Your recent commentary, “Supply Chains Are Critical Infrastructure. It’s Time U.S. Policy Caught Up,” correctly identifies supply chains as battlefields targeted by America’s rivals. But while you focus on new legislation and bureaucratic reforms, the real lesson of Maersk, Colonial Pipeline, and Nord Stream is not just a lack of resilience—it’s that corporate offshoring created a moral hazard. For decades, profits were privatized while risks were socialized. Now taxpayers are being asked to underwrite the fallout.
The True Cost of Externalized Risk Maersk, Colonial Pipeline, and Nord Stream all exposed the same vulnerability: companies prioritized efficiency and profit over redundancy and security. When their fragility became a national crisis, it was the government—and by extension, the American taxpayer—that had to absorb the cost. Legislation like the CHIPS Act or a pharmaceutical reserve may help, but these measures are ultimately subsidies for corporate strategic failures.
The Navy as a Necessary Public Good The U.S. government should not exist to de-risk private balance sheets. Its mission is to deter adversaries. And only the U.S. Navy has the reach, capability, and mandate to secure the sea lanes, ports, and subsea infrastructure that underpin 90 percent of global trade.
The inherent conflict of interest: CEOs answer to shareholders, not to national security.
The Navy as the ultimate hedge: no private firm will pay to safeguard global commerce; that burden falls on the fleet.
Deterrence through capability: a dominant Navy ensures freedom of navigation, secures subsea lifelines, and guarantees the supply lines needed for both commerce and force projection.
Congress Must Do More Congress should pass the Promoting Resilient Supply Chains Act, but it must not mistake legislation for deterrence. Protecting the arteries of our economy requires a stronger, larger, and better-resourced Navy. Anything less is subsidizing failure.
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 mission is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.
Somewhere in the South China Sea right now, a Filipino coast guard crew is preparing to head back to Second Thomas Shoal. They know what’s waiting—Chinese vessels that will shadow them, harass them, maybe hit them with water cannons or attempt to ram their boats.
They’re going anyway. They’re bringing supplies to their troops stationed on a rusting ship grounded on a reef that lies well within Philippine waters, recognized under international law.
They’re going because some things are worth standing up for. Because sovereignty matters. Because the rule of law at sea isn’t optional.
As the United States Navy marks its 250th anniversary, there’s no better example of why we exist than the U.S.–Philippine partnership—complicated, hard-won, and stronger than ever.
The Long Road to Partnership
Our relationship with the Philippines began painfully. After defeating Spain in 1898, America annexed the Philippines. Filipinos who had fought for independence resisted fiercely. The Philippine–American War was brutal—thousands of U.S. service members killed, tens of thousands of Filipino combatants lost, and many more civilians dead.
That legacy still shapes Filipino attitudes toward foreign military presence. Their wariness isn’t ingratitude—it’s rooted in history.
But World War II forged a different bond. Filipino and American forces fought side by side at Bataan and Corregidor. An estimated one million Filipino civilians died during the occupation. General MacArthur’s promise—“I shall return”— and the liberation that followed forged bonds in blood that endure.
After independence in 1946, Clark Air Base and Subic Bay Naval Base became crown jewels of U.S. power in the Pacific. During Vietnam, Subic Bay handled over 200 ship visits a month. These bases were economic engines but also symbols of resentment. By 1992, rising nationalism and environmental damage forced the U.S. military to leave.
For two decades, the alliance drifted. Then China changed the equation.
What Brought Us Back
Beijing’s growing assertiveness—seizing Scarborough Shoal in 2012, building militarized artificial islands, and harassing Filipino fishermen—forced Manila to turn again to Washington.
The 2014 Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) provided rotational access to Philippine bases without creating new U.S. installations—a distinction that matters for Filipino sovereignty. By 2023, the Philippines had opened nine EDCA sites, facing both Taiwan and the South China Sea.
Today, U.S. and Philippine forces conduct more than 500 joint activities each year. The Balikatan exercises now involve 14,000 troops in full-scale scenarios. New U.S. funding—$500 million in 2024—underscores how central this partnership has become.
The Risks We Should Acknowledge
No alliance is without risks.
The 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty could pull the U.S. into conflict over reefs or shoals. Americans could find themselves at war in disputes they barely understand.
Some argue we should fix our own maintenance backlogs and shipbuilding delays before investing abroad. Others warn our expanded presence could accelerate Chinese militarization instead of deterring it. And Philippine politics—sometimes turbulent—carry reputational risk for the U.S.
These are real concerns. But the alternative—a South China Sea dominated by Beijing, where international law collapses and small democracies are swallowed by larger neighbors—is far more dangerous.
The Bigger Picture: China’s Campaign
The Philippines is not the issue—it’s the line in the sand. Incidents at Second Thomas Shoal are part of a systematic campaign of Chinese aggression.
Harassment of U.S. forces: Military lasers aimed at U.S. aircraft, fighters buzzing within feet of American planes, warships cutting across our destroyers.
Rapid naval buildup: The PLA Navy is on track to field over 395 ships by 2025—outnumbering our Navy in its own region.
Encirclement of Taiwan: Beijing rehearses blockades and missile strikes, preparing to coerce neighbors and challenge U.S. access.
Cyber warfare: Groups like Volt Typhoon have penetrated U.S. power grids, water systems, and telecom networks. These intrusions aren’t hypothetical—they’re pre-positioning for conflict.
Disinformation and espionage: From spy balloons to propaganda campaigns, Beijing is shaping the information battlefield.
The message is clear: this is not about a shoal, it’s about the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific.
Why Americans Should Care
Freedom of Navigation: Nearly a third of global trade flows through the South China Sea. If Beijing can dictate access there, every sea lane becomes vulnerable.
Economic Security: This isn’t just about faraway reefs. Those sea lanes carry the fuel that powers your car, the medicine in your cabinet, and the goods that stock your shelves. During COVID, Americans got a hard lesson in what happens when supply chains break—higher prices, empty shelves, and uncertainty.
If China controls those routes, disruption won’t be temporary. It would mean sustained leverage over the American economy: higher grocery and gas prices, layoffs in U.S. factories, and rising costs on everything from mortgages to credit cards.
Control of the South China Sea isn’t an abstract problem overseas. It’s leverage over the American economy—and your family’s budget.
Alliance Credibility: Our 1951 treaty with Manila sends a message to allies everywhere—do U.S. commitments mean anything?
Democratic Solidarity: Manila is modernizing, partnering with Japan and Australia, and standing up to pressure. Supporting them means supporting a network of democracies.
The Choice Ahead
For 250 years, the United States Navy has defended freedom of the seas. At its best, it has enabled smaller nations to prosper without massive militaries of their own.
Today, Filipino coast guard crews at Second Thomas Shoal embody the courage and loyalty of a steadfast ally. They aren’t backing down, even when outnumbered.
The question is whether America will do the same.
As we celebrate our Navy’s 250th anniversary, we face a choice: Do we stand with democracies under pressure? Do we defend international law at sea? Do we maintain a Navy strong enough to prevent wars rather than fight them?
I know my answer. It’s why I write. It’s why Americans for a Stronger Navy exists. Because a strong Navy is what allows the world to prosper under the rule of law—not the rule of the biggest bully.
China’s cyber warfare escalation proves the need for a stronger Navy. For two years, we’ve warned that adversaries were already inside our homeland; today’s revelations confirm it and raise the stakes. Cyber defenses matter, but only forward-deployed ships provide the physical presence, analog resilience, and immediate deterrence that malware can’t erase. As we argue at home, Beijing prepares—time is running out to rally behind our sailors, our civilian maritime industry, and the shipbuilding surge America needs.
The Vindication No One Wanted This morning’s New York Times revelation should serve as a wake-up call, but for those paying attention, it reads like an inevitable conclusion. Despite CIA Director William Burns confronting China’s Minister of State Security in May 2023 with evidence of malicious code embedded in America’s critical infrastructure, China ignored the warnings and escalated operations.
As we’ve written before: “Most people don’t realize it yet. We are already in a quiet war. Not with bombs. Not with missiles. But with fentanyl, with financial schemes, and with cyber attacks.”
Today’s reporting proves we were right. The question is: why did it take a CIA director’s secret mission and a massive intelligence failure for mainstream media to acknowledge the obvious?
Silicon Valley’s Role in America’s Vulnerability Before we talk solutions, we must address culpability. Silicon Valley—the same industry that promised to “connect the world”—has systematically created the vulnerabilities that China now exploits.
Supply Chain Sellout: Manufacturing moved to China, transferring critical knowledge of hardware vulnerabilities.
Backdoor Bonanza: Even solar panels and batteries carry hidden back doors that could one day flip a switch against us.
Data Harvesting: Social media platforms collected massive datasets, much of which inevitably found its way into Chinese intelligence.
Infrastructure Integration: Cloud services created single points of failure that adversaries can exploit across sectors simultaneously.
Executives got rich while selling America’s digital sovereignty. They dismissed security concerns as “protectionism” and prioritized market access over national security. Where is the accountability?
The Secret Meeting That Changed Nothing The Times reveals that Burns’ confrontation with Chen Yixin was professional but meaningless. When presented with evidence of cyber intrusions, China’s intelligence chief “gave nothing away.”
China’s real response came later: Salt Typhoon—a massive, yearslong intrusion targeting “nearly every American” and dozens of countries. This was not diplomacy failing. It was China demonstrating that cyber warfare is a strategic pillar, not a negotiable issue.
As Rear Admiral Mike Studeman warned: “The reality is that adversaries have insinuated themselves in our homeland… and continue to exploit our society from the inside out.”
Why Naval Power Matters More After Cyber Escalation Cyber warfare doesn’t eliminate the need for naval power—it makes it more critical.
The Infrastructure Hostage Crisis We warned that adversaries target our banks, pipelines, and power grids. Today’s reporting confirms it. But there’s one thing they can’t hack: ships already forward-deployed.
The Communications Blackout Modern naval operations rely on networks China has proven it can disrupt. The solution isn’t cybersecurity alone—it’s having more ships already in position when networks go dark.
The Logistics Nightmare China can disrupt ports, fuel, and supply chains simultaneously. Forward-deployed naval power bypasses these vulnerabilities.
The Taiwan Test Case China’s cyber strategy aims to create an impossible choice: accept aggression or risk massive retaliation against U.S. infrastructure. But this calculation changes with a larger forward-deployed fleet:
Ships on station can’t be cyber-attacked out of position
Redundant communications across multiple vessels mitigate disruption
Immediate response capability denies China consolidation time
A visible presence deters aggression before it begins
The Call to Action We’ve argued for 24 months that the future of America depends on our sailors, our civilian maritime industry, and a Navy that protects them both. Today’s revelations make this argument irrefutable.
Every day Congress delays emergency shipbuilding, China gains ground. Every month without new investment deepens our vulnerability. Call your representatives. Demand they fund emergency naval expansion now.
Beyond China Russia, Iran, and North Korea are studying these techniques. Naval power provides what cyber defenses cannot: physical presence immune to digital attack.
Ships can’t be deleted by malware. Naval gunfire doesn’t require Wi-Fi. Sailors can’t be hacked out of existence.
Silicon Valley’s Reckoning Day Congress must investigate how U.S. tech companies:
Facilitated Chinese access to critical technologies
Ignored warnings in favor of market access
Enabled mass data collection for foreign intelligence
Built cloud infrastructures that created systemic single points of failure
Executives who sold out American sovereignty should be held to the same scrutiny as defense contractors.
The Validation We Didn’t Want Being right about China’s cyber warfare escalation brings no satisfaction. We would rather have been wrong. Instead, today proves China is pursuing cyber warfare and naval expansion simultaneously. America must respond with both—better cybersecurity and a stronger Navy.
Conclusion: The Time for Half-Measures is Over For 24 months, we’ve warned that America faces adversaries already inside our homeland. Today proves they didn’t waste those 24 months—they dug in deeper.
The question is no longer whether we can afford emergency naval expansion. The question is whether we can afford another 24 months of delay.
That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter — a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late. Let’s roll.
Introduction As a former U.S. Navy destroyer sailor from the ’70s and founder of Americans for a Stronger Navy, I’ve seen firsthand how sea power isn’t only about ships—it’s about people, industry, and the trade that keeps America moving. This isn’t a Beltway debate; it touches your grocery bill, your job, and the undersea cables that carry your paycheck.
In this interview, Captain Brent D. Sadler, USN (Ret.), discusses the ideas from his book U.S. Naval Power in the 21st Century: A New Strategy for Facing the Chinese and Russian Threat. He calls this framework naval statecraft. In Washington circles, the same concept is often referred to as maritime statecraft—a term meant to highlight the economic and commercial side of sea power. As Sadler makes clear, the two are essentially the same. What matters is the substance: reconnecting America’s Navy with shipyards, supply chains, and allies.
If we want peace, prosperity, and fewer crises, we must rebuild the muscle behind the flag—logistics, repair, and a maritime workforce. This interview is a practical roadmap. —Bill
Overview Captain Brent D. Sadler, USN (Ret.), argues that America must reconnect military power with economics, industry, and trade—what he calls naval (or “maritime”) statecraft. It’s not a new strategy so much as a return to our roots: the Navy as a warfighter, a shaper of peace, and a protector of commerce. That means rebuilding ships and shipyards, restoring sealift and logistics, re-wiring alliances for industrial capacity, and aligning innovation with both commercial and military needs.
What Is Naval/Maritime Statecraft—and Why It Matters
More than combat: the Navy deters war, protects trade, and shapes the environment in peacetime.
Break the silos: integrate defense, diplomacy, and economics so China can’t “triangulate” between them.
Update the structure: organize like it’s a long competition again—industry, ports, sealift, and policy working together.
Lessons from History
Avoid a “Phony War”: weak industrial bases turn short crises into long wars.
Operate where you may have to fight: know the people, ports, and waters before a crisis.
Today’s Pressing Challenges
Industrial shortfall: workforce gaps, thin supply chains, and insufficient naval architects and yards.
Logistics as Achilles’ heel: too few tankers, dry cargo/ammo ships, and assured fuel storage after Red Hill.
Economic leverage: China’s dominance in shipbuilding, shipping fleets, and port stakes shapes global trade on its terms.
Undersea infrastructure: seabed cables and pipelines are targets; cyber and space resilience are now core to sea power.
A Practical Path Forward
Demand and Shipyards: use smart incentives (e.g., Jones Act demand, allied capital) to expand U.S. yard capacity.
Human Capital: rebuild the trades—welders, pipefitters, naval architects—and grow maritime education pipelines.
Innovation with Purpose: from advanced logistics to modular cargo, small modular reactors, and data-driven supply chains—commercial breakthroughs that also serve military sustainment.
Allied Muscle: tap allied shipping and yards (Japan, South Korea, Europe, Canada) to scale capacity fast and politically sustainably.
Why Americans Should Care Everything from groceries to phones rides ships and undersea cables. If adversaries control ports, fleets, and repair yards—or cut our cables—prices spike, jobs suffer, and crises last longer. Maritime strength keeps daily life predictable.
Implications for the Navy Prioritize logistics ships, fuel resilience, dispersed Pacific access, and contested-environment sustainment. Tie operational concepts to a revitalized industrial base so the fleet you plan is the fleet you can build, crew, repair, and keep at sea.
Implications for Our Allies A stronger U.S. maritime sector reduces dangerous dependence on Chinese shipbuilding and sustains shared deterrence. Joint investment in yards, sealift, and pre-positioned stocks turns alliances into real capacity.
Call to Action Citizens should press leaders—local, state, and federal—to support maritime education, shipyard expansion, and logistics recapitalization. Industry and investors should pursue maritime tech and U.S. waterfront projects. Policymakers should align defense, commerce, and diplomacy to grow capacity at home and with allies.
For readers who want to go deeper, Captain Brent D. Sadler, USN (Ret.), expands on these ideas in his book U.S. Naval Power in the 21st Century: A New Strategy for Facing the Chinese and Russian Threat. It offers a detailed blueprint for how America can reconnect its Navy, industry, and diplomacy in the new era of great power competition.
For deeper dives, 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.
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.
Introduction Thanks to Tom’s Hardware for spotlighting the latest chapter in U.S.–China tech tensions. Their reporting underscores a key point: America’s security is tied to technology policy. And those who warned about selling cutting-edge chips to Beijing in the first place—the so-called “China hawks”—are now watching these events unfold with an all-too-knowing smile.
What Happened China recently ordered its top tech companies to halt purchases of Nvidia’s H20 AI chips. This comes after U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Washington’s goal was to make China “addicted” to U.S. technology. While blunt, his remark struck a nerve, evoking the painful history of the Opium Wars and China’s “Century of Shame.”
The Hawks Were Right For years, U.S. lawmakers and analysts skeptical of Beijing’s intentions argued that selling advanced U.S. chips—even at a “watered down” level—would only fuel China’s ambitions. They warned that the short-term profits were not worth the long-term risk: once Chinese firms learned from U.S. technology, they would double down on building domestic alternatives and reduce their reliance on America. That is exactly what we are witnessing now.
At Americans for a Stronger Navy, we have been sounding the alarm on this same pattern. Just as the hawks predicted, the policies of short-term gain have fed into long-term vulnerabilities. Our mission is to ensure the American public understands these risks and rallies behind a stronger Navy — one prepared for the challenges of tomorrow.
China’s Long-Term Drive for Self-Reliance It’s important to note that this isn’t simply a reaction to Lutnick’s remark or recent export bans. For more than a decade, Beijing has been methodically working to reduce exposure to Western technology:
Made in China 2025 (2015) — A state-led plan to dominate sectors like semiconductors, AI, robotics, and aerospace by producing up to 70% of key components domestically.
Semiconductors & Chips — Massive state investment in SMIC and the “Big Fund” to build a homegrown chip industry, with Huawei rolling out its own Kirin processors despite U.S. sanctions.
Cybersecurity & Data — Laws mandating that Chinese data be stored on Chinese servers, cutting Western firms out of core infrastructure.
“Dual Circulation” (2020) — Xi Jinping’s policy to insulate China’s economy from foreign shocks by prioritizing domestic supply chains and technology independence.
These moves show that dependency on U.S. technology was never going to be permanent. Beijing’s strategy has always been to learn, copy, and ultimately replace. The hawks knew it, and the evidence proves them right.
Why It Matters
Economic Competition: Nvidia initially saw huge demand for the H20. But Chinese regulators are now pushing data centers to buy 50% of their chips from domestic firms.
Historical Sensitivities: Lutnick’s “addiction” remark may have been casual in the U.S., but it hit raw nerves in Beijing—feeding nationalist backlash and accelerating decoupling.
Strategic Leverage: Technology is today’s high ground. If America cedes it, it cedes the ability to shape global security and commerce.
Implications for the U.S. Navy The Navy’s edge rests on secure, reliable, advanced technology—from AI-driven analysis to unmanned systems. If China achieves independence from U.S. tech, the leverage America once had diminishes, narrowing our technological superiority at sea. Hawks warned this might happen—and now it’s becoming reality.
Implications for Our Allies Allies across Asia and Europe rely on U.S. technology, but if Beijing succeeds in exporting homegrown chip alternatives, it could create cracks in the U.S.-led alliance system. China wouldn’t just compete militarily—it would compete by shaping the world’s tech ecosystem.
Why Americans Should Care This isn’t just about Nvidia stock or quarterly earnings. It’s about whether America’s long-term security is sacrificed for short-term profit. The hawks who cautioned against empowering Beijing were pointing to this very moment. If China wins the tech race, it strengthens its military, weakens alliances, and challenges the Navy’s ability to keep the seas free and open.
Conclusion Tom’s Hardware’s reporting shines a spotlight on a dangerous dynamic: America risks repeating past mistakes. Selling technology to Beijing may fill order books, but it also fuels the very rival we’re preparing to deter. The hawks warned us, and their concerns are looking more prescient by the day.
👉 Learn more and join the conversation at StrongerNavy.org
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.
