Global News Watch Archives - Americans for a Stronger Navy

October 7, 2025October 7, 2025

America’s Foreign Policy Tracker: The Navy’s Burden

Introduction: Why This Matters
At Americans for a Stronger Navy, our mission is clear: give sailors the tools they need to succeed. That means more than ships and weapons — it means clarity and consistency in U.S. foreign policy. When Washington wavers, it is sailors and Marines who carry the burden, often forward-deployed thousands of miles from home.

The Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ Foreign Policy Tracker shows just how uneven America’s global posture has become. Some areas are trending positive — energy exports, alliances in Europe, international organizations. Others, especially the Indo-Pacific, are trending negative. That inconsistency has real-world consequences for the Navy: sailors are asked to project strength even as policy shifts under their feet.

A Real-Time Example: The October 7th Hearing
Tomorrow, the Senate Subcommittee on East Asia, the Pacific, and International Cybersecurity Policy will hold a hearing titled “Combating the People’s Republic of China’s Illegal, Coercive, Aggressive, and Deceptive Behavior in the Indo-Pacific.”

The witnesses bring distinct perspectives that reflect the challenges highlighted in the Tracker:

Craig Singleton (Foundation for Defense of Democracies) – A former diplomat, Singleton warns that mixed signals on Taiwan, arms sales, and technology exports embolden Beijing. Policy inconsistency undermines deterrence and puts sailors in greater danger.

Ray Powell (SeaLight Foundation, Stanford) – A retired Air Force colonel, Powell tracks China’s “gray zone” tactics: swarming, harassment, and incremental pressure in the South China Sea. These confrontations fall hardest on sailors at sea, who face constant risks of escalation.

Dr. Ely Ratner (The Marathon Initiative) – A strategist focused on great-power competition, Ratner emphasizes the long view: rebuilding U.S. alliances, revitalizing shipbuilding, and sustaining naval power for decades, not just years.

Why Americans Should Care
The Indo-Pacific isn’t just a faraway chessboard. The sea lanes carry the goods Americans buy every day, from electronics to energy. If Beijing dominates those waters, costs will rise at home, jobs will be at risk, and U.S. influence will shrink abroad. Add to this China’s cyber intrusions, intellectual property theft, and influence operations, and the challenge is already reaching into American life.

Implications for the Navy
The Navy is America’s frontline deterrent. Singleton’s warnings highlight that sailors need more than weapons — they need policy clarity. Powell’s findings show how Beijing’s small-scale harassment tactics wear down ships and crews. Ratner’s perspective reminds us that without sustained investment in industry and alliances, our Navy risks being stretched to the breaking point.

Implications for Allies and Partners
Allies like Japan, the Philippines, and Australia want to see American resolve, not hesitation. Mixed signals make them question whether the U.S. will stand firm, driving them to hedge or make side deals with Beijing. A strong and steady Navy reassures allies and keeps coalitions intact.

The Navy’s Burden
From trade wars to canceled arms sales, from cyber threats to gray-zone skirmishes, the Navy carries the weight of America’s foreign policy. The Foreign Policy Tracker shows the global picture, and tomorrow’s hearing will shine a light on one theater where the stakes are highest: the Indo-Pacific.

Watch the Hearing
The hearing begins October 7, 2025, at 2:30 p.m. ET. Follow it here: Senate Foreign Relations Committee – Hearing Link. We’ll be listening closely and will share a follow-up with key takeaways.

Conclusion
At the end of the day, hearings and trackers matter because they remind us of one thing: our sailors and Marines deserve the tools, support, and clear direction needed to keep America safe.

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.

Subscribe today at StrongerNavy.org. Let’s roll.

October 4, 2025October 4, 2025

While We Fight Each Other at Home, China Prepares — And Time Is Running Out

Introduction

China set 2027 as their military readiness target – that’s 18 months away. Let me tell you something Americans need to hear, even if it makes you uncomfortable: China is laughing out loud and I can hear it from here, and they’re squeezing harder every day.

I’m not being dramatic. I’m being honest. As a former Navy sailor who spent his civilian career in telecom and web technologies, I understand both the military realities and the technological dependencies that have put us in this position. After two years of research—cross-checking military testimony, intelligence reports, and independent defense analyses—I can tell you we’re running out of time to fix this mess.

The Brutal Truth About 2027

China has set a goal to be militarily ready for war with the United States by 2027. That’s not some distant threat—that’s 18 months away. While we’ve been arguing about what he said and she said etc, they’ve been building the world’s largest navy and positioning themselves to strangle us economically, electronically and militarily.

Here’s what keeps me up at night: they don’t need to sink our ships to defeat us. They can just stop selling us the parts to build new ones.

How China is putting on the squeeze

They Control What We Need to Fight
Rare earth minerals for our missile guidance systems? China controls 80% of global processing.

Semiconductors for our weapons platforms? We outsourced that to Asia decades ago.

Critical components for naval systems? Good luck building ships without Chinese suppliers.

They Own Our Information Flow

TikTok shapes what our kids think about America and China

They manufacture the phones and devices we use to communicate

Their algorithms determine what information Americans see about military threats

They Hold Our Economy Hostage

Wall Street pension funds are invested in Chinese markets

Silicon Valley’s revenue depends on Chinese manufacturing and consumers
Our entire supply chain runs through Chinese factories

The Kicker? The same Silicon Valley companies that handed China our technological advantages now control how Americans get information. Try posting about Chinese military threats on Facebook—watch your reach get throttled. Discuss naval readiness on social media—suddenly you’re “violating community standards.”

They don’t just have us by the blank—they’re controlling the conversation about it.

Don’t Take My Word For It — Listen to the Experts

Over the past 24 months, Americans for a Stronger Navy has been mapping a story few citizens have ever been shown: how China’s campaign against the United States unfolded, who knew what and when, and what it will take to pull back from the brink. We didn’t start with opinions — we started with evidence. Here’s what the experts have been saying for years, and how their warnings fit together.

Strategic Intent and Military Buildup

Admiral James Lyons Jr., former commander of the Pacific Fleet, went on Fox News in 2013 and said what few in Washington wanted to hear: “We’re in our second Cold War with another communist totalitarian regime.” He warned that China has “built the navy specifically to go against the United States Navy” and that their anti-ship ballistic missiles are “not geared to go against the Bangladesh navy.” When a fleet commander speaks that bluntly on national television, that’s not politics — that’s professional judgment.

Brigadier General Douglas P. Wickert has shown how far that judgment has proven correct. In the Gobi Desert, China has built full-scale mock-ups of Taiwan’s Taichung International Airport and a “one-for-one silhouette of the Ford-class aircraft carrier” for target practice. They are not hiding their intentions. They are practicing to sink our ships and invade our allies.

The scale of China’s buildup is staggering: “They have 230 times the shipbuilding capacity of the United States in terms of shipyard infrastructure and potential output.. “Just one shipyard in China last year alone, in 2024, built more tonnage of ships than the U.S. did since the end of World War II.” One shipyard outproduced our entire nation’s post-WWII shipbuilding in a single year.

👉 Subscribe and Follow Along
This is just Part 1 of a three-part series. In Part 2: Political Warfare and the Silent Invasion, I’ll break down how China’s campaign has already reached into our own institutions — through espionage, influence operations, and economic coercion.

Key Takeaway: The fight isn’t just “over there.” It’s already here, shaping what Americans see, hear, and believe.

Don’t miss it — subscribe and follow the series at StrongerNavy.org.

September 28, 2025September 28, 2025

Why China’s Cyber Warfare Capabilities Make a Stronger Navy More Critical Than Ever

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.

September 24, 2025September 24, 2025

The Bashi Channel: Connecting the Dots in the U.S.–China Rivalry

Introduction
Over the last few months, we’ve reported on a series of developments that highlight the rising stakes in the Indo-Pacific:

China’s destruction of the environment at Scarborough Shoal
The revival of Subic Bay in the Philippines as a center of allied shipbuilding and logistics
The British carrier HMS Prince of Wales sailing through the South China Sea alongside U.S. partners .

Each of these stories pointed to a contest for control of the waterways, ports, and infrastructure that sustain both military power and the global economy.

Today, we turn to the Bashi Channel—a narrow strip of water between southern Taiwan and the northern Philippines that may be the least known, but most decisive, chokepoint in the region. If Scarborough Shoal shows us the contest over reefs and fishing rights, and Subic Bay demonstrates the value of allied ports, the Bashi Channel reveals why geography itself remains the ultimate factor in global power.

A Geography Lesson with Global Stakes
The Bashi Channel is less than 90 miles wide. Yet it connects Taiwan’s largest port, Kaohsiung—which handles over 60% of the island’s cargo—with the Pacific Ocean. In an invasion scenario, China would rely on Kaohsiung as a logistics hub, while the United States and allies would race to resupply Taiwan through bases in the Philippines and Japan. That makes the Bashi not just a strait, but a lifeline.

Building on What We’ve Reported

At Subic Bay ([read here][subic-link]), we saw how new shipyards and bases allow U.S. forces to operate closer to Taiwan. The Bashi Channel explains why: northern Luzon and the Batanes islands are the staging ground for resupply lines directly into Taiwan’s southern flank.
At Scarborough Shoal ([read here][scarborough-link]), we documented China’s attempts to normalize control through coercion. The same pattern is at play here—Chinese live-fire drills in 2022 pushed further south, right into the Bashi, to test how far they can go without pushback.
When the British carrier transited the South China Sea ([see coverage][carrier-link]), it demonstrated allied commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific. The Bashi Channel is where that commitment will be tested in practice.

The Digital Dimension
As we’ve stressed in earlier posts, undersea cables are the invisible arteries of the modern world. Between 97% and 99% of all international data traffic travels through them, and the Bashi Channel is one of the most congested corridors. If cables here were cut, Americans would feel it instantly—in internet outages, stalled financial transactions, and disrupted supply chains. The stakes are no longer abstract; they’re personal.

Why Americans Should Care
The Bashi Channel matters for the same reasons Subic Bay and Scarborough Shoal matter: because adversaries see them as pressure points against America. A disruption here could raise prices at U.S. gas pumps, slow down the internet in our homes, and challenge the freedom of movement that underpins our prosperity. Ignoring this geography doesn’t make the threat go away—it just leaves us less prepared.

Implications for the Navy
For the U.S. Navy, this isn’t just about patrolling a waterway. It’s about ensuring freedom of movement for allies, safeguarding undersea cables, and keeping logistics flowing in the event of conflict. Ships, submarines, and surveillance aircraft operating in and around the Bashi Channel aren’t just defending Taiwan—they are defending the arteries of the global economy.

Implications for Our Allies
The Philippines, Japan, and Australia all depend on the Bashi Channel for security and trade. As we saw in Subic Bay’s revival, Manila’s choices are central to allied strategy. If political winds shift in the Philippines, America’s ability to project power and protect cables through the Bashi could be compromised. That makes alliances more than symbolic—they’re the difference between deterrence and vulnerability.

Conclusion
Scarborough Shoal, Subic Bay, and now the Bashi Channel all point to one truth: the contest in the Indo-Pacific is about control of the chokepoints that sustain trade, communication, and freedom itself. Geography cannot be changed, but strategy can. For generations to come, the Bashi Channel will remain a pivot in the U.S.–China confrontation.

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.

September 22, 2025September 22, 2025

Don’t Bet Against America: A Response to Dan Wang on China’s Rise

Introuction

Dan Wang’s recent interview on Interesting Times with Ross Douthat offers an intriguing argument: that China, as an “engineering state” may outbuild, out-innovate, and outlast the United States. I respect Wang’s analysis — but I believe it overstates China’s strengths, underestimates America’s, and risks mistaking curated facades for lasting power.

I speak from experience. I served as a Cold War-era Navy destroyer sailor, worked in telecommunications at AT&T, helped set standards for web technologies, and founded Americans for a Stronger Navy. In 2008, I traveled to Beijing as a guest expert at the World Wide Web Conference. That visit — on the eve of the Olympics — revealed the gap between projection and reality.

Facades and Reality

Wang contrasts Shanghai’s clean subways and manicured parks with New York’s noisy infrastructure. I saw another reality. Behind Beijing’s gleaming new airport, residential homes were bulldozed to make way for Olympic tourism. Poverty was hidden, smog choked the skies, and the environmental cost of China’s rapid growth was impossible to ignore. Having served in Hong Kong in the 1970s, I could compare its then-crystal skies with Beijing’s haze in 2008 — a stark reminder that much of China’s “progress” is extraction, not sustainability.

Systematic Extraction

My telecom and security background made me see what others missed. The building across from our Hilton bristled with antennas pointed at us. Government “observers” monitored our sessions. The million-dollar fee to host the conference wasn’t just business — it was leverage.

More troubling were the Western executives — many half my age, fresh from Silicon Valley — using unsecured phones and laptops in this environment. I spoke with a young GM engineer who had developed a novel windshield wiper. He admitted openly that it would be copied and sold back to his own company at lower cost. Yet corporate pressure compelled him to manufacture in China anyway. Days later, flying home through London, I read an FBI advisory warning Olympic visitors not to bring their cell phones. That confirmed every operational concern I had seen firsthand.

The Population Trap

Wang points to China’s vast numbers of engineers and competing firms as proof of superiority. But scale alone does not equal strength. With 1.4 billion people, China naturally produces more engineers than America’s 330 million. The question is quality and innovation, not headcount. At the World Wide Web Conference, Chinese capabilities often lagged global standards. The proliferation of thousands of solar companies reflects size, not necessarily superior organization or creativity.

Naval Realities

Wang worries that China could quickly overwhelm Taiwan and that America’s Navy might not respond effectively. My perspective as a Navy veteran is different. Amphibious assaults across a strait are among the most complex operations in warfare. China’s navy, for all its growth, remains untested in major combat, dependent on land-based missiles with finite range, and lacking the blue-water experience U.S. forces have honed through decades of global deployment. To suggest America cannot meet this challenge underestimates both our power projection and the operational realities that matter at sea.

America’s Resilience

Perhaps Wang’s greatest omission is the resilience factor. History shows America’s ability to respond decisively when existential threats become clear: after Pearl Harbor, in the space race following Sputnik, and after 9/11. The same will be true in the face of today’s strategic competition.

Even China’s own people signal doubts about their system’s sustainability. Wang himself notes the “brain drain”: wealthy families buying homes in Irvine and Vancouver, entrepreneurs relocating to Singapore, tens of thousands crossing the Darién Gap to reach America. They are voting with their feet — and their futures.

A Balanced View

I do not dismiss Wang entirely. He is right to criticize U.S. naiveté in assuming economic engagement would democratize China. He is right that corporations prioritized profits over national resilience. But his analysis is filtered through carefully curated experiences and misses the darker realities: surveillance, forced extraction, environmental costs, and intellectual property theft.

Don’t Bet Against America

China has built dazzling infrastructure and manufacturing scale. But a system built on control, imitation, and exploitation is brittle. America’s advantages remain decisive: our Navy, our innovation ecosystem, our demographics, and above all our proven resilience.

Dan Wang is correct about one thing: this is a long competition. But if history is a guide, the nation that adapts, mobilizes, and earns the trust of its people and partners will prevail. That nation is not China. Don’t bet against America.

September 21, 2025September 21, 2025

Britain Joins the Fray: South China Sea Alliance Grows as UK Considers Troop Agreement with Philippines

Britain Signals New Military Role in Indo-Pacific

In a major development, the United Kingdom is considering deploying troops to the South China Sea under a new Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) with the Philippines. This move, announced by the Philippine Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro Jr., comes as China intensifies its claims over virtually the entire South China Sea—threatening the sovereignty of key regional allies.

A VFA would give the UK legal grounds to base forces in the Philippines for training, cooperation, and potential conflict readiness. It marks a new chapter in Britain’s Indo-Pacific posture and could eventually bring British troops within 200 kilometers of Taiwan—a critical flashpoint in the U.S.-China rivalry.

Why This Matters

The South China Sea is more than a disputed body of water—it’s a global trade superhighway and a strategic military corridor. A British military presence adds to a growing list of nations pushing back on China’s coercion and militarization of the region.

If finalized, this deal would place the UK alongside the U.S., Japan, Australia, and France in holding joint access agreements with the Philippines. It reinforces a growing international coalition determined to uphold freedom of navigation and resist revisionist claims that threaten peace in the Indo-Pacific.

Background on the Philippines’ Strategic Role

The Philippines’ northernmost islands in the Batanes chain are only 120 miles from Taiwan. These islands have become a focal point for U.S.-Philippines joint drills—including the recent deployment of the U.S. Marine Corps’ NMESIS “ship-killer” missile system.

As tensions rise over Taiwan and Chinese interference at sea escalates, the Philippines is building deeper defense ties not just with the United States, but also with regional and global allies.

Implications for the U.S. Navy

A stronger allied presence in the region could bolster logistics, interoperability, and rapid response capability—all crucial for countering China’s area-denial strategies. It also eases the burden on the U.S. Navy by increasing multinational deterrence capacity.

The move may encourage other NATO and European partners to follow suit, diversifying the military footprint in the Pacific and reinforcing the global rules-based order.

Implications for Our Allies

For Japan, Australia, and South Korea—nations already aligned with the Philippines and the U.S. in multilateral exercises—Britain’s involvement signals a maturing trilateral-plus framework. As these alliances deepen, they collectively raise the cost of aggression and ensure no single country bears the burden alone.

Why Americans Should Care

Every product you rely on—from cars to phones to food—moves through global sea lanes, and much of that commerce passes through the South China Sea. If those lanes are choked, the ripple effects would hit every American household.

A stronger presence of allied nations protects those trade routes, deters aggression, and reassures nations on the front lines of Chinese expansionism that the world is watching—and prepared to act.

This isn’t just about Britain and the Philippines. It’s about defending peace, stability, and freedom of the seas.

Closing Note:

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.

September 17, 2025September 17, 2025

Strategic Ambiguity: A Heavy Burden for the Navy, a Confusing Signal for America

Introduction

For more than two years, I’ve been writing about the Navy, America’s role in the Pacific, and the choices our leaders face. What I’ve learned is simple: policies that sound abstract in Washington — like “strategic ambiguity” — land hard on the decks of U.S. Navy ships and in the lives of everyday Americans.

As a former destroyer sailor, I see the burden ambiguity places on today’s fleet. And as a citizen, I see the confusion it creates for the American public and the Congress that reflects their will. RAND and other respected voices have warned of the risks, but too often the public doesn’t hear the full story. That’s why I’m weighing in directly.

The Policy of Ambiguity
Since 1979, U.S. policy toward Taiwan has rested on “strategic ambiguity.” Washington avoids clear promises, keeping adversaries guessing but leaving options open. It worked for decades, deterring Beijing without emboldening Taipei. But under President Trump’s return to office, ambiguity is back in sharper form — and it carries consequences.

Trump’s Ambiguity and Taiwan’s Uncertainty
President Trump has made it clear he will not commit publicly to Taiwan’s defense. When asked, he replied: “I never comment on that. I don’t want to ever put myself in that position.” That is strategic ambiguity in its rawest form.

Even more striking is his transactional framing: “Taiwan should pay us for defense … We’re no different than an insurance company. Taiwan doesn’t give us anything.” Rather than signaling clarity of purpose, this remark underscores uncertainty. For naval planners, it adds complexity. For the American public, it raises questions about whether Taiwan is seen as an ally or a customer.

Clarity in the South China Sea, Ambiguity in the Strait
Contrast that with Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s recent words on Scarborough Shoal: “Beijing claiming Scarborough Reef as a nature preserve is yet another coercive attempt to advance sweeping territorial and maritime claims in the South China Sea at the expense of its neighbors, including by preventing Filipino fishermen from accessing these traditional fishing grounds.”

Here, the U.S. drew a firm line. But in the Taiwan Strait, ambiguity still rules. The Navy now faces a dual challenge: enforcing clarity in one theater while operating under uncertainty in another.

Why Americans Should Care
Taiwan’s leaders know the stakes. As Mainland Affairs Council Minister Chiu Chui-cheng warned: “If Taiwan were to be taken over by China by force, it will trigger a domino effect, undermine the regional balance of power, and directly threaten the security and prosperity of the United States.”

RAND research reinforces that point: Taiwan’s ability to resist depends heavily on the speed, clarity, and credibility of U.S. support. Delay or hesitation in Washington could tip the balance, not only for Taiwan’s survival but for America’s security and economic stability.

Ambiguity also creates a chain reaction at home: Public → Voters → Congress → Navy.
When the public struggles to understand why Taiwan matters, voters hesitate to back costly commitments overseas. And when voter sentiment wavers, Congress hesitates to fully fund the Navy’s needs. Ambiguity at the top becomes confusion on Main Street, which turns into hesitation on Capitol Hill — all of it compounding the burden on sailors at sea.

Implications for the Navy
Strategic ambiguity translates into an enormous burden for the Navy. Without knowing if or when the order to act will come, the fleet must prepare for every possibility:

Breaking a blockade.
Resupplying Taiwan.
Responding to missile strikes.
Countering a full-scale invasion.

RAND findings emphasize that even as Taiwan strengthens its defenses and increases spending, U.S. naval power remains indispensable. Only the Navy has the forward presence, logistics, and strike capacity to counter China’s military pressure. Ambiguity at the top means complexity at sea.

Implications for Our Allies
Mixed U.S. signals ripple outward. Allies like Japan and Australia watch Washington’s every move. If America is clear about Scarborough Shoal but vague about Taiwan, they are left to wonder where the next line will be drawn. RAND analysts describe Taiwan as facing “strategic anxiety” with its primary security partner — a sentiment likely shared across the Indo-Pacific.

The Bottom Line
Strategic ambiguity may give presidents room to maneuver, but it burdens the Navy with complexity and leaves Americans confused about what is truly at stake. Taiwan’s security — and the stability of the Indo-Pacific — depend on clarity of purpose, credible deterrence, and above all, a strong Navy.

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.

September 16, 2025September 16, 2025

Mapping China’s Grip: The Islands, Reefs, and Bases Reshaping the South China Sea

Introduction

This post is part of Charting the Course: Voices That Matter — our ongoing educational series at Americans for a Stronger Navy examining the strategic threats facing the U.S. Navy and why they matter to every American. In this installment, we focus on China’s maritime buildup. China isn’t just making claims — it’s building infrastructure, militarizing reefs, and transforming sea features into forward bases. This map-driven guide walks you through where China has control, what they’ve built, and why it matters for U.S. strategy, regional allies, and global maritime security

Map & Visuals

Use one or more of the mapped images above to show:
- China’s “Nine-Dash Line” claim
- Areas with Chinese military build-up (Subi, Mischief, Fiery Cross, etc.)
- Overlapping exclusive economic zones (EEZs) claimed by the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, etc.

Key Chinese-Controlled Features
Here are the major reefs, atolls, and islands China controls or heavily influences. For each, we’d provide location, current state (military infra, runways, radars), and why it’s strategically important.

Feature	Militarization (Yes / No)	What’s Built / Recent Activity	Strategic Importance
Subi Reef	Yes	Runway, radars, missile systems, hardened shelters	Forward base; near Thitu Island; high capability to surveil / interdict
Mischief Reef	Yes	Airstrip, hangars, radar, anti-ship missile systems	Major Chinese hub; within Philippines’ EEZ
Fiery Cross Reef	Yes	Similar infrastructure; airstrip, radar, etc.	Power projection over Spratlys; enhances range
Gaven Reefs	Yes	Support buildings, radar / comms sites	Part of island chain to extend Chinese reach
Cuarteron Reef	Yes	Build-up like hangars, radar	Controls access routes; supports larger operations
Scarborough Shoal	De facto control	Coast guard, militia presence; possible construction; blocks Filipino access	Symbolic and strategic choke point; EEZ stakes
Paracel Islands	Yes	Many features; garrisons, military infrastructure	Proximity to mainland China; strategic flank toward Vietnam / Philippines

Why This Map Matters

Mapping shows how much of the Spratly / Paracel archipelagos are now “ militarized territory”
It reveals how close China’s bases are to other countries’ claimed waters (especially the Philippines)
Visual clarity helps Americans see this is not abstract — it’s real geography being altered, with legal, military, and economic implications

U.S. Strategic Implications

Presence: Where and how the U.S. Navy can operate
Deterrence: What it takes to make these bases costly for Beijing to use aggressively
Alliances: How neighboring countries feel and what they do (e.g. Philippines’ diplomatic protests, joint patrols)

Call to Action
Let the map sharpen our resolve. Knowing the terrain is step one. Step two is educating, advocating, and ensuring our Navy, our Congress, and our allies are equipped for what’s next.

Closing Thought
Geography doesn’t shift overnight — but power can. When maps are redrawn, either by diplomacy or force, everyone involved must choose whether to respond or concede. 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.

September 15, 2025September 15, 2025

China’s Fortress in the Sea: Why Subi Reef Should Alarm Every American

A Satellite Snapshot of Aggression

New satellite images released this month show just how far China has gone to entrench itself militarily in the South China Sea. On Subi Reef—a once-submerged shoal that lies far outside China’s legal maritime claims—Beijing has built a full-blown fortress.

We’re talking about:

A 10,000-foot runway capable of launching fighter jets and bombers
Radar domes, missile systems, and hardened aircraft shelters
A deepwater port designed to host military resupply and forward-deployed forces
Communications and surveillance arrays capable of watching everything from the Philippines to Vietnam

This is no routine development. It’s an armed island outpost, built in defiance of international law, smack in the middle of one of the world’s most vital shipping corridors.

Why Americans Should Care

Some may look at this and think: “So what? That’s half a world away.”
But here’s why it matters:

Trade flows through here. Over 30% of the world’s maritime trade—around $3.5 trillion annually—transits the South China Sea. That includes oil, food, tech, and the microchips in your phone.
Allies are at risk. The Philippines, a U.S. treaty ally, is within spitting distance of Subi Reef. China has already harassed Filipino vessels near Thitu Island, which lies just 12 nautical miles away.
The U.S. Navy is being challenged. These island bases are not for defense. They’re forward-operating platforms designed to deny access to American forces, intimidate our allies, and project Chinese power deep into the Pacific.

This isn’t just regional bullying—it’s strategic dominance by cement and steel.

What the U.S. Navy Is Up Against

Back in 2015, President Xi Jinping told President Obama he wouldn’t militarize these reefs. Less than a decade later, that pledge lies in ruins, just like China’s empty promises to Hong Kong.

The satellite photos don’t lie.
China is building fortresses.
We’re arguing about ship counts.

Former U.S. Indo-Pacific Commander Admiral John Aquilino said it plainly:

“They can fly fighters, bombers, plus all those offensive capabilities of missile systems. They threaten all nations who operate in the vicinity and all the international sea and airspace.”

This is a new kind of warfighting posture—a blend of gray-zone tactics, artificial island militarization, and legal warfare.

Implications for the Navy

Our Navy doesn’t just need to “keep pace”—it needs to regain strategic initiative in this critical region. That means:

Maintaining a strong forward-deployed presence
Supporting allied maritime forces with training, resources, and joint patrols
Investing in new platforms, undersea warfare, and AI-driven ISR
Holding the line on freedom of navigation operations (FONOPs) to demonstrate resolve

These reefs aren’t about fishing rights—they’re about who controls Asia’s future.

Implications for Our Allies

Beijing’s message is clear: “We’re not leaving. What are you going to do about it?”
If we abandon the rules of the sea, smaller nations like Vietnam, Malaysia, and the Philippines will be forced to bow—or arm themselves.

In the vacuum of leadership, fear grows.
But if the U.S. Navy stands strong—with support from the American people—freedom still has a fighting chance.

Final Thought

Subi Reef isn’t just an island. It’s a symbol.
A symbol of what happens when unchecked ambition meets apathy.

Americans must understand: this matters. It’s not just about China.
It’s about supply chains. Peace. Power. Stability. Your economic future.

Let’s wake up—before the tides turn too far against us.

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.

September 12, 2025September 12, 2025

A Clear Pretext for Occupation: Philippines Pushes Back on China’s Nature Reserve Claim

Philippine Officials Raise the Alarm
Top Philippine defense and maritime officials have condemned China’s recent declaration of a “nature reserve” at Scarborough Shoal, calling it a “clear pretext for occupation.” This bold response comes in reaction to Beijing’s move to designate the disputed shoal—known locally as Bajo de Masinloc and internationally ruled to be within the Philippine EEZ—as a Chinese national marine reserve.

Philippine officials aren’t mincing words. Former Supreme Court Justice Antonio Carpio, former Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana, and Coast Guard Commodore Jay Tarriela are among those warning that the “reserve” designation masks a broader strategy: to lock down access, increase Chinese presence, and project power deep into Southeast Asia’s maritime heart.

Part 1 — Broken Promises and Growing Risks
In 2012, after a tense naval standoff, the U.S. brokered a deal: both China and the Philippines would withdraw their ships from Scarborough Shoal. The Philippines complied. China didn’t. The U.S. didn’t press the issue. The result? Beijing solidified its control and sent a message that international mediation wouldn’t be enforced.

Part 2 — International Law Ignored
In 2016, an international tribunal ruled in favor of the Philippines, stating clearly that China had no legal claim to Scarborough Shoal. Beijing ignored the decision, accelerating militarization and disrupting Filipino fishing. Once again, global rule of law was challenged—and left unenforced.

Part 3 — The “Nature Reserve” Play
Now, in 2025, China has unveiled a new maneuver: using environmental language to advance military and political objectives. The creation of the “Huangyan Island National Nature Reserve” is being widely viewed as part of a creeping campaign to normalize Chinese administrative control.

Despite the label, this is not about conservation. China has repeatedly blocked Filipino fishermen, driven out environmental research vessels, and deployed maritime militia under the radar. Calling this a “preserve” is like calling a fortress a flower garden.

Why Americans Should Care

Strategic Sea Lanes: The South China Sea is a maritime superhighway. If China controls it, they can control access to vital markets and resources.
U.S. Credibility Is on the Line: American influence is measured by what we protect—not just what we promise.
Civic Responsibility: Understanding how foreign policy, trade, and defense intersect isn’t just for experts. It’s for every American who relies on secure energy, stable prices, and a functioning global order.
Environmental Lawfare: Americans should be wary of tactics that exploit noble causes—like conservation—to advance authoritarian control.

Implications for the Navy
The U.S. Navy has long played a vital role in ensuring freedom of navigation and stabilizing flashpoints. But gray zone tactics like these require more than just ships—they require intelligence, strategy, and public support. The Navy cannot succeed without a civilian base that understands the stakes.

Implications for Our Allies
This isn’t just a Philippine problem. What happens at Scarborough sends ripples across the Pacific. Taiwan, Vietnam, Japan, Australia—all are watching to see whether the U.S. will back its allies when it counts. So are our adversaries.

Call to Action
The future of maritime freedom—and American leadership—may hinge on places like Scarborough Shoal. When China tests the limits, Americans need to respond—not just with ships, but with awareness and resolve.

Let’s roll.