Analysis Archives - Page 2 of 5 - Americans for a Stronger Navy

June 27, 2024June 27, 2024

Ocean Shipping Disruptions and Their Economic Impact on Americans

Introduction

As the founder of Americans for a Stronger Navy, I have encountered a few pushback from those who believe that the need for a stronger Navy is overstated and that current global situations are someone else’s problem. This perspective overlooks the critical role that a robust Navy plays in safeguarding our economic interests and national security. In light of recent disruptions in ocean shipping, it is crucial to understand why the vast majority of Americans support a stronger Navy and how it impacts our daily lives.

Why This Matters

Global supply chains are intricately connected, and disruptions in one part of the world can have far-reaching impacts. The Red Sea, a critical maritime route, has recently seen increased attacks, forcing vessels to divert and causing gridlock at key ports such as Singapore, Malaysia, South Korea, China, and parts of Europe. This congestion is reminiscent of the chaos experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the repercussions are already being felt across the logistics and shipping industries.

Key Takeaways

Rising Shipping Costs: The diversions and delays are leading to increased shipping costs. With vessels stuck waiting for berths and navigating longer routes, the cost of transporting goods is climbing rapidly.
Port Congestion: Ports are struggling to manage the influx of containers, leading to long wait times and operational inefficiencies. This congestion exacerbates delays and adds to the overall costs of shipping goods.
Supply Chain Delays: As ports become bottlenecks, the timely delivery of goods is compromised. This affects the availability of products on store shelves, especially as we head into the holiday season, traditionally a peak period for consumer spending.Implications for the U.S. Navy

Implications for the U. S. Navy

Drawing from Alfred Mahan’s principles of sea power, the current instability in the Red Sea underscores the importance of maintaining control over critical maritime routes. The U.S. Navy’s presence in these regions ensures the security of trade routes, thereby safeguarding the global economy and national interests. Mahan emphasized that control of the seas, especially through a formidable navy, is crucial not only for wartime dominance but also for peacetime economic influence.

Implications for America

The economic implications of these disruptions are multifaceted:

Increased Consumer Prices: The rising costs of shipping are often passed down to consumers. Whether it’s electronics, clothing, or everyday household items, Americans will likely see higher prices at the checkout counter.
Inflationary Pressures: As transportation costs rise, so do the prices of goods. This can contribute to broader inflationary pressures, impacting the overall cost of living.
Business Costs: Companies that rely on imported goods face higher operational costs. These businesses may need to increase prices to maintain margins, further affecting consumer prices.
Supply Chain Reliability: The reliability of supply chains is crucial for economic stability. Persistent delays and disruptions can lead to stock shortages, affecting businesses’ ability to meet consumer demand and potentially leading to lost sales and revenue.

Lessons from Alfred Mahan

Nicholas Lambert’s book, “The Neptune Factor,” reexamines Mahan’s theories, arguing that sea power is not just about military might but also economic influence. Alfred Thayer Mahan, a prominent American naval officer and historian, is best known for his influential book, “The Influence of Sea Power upon History, 1660–1783.” Mahan’s groundbreaking ideas emphasized the strategic importance of a formidable naval presence to deter potential adversaries and ensure economic prosperity through control of maritime trade routes. Lambert emphasizes the need to integrate new technologies, such as cybersecurity and unmanned vehicles, and address environmental threats to maintain maritime dominance and economic security.

What Can Be Done?

To mitigate these impacts, several measures can be taken:

Diversifying Supply Chains: Companies can explore alternative routes and suppliers to reduce dependency on any single shipping lane.
Investing in Infrastructure: Enhancing port infrastructure and technology can improve efficiency and reduce congestion.
Policy Measures: Governments can play a role in ensuring maritime security and supporting international efforts to stabilize regions like the Red Sea.

Conclusion

Current disruptions in ocean shipping underscore the vulnerability of global supply chains to geopolitical events. As Americans, understanding these connections is crucial. The economic ripple effects—from increased consumer prices to broader inflationary pressures—highlight the importance of resilient and adaptive strategies in both business and policy.

By addressing these challenges proactively, we can better navigate the complexities of a globalized economy and ensure stability and prosperity for all.

Drawing from Mahan’s insights, we must recognize that sea power encompasses both military strength and economic influence. Maintaining a robust naval presence and addressing modern challenges is essential for safeguarding our economic security and way of life.

June 20, 2024June 20, 2024

Defending Allies: USS Ronald Reagan’s Mission to Secure the Philippine Sea Amid Rising Tensions

Defending Allies: USS Ronald Reagan’s Mission to Secure the Philippine Sea Amid Rising Tensions

Recent injuries inflicted on Filipino fishermen by Chinese forces in the shoals underscore the increasing tensions in the Philippine Sea. As these events unfold, the U.S. Navy’s forward-deployed carrier, the USS Ronald Reagan, plays a crucial role in maintaining regional stability and providing a deterrent against potential Chinese aggression.

The Strategic Importance of the USS Ronald Reagan

The USS Ronald Reagan, stationed in the Pacific, is undergoing resupply and refueling to extend its deterrence missions in the Philippine Sea. This action highlights the Pentagon’s commitment to a continued forward presence amid the escalating U.S.-China tensions. The strategic placement of the Reagan ensures that the U.S. can project significant air attack power throughout the region, protecting allies like the Philippines from potential threats.

The Threat of a “Fait Accompli” Scenario

A significant concern is the possibility of a “fait accompli” scenario, where China might quickly annex the Philippines or Taiwan before an allied response can be mobilized. This scenario is particularly worrying given China’s ongoing military maneuvers and blockades of small Philippine fishing boats. Kris Osborn noted, “Operating as a floating city with thousands of sailors and hundreds of attack planes and helicopters, the USS Ronald Reagan is likely having its deployment extended to ensure critical ‘proximity’.”

U.S. Support for the Philippines

The United States stands with its ally the Philippines and condemns the escalatory and irresponsible actions by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to deny the Philippines from lawfully delivering humanitarian supplies to service members stationed at the BRP Sierra Madre. Department Spokesperson Matthew Miller stated, “PRC vessels’ dangerous and deliberate use of water cannons, ramming, blocking maneuvers, and towing damaged Philippine vessels endangered the lives of Philippine service members, is reckless, and threatens regional peace and stability.”

The U.S. reaffirms that Article IV of the 1951 United States-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty extends to armed attacks on Philippine armed forces, public vessels, or aircraft – including those of its Coast Guard – anywhere in the South China Sea. Miller reiterated, “The United States reaffirms that Article IV of the 1951 United States-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty extends to armed attacks on Philippine armed forces, public vessels, or aircraft – including those of its Coast Guard – anywhere in the South China Sea.”

The Role of Carrier Strike Groups

The Reagan’s ability to deploy 5th-generation aircraft within striking distance of Chinese forces is a key element of the U.S. defense strategy. These aircraft can achieve air supremacy, significantly reducing the effectiveness of any Chinese military operation. The presence of the Reagan also ensures that the U.S. can quickly respond to any sudden moves by China, maintaining a balance of power in the region. Derek Grossman emphasized, “Manila is pressing forward with three other efforts… deepening its alliance with Washington, forging ahead on security drills and agreements with other countries in the region, and adopting a strategy of ‘assertive transparency’ toward Chinese encroachments.”

Commentary

As the founder of Americans for a Stronger Navy, I believe in peace and peace through strength. Diplomacy is essential, but there comes a time when we must draw a line in the sand and take action. I firmly believe that China will continue its aggression and other nefarious deeds until it is stopped. If they want war, then they better be prepared for one. It is crucial for the American public to engage and support the Navy. Internal conflict among ourselves only plays into the hands of our adversaries, which is a tactic straight out of the communist handbook.

Conclusion

The extended deployment of the USS Ronald Reagan in the Philippine Sea is a clear signal of the U.S. commitment to defending its allies and maintaining stability in the region. As tensions continue to rise, the Reagan’s presence is more critical than ever in preventing a potential crisis and ensuring the security of the Philippines.

By reinforcing our naval capabilities and maintaining a robust presence, we can deter aggression and protect the freedoms and security of our allies in the Indo-Pacific region. The injuries sustained by Filipino fishermen and the aggressive actions against the BRP Sierra Madre remind us of the real and present threats posed by Chinese expansionism, and underscore the necessity of a strong and ready U.S. Navy.

Sources:

Osborn, K. (2024, June 17). Defending the Philippines? USS Ronald Reagan Re-Supplied & Extended in Philippine Sea. Warrior Maven.
Miller, M. (2024, June 17). U.S. Support for the Philippines in the South China Sea. U.S. State Department.
Grossman, D. (2024, May 29). How to Respond to China’s Tactics in the South China Sea. Foreign Policy.

June 5, 2024

Debunking the USS Eisenhower Damage Claims After Houthi Strike Allegations

Introduction

In the realm of modern conflict, misinformation spreads almost as rapidly as the events themselves. A recent case involves claims by Yemeni Houthi rebels that they successfully struck the U.S. aircraft carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower in the Red Sea. These assertions were quickly debunked by multiple sources, yet they highlight the challenge of distinguishing fact from fiction in real-time.

The Allegations

Last Friday, Houthi military spokesperson Yahya Saree announced that missile strikes had targeted the USS Eisenhower. This announcement was followed by a second claim the next day, suggesting a “second targeting operation against the carrier during the past 24 hours” according to Reuters.

Thek Spread of Misinformation

Following these announcements, images began circulating online purporting to show the damage inflicted on the Eisenhower. A notable post on X (formerly Twitter) by user @iAmTheWarax claimed, “CONFIRMED: uss eisenhower (pictured docked for repairs in souda bay) hit and severely damaged by multiple houthi ballistic missiles.” This post included a satellite picture of a docked ship. Another post by @Alhussaini21S, viewed over 2.6 million times, showed what appeared to be an aircraft carrier with a large black mark on its runway.

The Reality

A thorough fact-check by Newsweek dismantled these claims. The images shared were not of the Eisenhower in the Red Sea. One image was of the Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov docked in Murmansk, Russia. The other was a doctored image of the Eisenhower docked in Norfolk, Virginia. The Pentagon confirmed there had been no strikes on the Eisenhower or the Norfolk port.

Further, Chinese satellite images dated June 4 showed the USS Eisenhower moving southward in the Red Sea without any visible damage, reinforcing the Pentagon’s position.

The Broader Context

The conflict between the Houthis and the Saudi-led coalition, supported by the U.S. and the U.K., has been ongoing since 2015. The recent Houthi claims emerged as part of retaliatory actions against strikes conducted by U.S. and U.K. forces on Houthi positions in Yemen.

Despite the assertions of direct hits on the Eisenhower and its escorts, U.S. Central Command reported that all Houthi munitions had been intercepted. No damage or injuries were reported on any U.S. vessel, further debunking the Houthi’s claims.

Conclusion

In an age where misinformation can easily overshadow reality, it is crucial to rely on verified sources and official statements. The false claims regarding the USS Eisenhower underscore the importance of critical evaluation of news, especially during conflicts. The Eisenhower remains operational, continuing its mission in the Red Sea, undeterred by the baseless allegations of damage.

By staying informed through credible sources, we can better navigate the complexities of modern-day conflicts and the accompanying flood of information, both true and false.

June 4, 2024June 4, 2024

A Call for Unity and Urgency: Addressing America’s Security Challenges

In his recent piece, “America Hits the Global Snooze Button” in The Wall Street Journal, Walter Russell Mead, the James Clarke Chace Professor of Foreign Affairs and Humanities at Bard College and a scholar at the Hudson Institute underscores the critical nature of current global threats, echoing a sentiment that I wholeheartedly share. The urgency cannot be overstated: China’s aggressive expansion, Russia’s advances in Ukraine, and Iran’s destabilizing actions in the Middle East constitute a significant and multifaceted threat to global stability. This demands stronger U.S. armed forces to counter these threats effectively.

The situation around Taiwan, the South China Sea and the Philippines exemplifies the complexities we face. China’s assertive territorial claims and militarization of the region threaten not only our allies but also global trade routes. It necessitates a stronger U.S. naval presence and support for regional partners. The Middle East is increasingly volatile and involves contested waters of the eastern Mediterranean, the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf. The U.S. Navy is the only effective naval force to counter the threats there and it is stretched thin.

Moreover, it is alarming to consider that our defense systems have potentially been compromised, which could be construed as an act of war. Yet, many Americans remain oblivious to these dangers, and who can blame them? After decades of conflict with little to show for it, the American public feels disillusioned, cheated, and exhausted. They see corruption and self-interest within the military-industrial complex and feel that politicians are complicit in perpetuating these issues.

The prevailing sentiment of mistrust extends to the government itself. Some argue for a more isolationist approach, focusing solely on defending our shores, while others, particularly younger generations, feel disenfranchised and disconnected from these geopolitical issues. This disconnect is further exacerbated by a widespread lack of historical knowledge, a consequence of its declining emphasis in our education system.

The threat of Chinese cyberattacks on global infrastructure is a significant concern. Chinese state-sponsored hacking has emerged as a critical global threat, targeting vital infrastructure across multiple nations. Recent reports reveal that Chinese military hackers have infiltrated Japan’s defense networks since 2020, accessing classified information about military capabilities and strategic plans. This breach, discovered by the U.S. National Security Agency, highlights the deep and persistent nature of Chinese cyber espionage. Despite efforts to secure these systems, the continued breaches underscore the sophistication and persistence of Chinese cyber capabilities. Additionally, China-based hackers have targeted U.S. government agencies, including the State and Commerce Departments, and critical sectors like transportation and utilities. These attacks are part of a broader strategy to gain access to sensitive information and disrupt vital infrastructure.

Additionally, recent reports indicate a troubling rise in cyberattacks against our critical infrastructure, including water supplies, by actors linked to China, Russia, and Iran. These cyberattacks do not just target water utilities but extend to other critical infrastructure, telecommunications networks, and security systems. They can disrupt access to essential services, steal intellectual property, and undermine our trade networks. The increasing frequency and sophistication of these attacks pose a significant threat to our national security and economic stability.

While Mead raises valid points about the severity of the threats we face, his politicization of the issue is counterproductive. The truth is, there is ample blame to go around, and what we need now more than ever is education and transparency. Americans deserve to understand the stakes and be assured of the integrity of those advocating for stronger defense measures. This is not a right versus left issue—it’s an American issue that requires a united, all-hands-on-deck approach.

A key mission of Americans for a Stronger Navy is to educate the public about these security challenges and the need for a stronger Navy. By fostering a national dialogue, we can bridge the gap between policymakers and the public, fostering mutual understanding and engagement. It is also crucial to emphasize the need for bipartisan cooperation in addressing these threats. A unified approach is necessary to effectively respond to the complex and evolving global security landscape.

In sum, the threats are indeed formidable, but trust is in short supply. Addressing this requires a commitment to honesty and clarity from our leaders, ensuring that the American public is both informed and engaged in the security decisions that will shape our future.

Thanks for listening.

Bill,
Americans for a Stronger Navy

May 7, 2024May 9, 2024

AI in Naval Warfare – From Logistics to Combat Strategy

Introduction from Americans for a Stronger Navy:

Hello, Bill Cullifer here with Americans for a Stronger Navy. Welcome to our inaugural episode of this enlightening series where we delve into transformative technologies reshaping naval operations. Throughout this series, we will explore various cutting-edge topics, including AI, unmanned systems, Directed Energy Weapons, cyber warfare, and more. Today, we begin with the crucial role of Artificial Intelligence in naval warfare.

Series Outline:

AI in Naval Warfare – This episode.
Uncrewed Systems – How drones and autonomous vehicles are changing naval tactics.
Directed Energy Weapons – The future of combat with lasers and high-energy systems.
Cyber and Electronic Warfare – Securing supremacy in digital battlefields.
Future Naval Strategies – Integrating new tech into traditional naval doctrines.

Overview: The Strategic Importance of AI in Military Operations AI’s role in military operations extends from enhancing logistical support to refining combat strategies. Its integration into naval operations promises significant advancements in operational efficiency and tactical decision-making.

Interview Segment: Insights from Admiral James Stavridis

We feature key insights from Admiral Stavridis during his interview with Fareed Zakaria on GPS. His expertise illuminates AI’s potential in transforming naval capabilities.

Logistics and Maintenance: AI’s predictive capabilities ensure higher readiness and efficiency.
Strategic Decision-Making: AI’s ability to analyze historical data aids in crucial decision-making processes.
Advanced Threat Response: The evolving role of AI in managing drone swarms and other asymmetric threats.

Why It Matters: Understanding the integration of AI into naval operations is crucial for anticipating how future conflicts will be managed and fought. AI not only enhances current capabilities but also opens new avenues in warfare strategy.

Implications for the Navy: Admiral Stavridis’ insights lead into a broader discussion on:

The necessity for ongoing training and adaptation among naval personnel to leverage AI effectively.
The potential shifts in naval strategy as AI technologies mature, particularly in terms of autonomous decision-making and real-time strategy adjustments.
Ethical and security considerations as AI becomes a pivotal element in defense.

Interview: CNN ZAKARIA and ADM. JAMES STAVRIDIS (RET.), FORMER NATO SUPREME ALLIED COMMANDER

CNN ZAKARIA: We humans have a lot to worry about these days, climate change and other pandemic, even the threat of World War Three. But the unregulated development of artificial intelligence might be as potent a threat as any, according to my next guest. He was NATO’s allied commander Eirope. And he’s now vice chair of global affairs at the Carlisle Group. His fascinating new book “2054 Novel,” which he co-wrote with Elliot Ackerman, very talented, is centered on the existential treat AI poses for the future of the world. Jim, pleasure to have you on. Fascinating how you’re writing these series of books. And this one is really about the A.I. race in military affairs. So first, I want to ask you, explain to us the power of A.I.
CNN ZAKARIA: So, you’re a — you’re a naval commander, what would A.I. allow you to do as a naval commander that you weren’t able to do when you were actually commanding ships?
ADM. JAMES STAVRIDIS (RET.), FORMER NATO SUPREME ALLIED COMMANDER: Let me give you three very practical things. Number one — and it doesn’t sound sexy, but it’s logistics and maintenance. Artificial Intelligence has a capability to predict when a particular set of maintenance functions are needed, make sure that the spare parts are in train, all of that done in a way that is much more efficient, much more capable.
ZAKARIA: But that’s huge because it keeps the ships in permanent readiness.
STAVRIDIS: Absolutely. We always say in the military, the amateurs are the ones talking about strategy. The professionals are focused on logistics. That’s what wins wars.
But number two, artificial intelligence will allow a commander — say I was the captain of a destroyer, which I was. If I had an A.I. advising me, plugged into my decision process, that A.I. will have access to every naval battle ever fought. It would be capable of scanning the horizon of history and whispering into the commander, you really ought to think about this.
And then third and finally, and we’re seeing the edges of this in Ukraine, drone, swarms, bringing them together in very lethal ways. We currently can’t quite do that. Artificial intelligence will make swarming drones the greatest threat by mid-century.
ZAKARIA: You talk a lot about the A.I. race and it’s really U.S. versus China.
STAVRIDIS: Yes.
ZAKARIA: Who’s ahead?
STAVRIDIS: U.S. marginally ahead. Our mutual friend, Eric Schmidt, did a marvelous set of research on this a couple of years ago, and he would have said then, we’re about a year ahead of China.
My sense from my sources, China is closing that gap. This is the foot race that will determine geopolitical superiority by mid-century.
ZAKARIA: Are we building the right kind of military for that kind of world?
STAVRIDIS: Absolutely. And let me add another example in terms of drones versus naval. Look what’s happening in the Black Sea. The Russian Black Sea fleet a third of it is on the bottom of the Black Sea, drinking seawater as we would say in the business.
Why? Not because Ukraine has a Navy, they don’t. It’s because the Ukrainians have used both air and surface drones. So, to your question
ZAKARIA: Drones are amazing. The minister showed them to me. They looked like toy boats —
STAVRIDIS: Yes.
ZAKARIA: — and they are really highly lethal drones that can sink these hundred — hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of warships.
STAVRIDIS: Correct. And so, the question then becomes, are the carriers still viable? I think they are for the moment, for the tenure future, 15-year future. Boy, you get much beyond that. And the capacity of massive swarms of drones accompanied by cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, all linked together by artificial intelligence, it will make those crown jewels of the fleet, our aircraft carriers vulnerable.
ZAKARIA: So, you’ve — you’ve held very, very high military office. And you know that there are some people who worry that Donald Trump, where he to be elected again, would politicize the military. Do you worry about that?
STAVRIDIS: I do. And I think that the greatest aspect of our national security isn’t a political military. And we would edge in to politics into that force at great peril to the republic. At the moment, all of my contacts in the active-duty military reassure me that the military continues to regard itself as apolitical, followers of the constitution. Let’s hope it stays that way.
ZAKARIA: And when you look at NATO, you were the former supreme allied commander, great, great title, by the way, there are people in Europe who worry a lot about Trump and NATO. And what I’ve heard people say is it’s — he doesn’t have to pull out of NATO. He just has to say, I’m not going to defend Latvia, Lithuania —
STAVRIDIS: Estonia.
ZAKARIA: Right. Because it’s a sort of — in some ways the whole — NATO is basically — it’s a psychological game. It’s the thread is psychological that the U.S. will get involved. That’s what Putin has to be calculating. And if the president says something like that — the NATO — the building can continue, the meetings can continue, but the heart of it is lost.
STAVRIDIS: We always say deterrence is the combination of capability and credibility.
NATO is incredibly capable. The defense budget of the United States and the Europeans together is well over 10 times that of Russia. The population is well over five times the size of Russia.
So, the capability is not the problem. You’ve put your finger on it, it’s the credibility. And yes, I would be very concerned about a Trump presidency that did not actively support and, indeed, lead within NATO. That’s a real concern.
ZAKARIA: From the former supreme allied commander of NATO.
STAVRIDIS: My pleasure, Fareed.
ZAKARIA: Thank you, sir.
STAVRIDIS: Thank you.

Further Viewing

Carrie Council interview with Elliot Ackerman and Admiral Stavridis:

Outro

Thank you for joining us for the first episode of our series. Don’t forget to subscribe to our podcast on your favorite platform to ensure you don’t miss any of our discussions on the future of naval warfare. Together, we aim to keep you informed and engaged with the latest in naval defense technology.

April 12, 2024April 12, 2024

Can America Reclaim Its Shipbuilding Might? A Deep Dive into Delays and the Road Ahead

The backbone of American naval power, the U.S. Navy’s shipbuilding industry, is facing a critical juncture. Years of delays in key programs have raised concerns about the Navy’s ability to maintain its edge and keep pace with potential adversaries. But the path forward is a complex one, fraught with economic considerations, national security implications, and the very real question of what price tag comes with rebuilding domestic shipbuilding capacity.

This investigative series will delve into the issue, giving voice to a range of stakeholders and exploring the potential solutions. We, the American people, ultimately foot the bill and rely on a strong Navy. This series aims to provide transparency and spark conversation about how to best move forward.

The Problem: Delays and Mounting Concerns

Recent reports paint a concerning picture. The Navy acknowledges delays of up to three years in major shipbuilding programs, impacting vessels like the Columbia-class submarine and the Constellation-class frigate. These delays raise serious questions about the Navy’s ability to meet its operational needs and deter potential threats.

Stakeholders: Who Has a Say?

Understanding the issue requires hearing from all sides. We’ll be speaking with:

Navy Leadership: What are the Navy’s specific concerns with delays? What solutions are they exploring?
Shipbuilders: What challenges are they facing that contribute to delays?
Policy Experts: How do these delays impact national security on a global scale?
Taxpayers: What are the economic implications of various solutions, including potential cost increases for domestically-built ships?

A New Twist: The Secretary of the Navy Visits South Korea

Adding another wrinkle to the story, in February 2024, U.S. Secretary of the Navy Carlos Del Toro visited shipyards in South Korea, a world leader in shipbuilding. This visit sparked speculation about whether the Navy might be considering partnerships or outsourcing some shipbuilding efforts to alleviate domestic delays.

New Details Emerge: A Look at the Press Release

An official U.S. Navy press release sheds light on Secretary Del Toro’s visit and reveals some key details:

Focus on Collaboration: The primary goal of the visit was to attract Korean investment in U.S. shipbuilding facilities. This suggests the Navy is exploring partnerships with South Korean companies to bolster domestic capacity and efficiency.
Advanced Technology: The press release highlights Secretary Del Toro’s interest in the advanced technology used by Korean shipbuilders. Collaboration could potentially lead to improvements in U.S. shipbuilding techniques.
Long-Term Vision: The press release emphasizes Secretary Del Toro’s vision for a revitalized U.S. shipbuilding industry that encompasses both commercial and naval vessels. This broader perspective suggests a long-term strategy for strengthening the entire maritime sector.

Looking Ahead: Building Here vs. Outsourcing

The debate hinges on two central options:

Domestic Shipbuilding: Renewed investment in American shipyards could create jobs and bolster domestic manufacturing. But it might come at a cost in terms of time and expense.
Outsourcing: Turning to foreign shipyards could expedite production and potentially reduce costs. However, this raises concerns about national security and dependence on foreign entities.

A Complex Calculus: Speed, Cost, and Security

The ideal solution likely lies somewhere between these extremes. We’ll explore:

The “cost” of outsourcing: Is it solely financial? What are the potential security risks of relying on foreign shipbuilders for critical naval vessels?
Maximizing Efficiency: Can domestic shipyards improve efficiency to compete with foreign options?
The Long-Term View: What does a sustainable shipbuilding strategy look like for the U.S.?

We Need Your Voice: Join the Conversation

This investigation is for the American people. We encourage your questions, comments, and insights. As we delve deeper into the issue, let’s have an open dialogue about the future of American shipbuilding.

April 8, 2024April 8, 2024

At the Helm of Uncertainty: Charting a Course Through the Navy’s Budgetary and Operational Storms

Introduction

In the vast and often tumultuous sea that is national defense, the US Navy stands as a beacon of strength and resilience. Yet, even the mightiest fleets face storms that test their mettle and resolve. Recent revelations about significant delays in critical shipbuilding programs amidst the rising tide of strategic competition underscore the challenges at the helm of America’s naval future.

The Heart of the Matter

As the Navy’s largest trade show, the Sea-Air-Space Exposition, unfolded without the customary briefings on marquee shipbuilding programs, the waves of concern grew taller. A damning internal report unveiled sweeping delays across four pivotal shipbuilding endeavors, casting shadows over our naval preparedness against the backdrop of an expanding Chinese fleet.

The Delays Unpacked:

The cascading delays, stretching from one to three years across various programs, reveal a complex web of supply chain disruptions, exacerbated by the global pandemic, and a pattern of changing designs mid-construction. At the core of this storm is not just a battle against time and resources, but a struggle to adapt and realign with the relentless pace of technological and geopolitical shifts.

Implications for Strategic Readiness:

The ripples of these delays extend far beyond the shipyards. They touch upon the very essence of our strategic readiness and our ability to project power across the globe. As we navigate through these troubled waters, the need for a resilient and adaptable naval force has never been more pronounced.

Charting a Course Forward

In the face of these challenges, the path forward demands more than just steadfast resolve; it requires a comprehensive reevaluation of our shipbuilding and procurement strategies. This involves not only addressing the immediate hurdles of supply chain and workforce shortages but also fostering a more agile and responsive industrial base that can weather the storms of uncertainty.

A Call to Action

As we stand at this critical juncture, the call to action resonates louder than ever. It is a call for collaboration between the Navy, Congress, and industry partners to forge innovative solutions that ensure the timely delivery of our future fleet. It is a call for vigilance and adaptability in the face of evolving threats and opportunities.

Conclusion

The journey ahead is fraught with challenges, yet it is within the tempest that the true strength of our Navy and our nation is forged. As we chart a course through these budgetary and operational storms with foresight, innovation, and unwavering commitment, we face a critical examination of our shipbuilding practices and the evolving demands we place upon them. Bryan Clark, a seasoned voice from the Hudson Institute, articulates this sentiment, noting, ‘The Navy just keeps larding new requirements on the ships. And each new generation is so much more sophisticated than the predecessor that inevitably you’re going to get to the point where you’re just asking too much of the shipbuilding industry to punch out the ships on quick timeliness.’ This reflection serves as a poignant reminder of the delicate balance between ambition and feasibility, urging us to navigate these waters with a keen eye on both the horizon and the depths beneath..

In the ever-evolving narrative of our Navy’s strength and readiness, each challenge we encounter is an opportunity to reaffirm our resolve and adaptability. Let’s engage in this crucial conversation, not as mere observers, but as active participants in shaping the future of American naval power. Together, we can navigate through the noise and chart a course towards a stronger, more resilient Navy.

March 25, 2024March 25, 2024

Charting the Course: The Future of American Naval Power – An Evaluation of US Navy Strengthening Plans FY25

In our previous blog post, we acknowledged the importance of defining requirements before diving into the intricacies of Navy budget analysis.

We appreciate the insightful feedback received from a reader who highlighted this point, and we recognize the valuable insights it brings to our exploration of the Navy’s budget.

The US Navy plays a vital role in global security and national defense. As the geopolitical landscape evolves, it’s crucial to assess current plans for strengthening the Navy’s capabilities. This analysis will delve into various proposals and strategies, aiming to foster a well-rounded understanding.

To gain further insights into the Navy’s FY25 budget request, let’s take a moment to view a C-SPAN video featuring a press briefing by Navy officials. This briefing delves into the details of the proposed budget and its implications for strengthening the Navy.

Building a Stronger Navy

Building a stronger Navy requires a comprehensive understanding of its present and future needs. We explored critical areas like artificial intelligence (AI) and unmanned systems in our “Charting the Course – The Future of Naval Power” series.

We also delved into the DDG(X) program, the next-generation guided-missile destroyer envisioned as the backbone of the future surface fleet. You can find a more detailed analysis of the DDG(X) program within the series and by clicking here the summary of the series.

Evaluating Strengthening Plans

This framework focuses on several key criteria:

Cost-effectiveness: We will analyze the financial feasibility of each plan, considering both upfront costs and long-term maintenance expenses. While we may not have in-house accounting expertise to conduct an in-depth line-by-line budget analysis of each plan, we are committed to evaluating the broader financial feasibility based on credible data sources such as official Navy reports and analyses from respected think tanks.
Impact on Fleet Capabilities: The effectiveness of each plan in enhancing the Navy’s operational capabilities will be a critical evaluation point. This includes factors like firepower, survivability, and mission versatility.
Alignment with Strategic Objectives: We will assess how well each plan aligns with the Navy’s long-term strategic goals and national defense priorities.
Technological Considerations: The evaluation will take into account the technological feasibility and adaptability of each plan in light of evolving defense technology.

To conduct this analysis, we will rely on a variety of data sources. These include official Navy reports, independent analyses from think tanks, and insights from experienced naval experts.

By considering diverse perspectives and utilizing credible data, we aim to present a balanced and informative evaluation.

Examining Existing Programs

The DDG(X) program, among others, is a significant initiative aimed at modernizing the Navy’s fleet. A dedicated section within this analysis can detail the specific features and potential impact of the DDG(X) program in light of the established evaluation criteria. (Here, you can delve deeper into the DDG(X) program) [Refer to previous outline for details on how to approach the DDG(X) analysis]

Other Strengthening Plans: While the DDG(X) program represents a significant initiative, it’s important to acknowledge the existence of other proposals for strengthening the Navy. We are committed to analyzing these plans as well, utilizing the established evaluation framework.

Seeking Balanced Perspectives

Engaging with experienced analysts and experts from diverse backgrounds is vital for a comprehensive evaluation. We will actively seek out a range of viewpoints to ensure a balanced and informative discussion. This includes considering the perspectives expressed by stakeholders like Rep. Rob Wittman.

The quote from Rep. Wittman (March 11 statement) exemplifies the ongoing debate surrounding Navy force structure and shipbuilding cadence. By incorporating a variety of voices, we strive to present a nuanced picture of the challenges and opportunities facing the US Navy.

Moving Forward

Through this evaluation, we hope to contribute to a well-informed conversation regarding the future of the US Navy. By analyzing existing plans and fostering a dialogue with experts, we can help chart a course towards a stronger and more effective maritime force. We will continue this discussion in future blog posts, delving deeper into specific plans and the findings of our analysis.

Call to Action

We encourage our readers to share their feedback and suggestions for additional resources, especially regarding the financial aspects of these plans. Your input is valuable in ensuring a well-rounded analysis. We also invite you to engage on our social media Facebook page by following the links beloe to share your thoughts on strengthening the US Navy.

March 14, 2024March 14, 2024

A Closer Look: The Department of the Navy’s FY 2025 Budget Request

Department of the Navy Fiscal 2025 Budget Proposal

Greetings, members and friends of Americans for a Stronger Navy!

This is the first in a series of deep dives examining the details of the Department of the Navy’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 President’s Budget request. We’re launching a series analyzing the details – from ship construction to sailor well-being. Is the Navy getting enough to fight?

This blueprint outlines the Navy’s funding priorities for the coming year, impacting everything from our national security posture to the lives of our dedicated sailors and Marines.

Key Takeaways:

Modest Increase: The budget request of $257.6 billion represents a small increase (0.7%) from FY24.
Readiness First: The Navy prioritizes maintaining a ready and capable force with investments in ship maintenance, training, and operational deployments.
Modernization Matters: Funding is allocated for next-generation submarines, unmanned vehicles, and advanced aircraft.
Investing in People: The budget includes a pay raise for service members, increased recruitment efforts, and improved quality-of-life initiatives for sailors and Marines.
Partnerships for Power: The Navy emphasizes strengthening strategic relationships with allied nations.

Implications for the Navy:

Maintaining Maritime Dominance: The budget supports the Navy’s role as the primary instrument of sea control, essential for protecting our interests worldwide.
Focus on the Future: Investments in research and development ensure the Navy remains at the forefront of technological innovation.
Efficiency and Optimization: Upgrading shipyards and infrastructure aims to streamline operations and maintenance.

Implications for Navy Personnel:

Pay and Benefits Boost: A 4.5% pay increase and increased recruitment/retention bonuses offer a competitive edge.
Investing in Quality of Life: Improved housing, childcare, and professional development opportunities boost morale and retention.
Focus on Sailor Safety: Increased funding for mental health and suicide prevention programs prioritizes the well-being of our personnel.

Implications for Suppliers:

Potential Growth: Increased shipbuilding and aircraft procurement could translate to more contracts for defense contractors.
Modernization Opportunities: Investments in shipyard infrastructure may open doors for companies specializing in construction and engineering.

Implications for the American Public:

A Strong Navy, a Safe Nation: A well-funded and modernized Navy safeguards American interests and deters potential adversaries.
Investing in Security: The budget reflects a commitment to national security, a critical concern for all Americans.
Supporting Our Heroes: The focus on sailor and Marine well-being aligns with the public’s desire to see our service members thrive.

The Road Ahead

Americans for a Stronger Navy will continue to analyze this budget request in detail. We’ll be looking closely at whether the funding levels are sufficient to maintain a truly powerful Navy in the face of evolving threats. We’ll also be advocating for policies that prioritize the well-being of our sailors and Marines, the strength of our shipbuilding industry, and ultimately, the safety and security of the American people.

Stay tuned for further updates and opportunities to get involved!

February 22, 2024February 23, 2024

Reinforcing America’s Pacific Defense through Strategic Partnerships

The First Island Chain, extending from Japan through Taiwan to the Philippines and Borneo.
**NOTE TO READER:** The blue line should go between Taiwan and China because Taiwan is an integral component of the First Island Chain.

Introduction

In an era where global dynamics are rapidly evolving, the strategic importance of the Pacific region in maintaining America’s defense capabilities cannot be overstressed. A key element, often overlooked even by the well-informed, is the mid-Pacific chain of islands. These islands are not just dots on the map but pivotal assets in the geopolitical chessboard, ensuring America’s military and strategic superiority in the Asia-Pacific.

Strategic Significance of the Compacts of Free Association

The First Island Chain’s Defense Backbone

The First Island Chain, extending from Japan through Taiwan to the Philippines and Borneo, forms a natural barrier crucial for regional stability and security. However, its defense is untenable without a secure base of operations in the central Pacific, provided by the Compacts of Free Association (COFA) states: Palau, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of Marshall Islands.

Guardians of the Central Pacific

These nations, through COFA agreements with the U.S., offer more than just strategic locations; they ensure American military mobility and operational freedom across a vast east-west corridor. This not only deters potential adversaries but also fortifies America’s defense posture across the Pacific.

Financial and Diplomatic Dimensions

A Cost-Effective Investment

At a glance, the financial commitment to the COFA states—$2.3 billion over 20 years—may seem substantial. However, when contextualized within the broader U.S. defense budget and the strategic value it brings, this investment is not only prudent but also cost-effective. The COFA agreements represent a fraction of America’s defense expenditure but play a critical role in maintaining peace and stability in the region.

Reciprocal Benefits

Beyond financial aid, the COFA agreements encompass deeper ties, including the right for COFA citizens to work in the U.S., many of whom serve in the U.S. military at commendable rates. This reciprocal relationship strengthens cultural and economic bonds, enhancing the strategic partnership beyond mere financial transactions.

Why This Matters

In the current geopolitical climate, where the balance of power in the Pacific is increasingly contested, the role of the COFA states becomes even more critical. The strategic locations of these island nations offer unparalleled advantages for surveillance, rapid deployment, and logistical support, essential for deterring aggression and ensuring regional security. The renewal of the COFA agreements is not just a matter of policy but a cornerstone of America’s Pacific defense strategy.

Conclusion

“The strategic landscape of the Pacific is intricately defined by the mid-Pacific islands, which are essential for our defense strategy. Dale A Jenkins, a Senior Advisor to Americans for a Stronger Navy and the author of ‘Diplomats and Admirals,’ poignantly underscores the critical significance of these islands within our defense framework—a fact that often eludes even the well-informed.”

As we navigate the complexities of contemporary geopolitics, the renewal of our agreements with these islands transcends mere policy—it’s an essential investment in the bedrock of America’s security and its leadership stance in the Pacific.

For entities like the Americans for a Stronger Navy and all advocates for regional peace and stability, championing these agreements is not just strategic but an imperative.

These partnerships stand as a testament to our enduring commitment to our Pacific allies, underpinning the collective security that safeguards our nation’s interests and upholds the values we share with our friends across the vast expanse of the Pacific.