command and control. The difference is that Taiwan is at the center of global supply chains, producing 90 percent of the world’s advanced semiconductors. If its networks go dark, the shockwaves would slam every corner of the global economy — including the U.S. Navy’s shipyards and weapons programs.
Fentanyl: War in Our Streets
While Taiwan faces digital siege, America faces chemical siege. CCP-linked networks subsidize the production of fentanyl precursors that end up killing tens of thousands of Americans each year. This is not just crime — it’s a form of warfare. An addicted, divided society is weaker, less resilient, and less able to project power abroad.
Just as cyberattacks aim to paralyze a nation’s systems, fentanyl undermines its people from within. Together, they form a strategy of attrition: weaken the United States until it can no longer lead.
Why Americans Should Care
PRC-backed groups like Volt Typhoon have already penetrated U.S. critical infrastructure in places like San Diego, Norfolk, and Houston.
Our communities are flooded with fentanyl that is subsidized and trafficked through networks linked to China.
Our economic security hangs on supply chains that Beijing can disrupt with a few keystrokes.
The CCP doesn’t need to invade to weaken us. They’re already doing it.
Implications for the Navy A Navy cannot fight if its logistics, communications, and supply lines are compromised. If Taiwan falls prey to a digital siege, our fleets in the Pacific will face an even harder fight — one fought without the semiconductor edge or the industrial resilience we’ve taken for granted.
The Navy will inevitably be tasked with cleaning up the mess: defending supply chains, securing sea lanes, and protecting American infrastructure from further exploitation. That means cyber resilience and industrial revival are as critical to naval readiness as shipbuilding or new destroyers.
Implications for Our Allies Hudson warns of a dangerous ambiguity: there is no Indo-Pacific cyber alliance. Would Japan, South Korea, or Australia respond to a Chinese cyberattack on Taiwan? Would Washington retaliate in kind? The lack of clarity undermines deterrence — and gives Beijing confidence.
We need joint cyber defense drills, clear doctrine, and public-private coordination on resilience — not after a crisis, but now.
Conclusion We are already at war — just not in the way most Americans imagine. The CCP’s cyberattacks, fentanyl subsidies, and influence operations are part of a long game of attrition. Admiral Studeman is right: this is a “quiet and costly national crisis” we’ve failed to mobilize against.
Hudson is right too: resilience is deterrence. America must strengthen its cyber defenses, rebuild its industrial base, and support Taiwan’s ability to withstand a digital siege. At the same time, we must recognize how Silicon Valley’s past choices — offshoring technology and handing Beijing the keys — helped create this vulnerability.
The sooner we admit the war has already begun, the sooner we can rally the Navy, our allies, and the American people to win it.
Chart of the disposition of ships the night of 8 AugustBill 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.
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:
Intelligence operations – Now conducted with unprecedented boldness
Cyber operations – Increasingly destructive rather than just penetrative
Information and disinformation operations – Openly aggressive narrative warfare
United Front work – Brazen influence operations in academic and political institutions
Irregular military actions – Escalating gray zone operations testing American resolve
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
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.
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.
If you’ve been following us over the past couple of years, you already know—we’ve been sounding the alarm.
Bill Cullifer, Founder
Introduction
This week’s news confirms it: Microsoft allowed China-based engineers to support U.S. military cloud systems, including infrastructure tied to the Navy. It took a journalistic exposé, a senator’s inquiry, and finally a directive from the Secretary of Defense to shut it down.
Let’s be clear—this is systemic.
This wasn’t one company’s mistake. It reflects a broader failure—where critical defense infrastructure is entangled with adversarial regimes, our tech workforce has been hollowed out, and profit has been prioritized over patriotism.
This Is My Journey—and My Shout: From Destroyer Sailor to Digital Sentinel
My early days as a U.S. Navy destroyer sailor in the 1970s gave me a global perspective that’s stayed with me ever since. I saw firsthand how the world’s most critical maritime trade routes—from the Malacca Strait to the South China Sea—could quickly become flashpoints when adversaries or their proxies seized control. I came to understand just how vital the U.S. Navy’s role in freedom of navigation is—not only in defending democracy abroad, but in protecting our economic and strategic interests here at home.
After a career in telecommunications, I turned my focus to education. In 1997, I founded a national association committed to building America’s digital workforce. We trained web developers, server administrators, and IT professionals—because I believed then, as I still do, that digital strength is national strength.
Even back then, the writing was on the wall: rising dependence on China, fragile supply chains, and a dangerous complacency about safeguarding America’s digital and strategic backbone.
What I Saw Coming
I could see where this was headed. The decisions being made in boardrooms and bureaucracies—about outsourcing, offshoring, and chasing short-term profits—were creating long-term risks. And I knew exactly who would be left to deal with the fallout: our Navy and the sons and daughters of those I served with.
They’d be the ones sent to navigate hostile waters, defend contested choke points, and hold the line during crises that began far from the sea.
Why I Launched Americans for a Stronger Navy
I couldn’t sit back and hope it would all work itself out. I’ve seen too much. And frankly, it pains me to see the Navy have to grovel for support in an era where threats are multiplying—not receding.
That’s why I founded Americans for a Stronger Navy—to push for the readiness, resources, and respect our Navy needs. Because I know what’s at stake—not just for this country’s future, but for the safety of our allies and the stability of the global order.
This is just the beginning. In the weeks ahead, I’ll be breaking down what went wrong—and how we fight back.
More Than Microsoft: A National Security Crisis
The Navy—and the rest of our armed forces—now depends on cloud systems for everything from warfighting logistics to operational readiness. But when those systems are built or maintained by foreign nationals under weak supervision, our adversaries don’t need to hack their way in. They’re already inside.
This Microsoft scandal is just the latest proof point. Behind it lies:
* A depleted domestic technical base
* A defense industry over-leveraged to foreign subcontractors
* Big Tech firms chasing margins—not national security
And at the center of it all? A Navy that’s being asked to do more with less—and too often, without the tools it needs.
What Comes Next: Charting the Course
That’s why we’re launching Charting the Course: Voices That Matter—a comprehensive 24-session educational series designed to peel back the layers of how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next.
Each session will tackle a specific facet of the crisis—from the outsourcing of digital infrastructure and the hollowing out of our industrial base, to the cybersecurity vulnerabilities inside the Navy’s digital backbone. We’ll examine the influence of adversarial regimes, the failure of public-private accountability, and the high-stakes strategic chokepoints where our forces may soon be tested.
But this isn’t just about understanding the problem. It’s about charting a path forward.
We’ll offer concrete proposals to revitalize American shipbuilding, retrain our tech workforce, and rebalance the defense-industrial ecosystem to serve national—not corporate—interests. And yes—we’ll ask the tough question: how do we pay for it?
Because the days of bloated, inefficient spending are over. We need what Navy leadership is already calling for: a leaner, more lethal, and more disciplined force. As Acting CNO Admiral James Kilby put it, the Navy must:
“Exercise strategic discipline… while increasing surge readiness… without sacrificing scheduled maintenance,” with a goal of achieving “an 80% combat‑surge ready posture by 2027.”
We’ll explore potential solutions ranging from public-private innovation partnerships and industrial reinvestment incentives, to reallocating wasteful spending and rethinking procurement models that reward results—not red tape.
These sessions are designed to educate the public, inform policymakers, and mobilize everyday Americans—because this is not just a military issue.
We’re entering a new era of naval warfare—one where drones can fly farther than planes, submarines can think for themselves, and enemies strike not just with missiles, but with malware. But amid all the noise about autonomous systems and AI, let’s be clear:
America still needs sailors at sea.
Nothing can replace the judgment, courage, and leadership of a U.S. Navy crew. But we would be wrong not to give them every technological edge available. That’s where innovators like Palmer Luckey are stepping in—with bold ideas, operational tools, and a firm belief that deterrence should be smart, scalable, and American-made.
Meet the Man Behind the Disruption
Palmer Luckey is no ordinary defense entrepreneur. Best known as the creator of Oculus VR, Luckey turned his attention from gaming to national security in 2017 when he founded Anduril Industries. His mission: disrupt the bloated defense procurement system and deliver real-world, ready-to-use military tools at Silicon Valley speed.
Today, Anduril is producing drone interceptors, electromagnetic warfare systems, autonomous submarines, and smart command platforms that are already in service—supporting U.S. forces and our allies abroad.
“Porcupines, Not Policemen”
One quote from Palmer Luckey, shared in his 60 Minutes interview, captures the heart of a smarter deterrence strategy:
“My position has been that the United States needs to arm our allies and partners around the world so that they can be prickly porcupines that nobody wants to step on, nobody wants to bite them.” — Palmer Luckey, 60 Minutes, July 2025
We believe Luckey’s philosophy echoes the enduring wisdom of peace through strength. The goal isn’t global policing. It’s creating strong allies, hardened targets, and enough capability across our partnerships that no aggressor wants to test the waters.In Luckey’s view, deterrence isn’t about overwhelming presence—it’s about posture. And in today’s world, that posture needs to be smart, fast, and often unmanned.
Why Americans Should Care
Our adversaries are innovating relentlessly—China with hypersonics, Russia with cyber sabotage, Iran with drone warfare. If America lags in defense innovation, we risk far more than budgets—we risk blood.
Luckey’s approach embodies the kind of entrepreneurial urgency that once won us wars and landed men on the Moon. He’s not waiting for a contract. He’s building the future now.
The government isn’t always fast. But the American spirit—when unleashed—is faster.
Smart Tools for a Stronger Fleet—Not a Sailorless One
Let’s be clear: We’re not advocating for ghost fleets. We’re calling for smarter fleets.
Destroyers, submarines, and aircraft carriers remain the bedrock of American sea power. But in today’s threat landscape, steel without software is just a target. Our Navy must be equipped to launch and command advanced tools—like the Roadrunner drone interceptor or Dive XL autonomous submarine—from the decks of manned ships.
Autonomous platforms shouldn’t replace sailors. They should protect them. Empower them. Extend their reach.
When a U.S. warship can deploy swarms of AI-powered sensors or coordinate with allies via a shared AI battlefield platform like LATTIS, our sailors gain more than data—they gain the upper hand.
A New Era of Deterrence
The old model—sending troops into every hot zone—no longer fits a world of proxy wars, satellite surveillance, and cyber infiltration. Instead, we need to export capability, not just commitment. Give our partners the power to defend themselves, and America’s deterrent grows without overextending our forces.
That’s the heart of the porcupine strategy: Don’t invite a fight. But make it painful to start one.
The Bottom Line A Navy without sailors? That’s not America’s way. But a Navy without innovation? That’s a risk we can’t afford.
Let’s give our fleets and our friends the tools they need to defend freedom—above, below, and beyond the sea.
Let’s Talk to the Man Himself At Americans for a Stronger Navy, we believe voices like Palmer Luckey’s deserve a national stage. We’ve invited him to join us for a conversation—about innovation, entrepreneurship, and what the next generation of defense leadership looks like.
Palmer, if you’re reading this: the invitation is open.
👉 Subscribe at StrongerNavy.org 👉 Follow the mission: #StrongerNavy #PorcupineStrategy #SeaPower2
