Overview The United States is increasing its forward military presence near China by deploying Marine forces aboard the expeditionary sea base ship USS Miguel Keith. This afloat platform extends the reach of the Marine Rotational Force-Darwin (MRF-D), based in northern Australia, across the contested island chains of the western Pacific. This move underscores Washington’s commitment to countering Beijing’s growing influence and military footprint in the Indo-Pacific.
The Island Chain Strategy At the heart of this deployment lies the U.S. island chain strategy: three north-south defensive lines stretching across the Pacific. By leveraging allied territory and naval access points, the U.S. can project power, deter aggression, and defend against potential Chinese military action. The second island chain, where the USS Miguel Keith is homeported in Saipan, plays a pivotal role in supporting operations deeper into the Pacific.
Why This Matters Operating from a sea base offers the Marines flexibility and unpredictability. Unlike fixed land bases, the Miguel Keith allows U.S. forces to maneuver rapidly across archipelagic terrain and forward locations ashore, complicating adversary planning. This is especially important at a time when Chinese forces are building out anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) capabilities designed to push U.S. forces farther from contested waters.
Recent Exercises The deployment follows recent exercises across the first and second island chains:
Exercise Alon 25 in the Philippines (August 15–29).
Exercise Super Garuda Shield 25 in Indonesia (August 25–September 4).
These multinational drills reinforced cooperation with allies, improved readiness, and signaled a unified front in the region.
Implications for the Navy The Navy’s role in enabling sea-based expeditionary operations is central. With amphibious ships like the USS New Orleans temporarily out of service due to fire damage, expeditionary sea bases provide a critical stopgap. They allow Marines and sailors to continue distributed operations, demonstrating the Navy’s adaptability in keeping forward presence credible.
Implications for Our Allies For Australia, the Philippines, and Indonesia, U.S. deployments reinforce security guarantees. The Marines’ message, as articulated by Colonel Jason Armas, was clear: America and its allies “stand ready to maneuver, sustain and fight as one force.” This is reassurance at a time of rising Chinese assertiveness in the South China Sea and beyond.
Why Americans Should Care This is not simply a faraway deployment. The Pacific is a lifeline for U.S. trade, energy, and global communications infrastructure. Securing these waters ensures that Americans at home continue to benefit from stable supply chains and open sea lanes. A failure to hold the line in the Pacific would ripple into our economy and national security alike.
Closing Call As the U.S. strengthens its presence in the Indo-Pacific, the question is not whether we can afford to maintain this posture, but whether we can afford not to. A stronger Navy and Marine Corps presence ensures deterrence, protects trade, and preserves peace.
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.
U.S. and allied navies sailing in formationBill Cullifer, Founder
Introduction
Giving Credit Where It’s Due Kurt Campbell and Rush Doshi recently argued in the New York Times that America alone cannot match China’s growing scale — economically, technologically, or militarily — and that our strength depends on “allied scale.” They are right to say this out loud, and they deserve credit for raising the issue. Campbell has long been a voice for rebalancing U.S. strategy toward Asia, and Doshi has studied China’s grand strategy in depth. Their track records show they’ve been sounding the alarm.
Why We’re in This Position It’s fair to ask: if they saw this coming, why didn’t America adjust sooner? The truth is, Campbell and Doshi were not sitting in the chairs with the ultimate levers. Campbell’s call for a pivot to Asia faced headwinds from wars in the Middle East and competing budget priorities. Doshi, until recently, was in academia, warning of China’s rise but without a policymaker’s authority. They were raising the right concerns, but Washington’s attention was elsewhere. That’s not about pinning blame on individuals — it’s about recognizing how easy it is for America to be distracted.
The Larger Point The conversation they are starting in public now is one America needs to have candidly. China’s scale in shipbuilding, technology, and manufacturing is a strategic challenge unlike any we have faced before. Campbell and Doshi are right that alliances matter — losing India, Japan, or Europe to Chinese influence would change the balance overnight. But alliances alone aren’t enough. America must also invest in its own naval strength and rebuild the industrial base that sustains it.
My Role in This Conversation I am two years into this effort with Americans for a Stronger Navy. My job is not to dictate policy but to help Americans understand the facts. It is up to the American people to decide. What I can do is publish what’s happening, provide context, and advocate on behalf of my shipmates — so that when the time comes, they have the resources they need, where and when they need them.
Why Americans Should Care If we don’t get this right, it’s not only the Navy that will feel the consequences. Our supply chains, our economy, and our security all ride on free and open seas. Campbell and Doshi are right to remind us that “quantity has a quality all its own.” China has the quantity. America must respond with both quality and scale — and it will take both allies abroad and buy-in at home to meet that challenge.
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.
China and Russia are pushing closer to our northern doorstep — and Alaska is the front line.
Introduction
Over the past year, U.S. Coast Guard cutters have repeatedly intercepted foreign “research” ships operating just beyond the 200-mile line off Alaska’s Arctic coast. At the same time, the U.S. Navy has kept up under-ice submarine operations, while Russian aircraft test our air defense zone and Sino-Russian flotillas sail through the Bering Strait.
Map Legend Dashed Red Lines – Patrol routes and foreign vessel tracks monitored by the U.S. Coast Guard near Alaska’s Arctic coast. Solid Blue Lines – Projected Arctic shipping lanes, including the Northern Sea Route (along Russia) and emerging trans-Arctic corridors. Shaded Blue Zone – Exercise Northern Edge 2025 training areas, where U.S. and allied forces conducted joint, multi-domain operations. Black Ship Icons – Locations of recent intercepts of foreign “research” vessels near Utqiaġvik. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) – U.S. waters extending 200 nautical miles from Alaska’s coast, where America exercises sovereign rights over resources.
The takeaway is simple: America’s Arctic is no longer quiet. It’s contested.
Why Americans Should Care Alaska is not a remote outpost. It is our Arctic front yard, rich in resources, with thousands of miles of shoreline and a narrow strait that connects the Pacific to the Arctic. When Chinese “research” vessels map our seabeds or Russian aircraft enter the Air Defense Identification Zone, they’re probing how close they can get to our homeland. What happens off Alaska affects energy security, trade routes, and even the protection of undersea cables that carry the world’s internet traffic.
RAND’s latest study underscores this point. In The Future of Maritime Presence in the Central Arctic Ocean (July 2025), RAND concludes that as sea ice retreats, the Arctic will draw in both Arctic and non-Arctic actors for economic, political, and military gain. They warn that competition will intensify in phases: first commercial, then political, and ultimately strategic. For the U.S., that means maritime presence is not optional — it is essential to prevent rivals from dictating the rules of the Arctic.
Implications for the Navy Day-to-day patrols fall to the Coast Guard, which provides the only regular surface presence in the Arctic. But the Navy’s role is no less critical. Its submarines operate beneath the ice, practicing for deterrence and warfighting in a domain where rivals are gaining ground. The Navy also views Alaska as part of the defense-in-depth of the United States — the first line of detection and deterrence against missile submarines, long-range bombers, and other threats moving south from the Arctic.
This year’s Northern Edge 2025 exercise made that point clear. More than 6,400 U.S. and Canadian service members, 100 aircraft, and seven warships, including USS Abraham Lincoln and her carrier strike group, trained across Alaska. Running alongside Arctic Edge, the exercises brought together INDOPACOM and NORTHCOM to practice joint, multi-domain operations — from the Aleutians to Adak. In other words: Alaska is not just about defending the homeland, it is a launchpad for projecting U.S. power into the Indo-Pacific.
The challenge remains that America’s icebreaker fleet is thin, while Russia operates dozens and China fields new polar-capable vessels. Without recapitalization and greater presence, the U.S. risks falling behind in its own backyard. RAND echoes this warning: presence and infrastructure — from icebreakers to domain awareness — are key to avoiding strategic surprise.
Implications for Our Allies The Arctic is no longer an American issue alone. NATO allies — Canada, Denmark, Norway — all face the same northern pressure. China brands itself a “near-Arctic state” and seeks influence in waters that directly border allied territory. Coordinated exercises like Northern Edge and Arctic Edge are proof that alliances matter. Shared domain awareness and investment in icebreaking and seabed security will be vital. If America steps back, allies are left exposed — and adversaries will fill the gap.
The Bottom Line Alaska’s Arctic waters are an overlooked but critical front in U.S. homeland defense. The Coast Guard may be on point, but the Navy’s presence under the ice and in the chokepoints is just as important. Together, they demonstrate that the U.S. is watching, ready, and committed to protecting its northern approaches.
That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter — a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.
A Comprehensive Series by Americans for a Stronger Navy
By Bill Cullifer, Founder – Americans for a Stronger Navy
Introduction: Why We’re Launching This Series on Scarborough Shoal
What is Scarborough Shoal?
At first glance, it’s just a triangle-shaped reef in the South China Sea, roughly 120 nautical miles west of Luzon, Philippines. No buildings. No runway. No flag.
Scarborough Shoal, courtesy of the U.S. Navy.
But don’t let its humble appearance fool you.
Scarborough Shoal is one of the most contested flashpoints in the Indo-Pacific. This seemingly minor cluster of rocks and reefs sits at the heart of one of the world’s most vital sea lanes — and could very well be the next spark in a global conflict.
What Prompted This Series
We didn’t choose Scarborough Shoal at random. This series was prompted by a disturbing escalation in Chinese maritime aggression in the South China Sea — specifically at Scarborough Shoal, a small reef with outsized strategic consequences.
Recent satellite photo of Scarborough Shoal showing Chinese vessels surrounding the reef, with overlay graphics indicating vessel positions and types
Recent events that brought this to a head include:
A Chinese cutter and guided-missile destroyer collided during a botched blockade attempt of Philippine Coast Guard vessels ten nautical miles off Scarborough Shoal in August 2025.
USS Higgins (DDG-76) sailed within 12 nautical miles of Scarborough Shoal conducting a Freedom of Navigation Operation (FONOP) — the first known U.S. military operation in at least six years in these specific waters.
Chinese Coast Guard harassment of Philippine resupply missions.
Dumping of concrete blocks — a likely signal of future construction.
Swarming of the area by Chinese maritime militia vessels.
The Scarborough Shoal is quickly becoming a litmus test for Chinese expansionism and U.S. resolve.
Why Now: The Wake-Up Call
Scarborough Shoal lies just 120 nautical miles off the Philippine coast — well within their Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) — and even closer to America’s red lines. When China seized de facto control of the shoal in 2012, the U.S. stood back. Many viewed this as a strategic failure of deterrence.
Now, the world is witnessing the possibility of militarization of the reef — and direct confrontation with a U.S. ally. That makes this more than a regional issue. It’s a crisis in the making.
The 2012 Standoff: A Turning Point
In April 2012, Philippine authorities attempted to arrest Chinese fishermen operating illegally in the shoal. Chinese maritime surveillance ships intervened. A tense standoff ensued, lasting weeks. The U.S. brokered a deal: both sides would withdraw.
The Philippines kept its word. China didn’t.
Instead, China took control of Scarborough Shoal, effectively barring Filipino access ever since. They now patrol it with coast guard cutters, militia fishing boats, and surveillance drones — sometimes even water cannons. Construction may follow.
A Geopolitical Tinderbox in the Sea
The South China Sea is home to trillions of dollars in annual global trade. It’s also flush with resources: fish, gas, oil, and geostrategic leverage. China claims nearly all of it under its so-called “Nine-Dash Line” — a sweeping assertion that ignores international law and overrides the rights of Southeast Asian nations like the Philippines, Vietnam, and Malaysia.
Scarborough Shoal, or Bajo de Masinloc as the Filipinos call it, lies within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone (EEZ), as defined under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). In 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration definitively ruled that China’s sweeping claims in the South China Sea had no legal basis under international law.
China’s response? They ignored the ruling entirely and doubled down on their aggression.
My Perspective: This Isn’t Just a Reef
As a former Navy destroyer sailor from the 1970s, I understand how seemingly minor naval flashpoints can quickly spiral. I launched Americans for a Stronger Navy to bridge the gap between what’s happening on the water and what the American public knows.
When I began Americans for a Stronger Navy, I did so because I believed — and still believe — that Americans are not being told the full story.
Scarborough Shoal isn’t on the nightly news — but it should be.
This reef is about more than rocks and water. It’s about:
Sovereignty
International law
Access to critical trade routes
Maintaining a rules-based order
The failure of deterrence
The rise of maritime bullying
The fragility of global trade
And the uncomfortable question: Will America act, or will we retreat?
Why Americans Must Pay Attention
Most Americans have never heard of Scarborough Shoal, but they should. Here’s why it matters to you:
Over $3 trillion in trade passes through the South China Sea annually.
China is testing the boundaries of international law and Western will.
Scarborough is a potential trigger point for a wider conflict — even WWIII.
The U.S. Navy may be forced to act, and our sailors are on the front line.
Success here emboldens China’s tactics elsewhere — Taiwan Strait, East China Sea.
Control of Scarborough supports China’s broader Belt and Road Initiative and maritime silk road ambitions.
If you think a shoal doesn’t matter, consider this: $3.4 trillion in global trade flows through the South China Sea every year. China is attempting to rewrite the rules of international waters. And the U.S. Navy — your Navy — is the thin blue line standing in the way.
Coming Up in This Series
The history of Scarborough Shoal and how we got here
The 2012 U.S.-brokered standoff and its long-term impact
The 2016 international arbitration ruling and China’s defiance
China’s maritime militia and “gray zone” tactics
The importance of fishing rights, seabed minerals, and cable networks
Allied response frameworks: QUAD, AUKUS, and Philippines mutual defense commitments
The implications for the U.S., our allies, and our Navy
Economic warfare potential and leverage tactics
Technology, surveillance, and intelligence dimensions
WWIII scenarios — and what they could look like
Congressional and policy tools available (or missing)
What Americans know (or don’t) about this growing threat
Each post will build context and momentum — helping readers understand why this small reef could shape the future of American security strategy in Asia and beyond.
Join the Mission
Understanding Scarborough Shoal is understanding a fault line in today’s global order. This series isn’t just about sounding the alarm — it’s about equipping Americans with insight, history, and facts so we can rally support, demand accountability, and avoid miscalculation.
If we don’t understand where the storm is brewing, we won’t know when to take shelter — or when to stand our ground.
Scarborough Shoal may seem far away. But the values at stake — sovereignty, freedom of navigation, and deterrence — are right at our doorstep.
Not to inflame. Not to fearmonger. But to educate, illuminate, and inspire action.
Please follow along, share with others, and help us shine a spotlight on one of the most important — and most underreported — strategic flashpoints of our time.
Stay with us. Read. Share. Talk about it.
Because understanding this reef might just help us prevent the next war.
A Final Thought
If a reef you’ve never heard of could spark the next major war — dragging America and its sailors into the fight — doesn’t that make it worth understanding?
Let’s chart the course together.
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.
210728-N-FO714-1033 TAIWAN STRAIT (July 28, 2021) The Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Benfold (DDG 65) transits the Taiwan Strait while conducting routine underway operations. Benfold is forward-deployed to the U.S. 7th Fleet area of operations in support of a free and open Indo-Pacific. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Deanna C. Gonzales)
Introduction
In a recent Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, Senator Tom Cotton posed a sobering question to Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command: What would happen to the global economy if China attacked or invaded Taiwan?
The answer, echoed by both military and civilian experts, is nothing short of catastrophic.
Investor Ken Griffin warned that a rupture over Taiwan could send the world into “great depression circumstances.” Ian Easton of the Naval War College has long warned of China’s ability to disrupt global trade and exploit vulnerabilities in the Indo-Pacific. The U.S. Navy and our allies cannot afford to treat these concerns as hypothetical.
Why Taiwan Matters to the Global Economy
Taiwan is not only a leading global manufacturer of semiconductors—it is also a key node in international shipping. Roughly one-third of the world’s trade passes through the South China Sea. Any disruption caused by Chinese military action—especially a blockade or invasion of Taiwan—would choke critical sea lanes and sever the supply chains that power everything from cars to smartphones to critical defense systems.
What Ken Griffin Got Right
In January 2024, Griffin put it bluntly:
“If there were a rupture around Taiwan, it would be catastrophic to both the Chinese and to the American economy.”
Griffin wasn’t talking about market jitters—he was warning about supply chain collapse, capital flight, manufacturing shutdowns, and global financial panic. These effects wouldn’t just hit Wall Street—they would impact farmers, truckers, teachers, and service members alike.
Sea Power Is Economic Poweruh
This is why Americans for a Stronger Navy continues to sound the alarm. The U.S. Navy isn’t just a military force—it’s a shield for global commerce. Sea power ensures stability in the Indo-Pacific and protects the economic lifelines that Americans depend on.
Today’s tools of deterrence extend beyond warships. Ships, drones, AI—they all play a critical role in keeping trade flowing and conflict at bay. Without continued investment in these technologies and the people who operate them, our economy and our alliances remain vulnerable.
Blockade drills and military posturing by China are not symbolic—they are preparation. And we must respond with strategic clarity, industrial readiness, and unwavering public support for naval strength.
Conclusion: Americans Deserve to Know
This isn’t just a military issue—it’s an economic one. The American people deserve to understand what’s at stake, and what it means to be unprepared.
If we fail to invest in our fleet, fortify our alliances, and educate the public, we risk more than just ships—we risk our prosperity.
A Review of Heritage Foundation Report BG3902 by Americans for a Stronger Navy
Introduction
The Heritage Foundation’s latest report, “Arming for Peace: Expanding the Defense Industrial Base and Arming Taiwan Faster” (BG3902), echoes what Americans for a Stronger Navy has been sounding the alarm on: The threats facing the United States are real, escalating, and dangerously close to overwhelming our current naval capabilities. As Brent Sadler writes, the time for talk has passed. Action is overdue. If we don’t mobilize now, America risks losing the ability to deter war and defend freedom in the Indo-Pacific and beyond.
As Sadler states: “As Americans go about their daily lives unmolested, the world is accelerating in its change—much of it perilous to U.S. national survival.” He warns that “on the back of a decades-long sustained military build-up, China’s military is increasingly confident and willing to directly challenge the U.S.”
His call to action is clear: “The U.S. must restore ebbing national deterrence and prevent a war in Asia—while not ceding its democratic way of life and prosperity for the next generations.”
Key Findings That Should Wake America Up
China is preparing for war. Admiral Davidson’s 2021 warning that China could strike Taiwan by 2027 has not only proven prescient, it’s now backed by an unprecedented military buildup. China has conducted massive joint-force invasion rehearsals and increased provocations around Taiwan. As Brent Sadler put it, “Aggressive maneuvers around Taiwan right now are not exercises, as they call them. They are rehearsals.”
That warning was underscored this week when the Chinese military launched large-scale joint drills around Taiwan, including its Shandong aircraft carrier battle group. According to China’s own Eastern Theater Command, these drills are a “severe warning and forceful containment against Taiwan independence.” With missile forces, air strikes, and blockade rehearsals now unfolding, many in Taiwan — and around the world — are rightfully concerned. Sadler’s insights about China’s evolving risk tolerance add important context to these real-time developments.
Further validating the urgency, the U.S. Naval War College’s China Maritime Report No. 14 found that Chinese analysts themselves believe the PLA has narrowed the gap with the U.S. military, especially in its immediate region. “There is consensus in China that the PLA has narrowed the gap in overall military capabilities with the United States over the last two decades,” the report notes.
Russia and China are approaching U.S. shores. Testimony from U.S. Northern Command chief Gen. Gregory Guillot before Congress confirmed that joint Russian-Chinese military patrols have entered the U.S. Air Defense Identification Zone near Alaska — levels not seen since before the Ukraine war began. One coordinated flight last July saw Russian TU-95 and Chinese H-6 bombers test U.S. response time. This should serve as a wake-up call: our adversaries are not just projecting power near Taiwan, they’re probing U.S. airspace and waters closer to home. As Politico reported, Chinese “dual-use” vessels under scientific pretenses are mapping the Arctic for future military operations.
U.S. deterrence is fading. Years of underinvestment in shipbuilding and naval readiness have created dangerous gaps. Delays in weapons deliveries, inadequate port infrastructure, and a depleted missile defense stockpile are symptoms of a nation unprepared for a prolonged maritime conflict. As Sadler warns, “Failing to act… could result in the most destructive and consequential war the U.S. has ever had to fight.”
The Navy is stretched thin. The U.S. Navy has sustained an aggressive forward presence, but at great cost. Ship wear, sailor fatigue, and insufficient repair capacity are taking their toll. The grounding of the USNS Big Horn disrupted combat ops in the Red Sea, highlighting our logistical fragility. Sadler notes, “This comes at a cost in added wear on the ships and sailors reliant on a logistics infrastructure of ports, support ships, and dry docks too few to assure contested forward naval operations.”
The world is on fire. From Ukraine to the Red Sea to the Arctic, our adversaries are watching and testing U.S. resolve. China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea now operate more boldly, confident in America’s disunity and domestic distraction.
Taiwan is not a distant concern. More than 80,000 Americans live, work, or travel there. A war over Taiwan would drag us into conflict, devastate global supply chains, and send shockwaves through the U.S. economy. As Sadler puts it plainly, “Taiwan is where over 80,000 Americans live, work, or travel on any given day.”
China’s geographic advantage cannot be ignored. According to the CMSI report, Chinese military capabilities are particularly potent within the First Island Chain, which includes Taiwan. “Chinese capabilities may…contest U.S. supremacy in scenarios close to home,” the report warns. That’s where deterrence matters most—and where readiness is most urgently needed.
Why Americans Should Care
This is not just a Navy problem. It’s an American problem. Delays in defense production, weak infrastructure, and an uninformed public are national vulnerabilities. If Americans fail to understand what is at stake, we will fail to hold our leaders accountable. And if we fail to act, we will be forced to react under far worse circumstances.
A strong Navy protects freedom of navigation, global trade, energy security, and the American way of life. Without it, our adversaries will decide what happens in the Taiwan Strait, the Red Sea, the South China Sea — and now, even the Arctic.
What the Navy Needs Now
A modern Naval Act. We need a 21st-century version of the pre-WWII Naval Act to rapidly rebuild shipyards, expand production, and modernize our fleet. Sadler calls this “a promising first step to regain the ability to sustain a wartime economy in a prolonged war with China.”
Real investment in maritime infrastructure. Ports, dry docks, and logistics support are vital national security assets that must be revitalized now.
Faster arms deliveries to Taiwan. The delays in Harpoon, Javelin, and Stinger deliveries must be resolved. Taiwan’s ability to defend itself is our first line of deterrence. Sadler emphasizes that “how the new Administration responds and accelerates the arming of Taiwan will be key in sustaining the military balance and peace in the near term.”
A unified national strategy. We must operate differently — with diplomatic, economic, and military efforts aligned. Naval statecraft must be at the heart of this new Cold War strategy. Sadler emphasizes, “Naval statecraft is the recommended way forward; that is, a maritime strategic framework for using American power.”
The CMSI report reminds us that training, human capital, and logistics remain U.S. advantages. While China may be catching up in hardware, “Chinese training still lags. The gap in the software [human resources and development] is even bigger,” the report notes. But these gaps can close — unless we act now to protect and reinforce our edge.
An Engaged and Educated Public
At Americans for a Stronger Navy, we believe in peace through strength. But strength requires public awareness, buy-in, and civic action. That’s why we launched the Americans for a Stronger Navy Educational Series — to help Americans understand the stakes, the history, and the path forward.
We invite every reader to check out and sign up for the Educational Series on StrongerNavy.org. Learn what makes our Navy vital to our security and prosperity. Share it with others. Talk about it. Get involved.
Conclusion
We are not powerless. But we must not be silent. The Heritage Foundation, the U.S. Naval War College, and recent military testimony to Congress all point to the same reality: America is in the early stages of a long contest with near-peer adversaries, and we must prepare now.
It’s time for Americans to wake up, stand up, and demand a Navy that is ready not just for today’s threats, but tomorrow’s challenges.
America needs a stronger Navy. And the Navy needs a stronger America behind it.
In a move that could reshape the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific, North Korea has unveiled a nuclear-powered submarine under construction for the first time. The announcement, accompanied by images of Kim Jong Un inspecting the shipyard, raises serious questions about regional security, technological proliferation, and the future of naval warfare.
For years, North Korea’s submarine fleet was seen as aging and limited in capability. This new development, however, suggests a leap forward—one that could allow Pyongyang to launch nuclear missiles from stealthy underwater platforms. If confirmed, this would be a major strategic shift, making it harder for the U.S. and its allies to detect and respond to potential attacks.
So how did a heavily sanctioned nation achieve this milestone? And more importantly—what does it mean for the United States, its allies, and the U.S. Navy?
Key Takeaways
North Korea has publicly showcased a nuclear-powered submarine under construction, potentially capable of carrying nuclear-capable missiles.
Experts speculate that North Korea may have received Russian technological assistance in exchange for supporting Russia’s war efforts in Ukraine.
If deployed, this submarine would significantly enhance North Korea’s second-strike capability, making its nuclear deterrence more credible.
The development complicates regional security and raises concerns about a growing alliance between North Korea and Russia in military technology sharing.
Why Americans Should Care
For many Americans, North Korea’s military developments may seem like distant problems. But in reality, this new submarine could directly impact U.S. national security.
A nuclear-powered submarine allows North Korea to extend its reach beyond the Korean Peninsula. Unlike land-based missile systems, which can be monitored through satellites and surveillance, a submarine carrying nuclear weapons can disappear into the vast ocean, making it nearly impossible to detect before a potential strike.
If North Korea can launch nuclear missiles from an underwater platform, it could target U.S. allies like South Korea and Japan with little warning—or even reach the U.S. mainland in the future. This dramatically raises the stakes and adds another layer of unpredictability to global security.
Implications for the USA
A Strengthened North Korea-Russia Alliance
Reports suggest that Russia may have provided North Korea with reactor technology for this submarine in exchange for conventional weapons or manpower for its war in Ukraine. If true, this signals a growing military partnership between two U.S. adversaries. A stronger North Korea emboldened by Russian support poses a direct challenge to U.S. leadership in the region.
Increased Risk of Nuclear Conflict
North Korea’s ability to launch nuclear strikes from the sea reduces the effectiveness of traditional missile defense systems. A surprise underwater attack would be harder to intercept, increasing the risk of escalation in the event of a conflict.
Undermining U.S. Deterrence
This development challenges the U.S.’s ability to maintain strategic deterrence. If North Korea gains confidence in its second-strike capability, it may be less willing to negotiate or back down from provocations.
Implications for the U.S. Navy
Greater Demand for Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW)
Detecting and neutralizing enemy submarines is already one of the most complex challenges in naval warfare. The U.S. Navy will need to enhance its ASW capabilities, including deploying more advanced sonar systems, hunter-killer submarines, and aerial surveillance.
Need for Expanded Naval Presence in the Indo-Pacific
A nuclear-powered submarine gives North Korea the ability to operate farther from its shores. The U.S. Navy may need to increase its presence in the region to counter this new threat, requiring more attack submarines, destroyers, and aircraft carriers to maintain sea control.
More Investments in Unmanned and AI-driven Warfare
The future of undersea warfare is shifting toward AI-driven detection and unmanned systems. This new threat underscores the urgency of investing in advanced drone technology, autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs), and real-time surveillance to track enemy movements.
Conclusion
North Korea’s nuclear-powered submarine is more than just a headline—it’s a wake-up call. It signals a shift in global security, exposing weaknesses in existing defense strategies. The U.S. must recognize this as part of a broader challenge, not only from North Korea but also from the growing military cooperation between adversaries like Russia and China.
America cannot afford to be complacent. A stronger U.S. Navy is essential to maintaining deterrence, securing trade routes, and ensuring that threats like this do not go unchecked. Now, more than ever, investing in naval power is not just a choice—it’s a necessity.
A stark reality: China’s naval task force is actively testing Australia’s response—militarily, politically, and diplomatically. A Chinese fleet operating near Australia’s waters isn’t just a message to Canberra; it’s a signal to the world that Beijing is expanding its reach.
For Americans, this should be a wake-up call. Australia, a key U.S. ally, has long enjoyed security from major conflicts. Yet, China’s maneuvers off its coast expose vulnerabilities in a way that should concern every nation reliant on maritime security, global trade, and naval power.
If China can challenge Australia’s sovereignty at sea today, what stops it from doing the same to America and its allies tomorrow?
China’s Strategy: Testing and Expanding
The deployment of a Chinese naval task group so close to Australia is no accident. It follows a pattern:
Probing reactions. Just as it has done in the South China Sea, the Taiwan Strait, and Latin American ports, China is assessing how the world will respond to its growing military presence.
Disrupting global security norms. Conducting live-fire drills near civilian air routes, refusing to issue proper warnings, and testing defense response times all serve a greater goal—normalizing an expanded Chinese naval footprint.
Challenging the free world. This is about more than Australia. China is signaling that it has the capability—and the intent—to pressure democratic nations and reshape global power structures in its favor.
This matters to the United States because we rely on the same global shipping lanes, trade networks, and security partnerships that China is testing right now.
Lessons for the U.S. Navy and America
Jennifer Parker’s article points out an uncomfortable truth: Australia’s navy is struggling to meet growing demands. Its limited number of warships, outdated replenishment capabilities, and defense spending shortfalls are now under the spotlight.
But let’s not pretend this problem is unique to Australia.
The U.S. Navy is stretched thin. With growing commitments in the Indo-Pacific, Middle East, and beyond, America is already balancing a smaller fleet against greater global threats.
Shipbuilding capacity is a bottleneck. While China launches warships at record speed, the U.S. struggles to maintain its current fleet.
Defense funding debates mirror Australia’s. At just 2% of GDP, U.S. defense spending is below Cold War levels, and ship procurement continues to face budgetary and political hurdles.
Australia’s vulnerabilities should be a case study for the United States. If a key U.S. ally is struggling to keep pace with China’s naval expansion, America cannot afford to take its own naval dominance for granted.
What Needs to Happen Next?
The right response is not panic—it’s preparation. America must learn from Australia’s situation and take the following steps:
Increase Naval Readiness
The U.S. must expand and modernize its fleet, ensuring it has the ships, submarines, and logistical support needed to deter threats.
Fleet maintenance and shipyard infrastructure must be prioritized so that existing assets remain operational.
Strengthen Strategic Alliances
The U.S.-Australia partnership is critical—joint naval exercises, intelligence sharing, and strategic basing agreements must be expanded.
Coordination with Japan, the Philippines, India, and other Indo-Pacific allies must also be reinforced.
Engage the American Public
Most Americans aren’t aware of how dependent the U.S. economy and security are on naval power.
China isn’t just flexing its military strength—it’s waging a long-term strategic contest to control global trade, technology, and resources.
If we don’t educate and rally support for a stronger Navy now, we risk falling behind when it matters most.
Final Thought: A Call to Action
Australia is waking up to the reality that it must invest in naval power to protect its interests. America should take this moment to do the same.
We don’t need alarmism. We need action.
The choice is simple: Invest in a stronger Navy today, or risk facing a crisis tomorrow.
