Tag: National Security

Posted on

Why the Gulf (of America) Matters: A Maritime Powerhouse & Naval Stronghold

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

The renaming of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America has sparked discussions, but names aside, this region has long been one of the most strategic waterways in the world. The U.S. Navy has played a critical role in securing these waters, ensuring trade routes remain open, energy supplies are protected, and national security is upheld.

Renaming bodies of water is nothing new. According to the Associated Press (AP), in 2015, President Barack Obama renamed Mount McKinley to Denali, recognizing its indigenous heritage. In 2013, Hillary Clinton remarked that if China could claim nearly the entire South China Sea, the U.S. could have labeled the Pacific Ocean the ‘American Sea’ after World War II. Even earlier, Mississippi legislators proposed renaming their portion of the Gulf as the “Gulf of America” in 2012, though it was largely symbolic.

While names may change, the Gulf’s importance remains the same—it is a lifeline for trade, military operations, and energy security. This article focuses on the facts—why the Gulf matters to America’s security, economy, and the strength of the U.S. Navy.

The Gulf’s Strategic History and Naval Legacy

The Gulf has been a key maritime battlefield in U.S. history, from the War of 1812 to World War II. The U.S. Navy has played a central role in defending American interests and maintaining stability in these waters.

  • The Battle of Mobile Bay (1864) – A defining moment in the Civil War.
  • The Gulf Blockade in WWII – Preventing German U-boats from disrupting supply chains.
  • The Cuban Missile Crisis (1962) – A tense naval standoff that highlighted the Gulf’s strategic importance.

Today, the Navy remains the dominant force in the Gulf, ensuring stability and security in the region.

The U.S. Navy’s Role in the Gulf of America

The Navy conducts daily operations to protect trade, energy, and national security. Key missions include:

  • Patrolling shipping lanes to ensure free trade.
  • Securing oil and gas infrastructure from cyber and physical attacks.
  • Countering drug smuggling and trafficking networks.
  • Responding to hurricanes and natural disasters.

Key U.S. Naval Bases in the Gulf

  • Naval Air Station Pensacola (FL) – Aviation training.
  • Naval Air Station Corpus Christi (TX) – Aircraft support.
  • Naval Station Mayport (FL) – Destroyer and amphibious fleet.
  • Naval Air Station Key West (FL) – Counter-drug operations.

As threats increase globally, is the U.S. Navy stretched too thin to secure the Gulf effectively?

Is the U.S. Navy Strong Enough to Secure the Gulf?

With rising global tensions, cyber vulnerabilities, and shipbuilding challenges, the Navy’s presence in the Gulf faces new pressures.

  • The Navy is spread across the Pacific, Arctic, and Middle East, requiring more ships and personnel.
  • Shipbuilding delays mean the U.S. Navy is shrinking rather than growing.
  • Older ships are being retired faster than new ones are being built, creating fleet gaps.

Cybersecurity Threats in the Gulf

The biggest future threats may not come from warships—but from cyberattacks.

  • Hackers have already targeted U.S. energy infrastructure, shutting down pipelines and refineries.
  • China, Russia, and Iran have cyber units capable of disrupting U.S. ports and energy grids.
  • The Gulf’s 4,000+ offshore oil platforms and refineries are vulnerable to hacking.

A successful cyberattack on a major port like Houston or New Orleans could cripple U.S. exports, disrupt global trade, and weaken naval operations.

U.S. Response: Strengthening Cyber Defense

  • The Navy and U.S. Cyber Command are expanding maritime cybersecurity operations.
  • AI-driven threat detection is being tested for oil rigs and naval vessels.
  • Private industries are working with the military to protect infrastructure.

Military-Commercial Overlap: The Jones Act & Shipbuilding

The Jones Act (1920) requires that only U.S.-built, U.S.-crewed ships can transport goods between U.S. ports. This protects American shipbuilders and maritime workers, but there’s a problem:

  • American shipbuilding is lagging behind China, South Korea, and Japan.
  • The U.S. fleet of commercial ships has shrunk, making supply chains vulnerable in wartime.

A weaker shipbuilding industry means a weaker Navy. If war broke out, the U.S. would rely on foreign-built commercial ships for logistics.

Revitalizing U.S. shipbuilding would strengthen both military and commercial fleets, ensuring the U.S. remains competitive and secure.

Economic & Strategic Impact of the Gulf of America

The Gulf isn’t just a naval stronghold—it’s an economic powerhouse.

  • 15% of U.S. crude oil production comes from the Gulf.
  • Over 50% of all U.S. maritime commerce moves through the Gulf.
  • 40% of U.S. seafood (shrimp, oysters) is sourced from the Gulf.

Economic Vulnerabilities

  • A hurricane, cyberattack, or naval conflict could cripple energy exports and supply chains.
  • A strong U.S. Navy presence ensures stability, preventing disruptions that could impact millions of Americans.

The Gulf of America Needs a Strong Navy

The renaming of the Gulf is symbolic, but the real issue is whether the U.S. has the naval power to secure it.

  • The Navy must remain strong in the Gulf to protect trade, energy, and security.
  • Cyber defense is as important as naval defense.
  • Revitalizing U.S. shipbuilding would strengthen both the Navy and the economy.

A Call to Action

Supporting a Stronger Navy means:

✔ More investment in fleet modernization.
✔ Better cybersecurity for ports and oil infrastructure.
✔ Reviving American shipbuilding to ensure a strong commercial-military fleet.

Posted on

When America Ships, America Wins

Wake up, America—our destiny depends on it.

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

Introduction

In our ongoing pursuit to strengthen America’s sea power, we must confront the challenges facing both our Navy and the broader maritime domain. Over the weekend, I immersed myself in key publications—from Captain Brent D. Sadler’s impassioned article, The Nation Needs a Shipbuilding Revolution (February 2025 Proceedings), to insightful analyses on platforms like War on the Rocks and legislative presentations regarding the SHIPS for America Act. In addition, I revisited the history and nuance of Naval versus Maritime Statecraft.

The conclusion is clear: our nation’s strength at sea relies on a transformative, integrated approach. In short, When America Ships, America Wins.

Why This Matters

For too long, the U.S. Navy has operated under a narrow warfighting mandate—a legacy of policies from the 1950s that prioritized combat readiness above all else. Yet history teaches us that true American sea power has always depended on two interlinked capabilities: a modern, formidable fleet and an engaged maritime domain that underpins commerce, diplomacy, and humanitarian efforts.

As Rep. Garamendi recently stated,
“Today, less than 200 oceangoing ships fly the American flag; the SHIPS for America Act will empower our shipyards and marine merchants to uphold our country’s status as a leader in the maritime industry.”

Meanwhile, Senator Mark Kelly emphasized,
“Strengthening America’s shipbuilding capacity and revitalizing our commercial maritime industry is critical to both our national security and economic resilience.”

These words capture the urgent need to reinvest in our naval statecraft while simultaneously enhancing our broader maritime strength.

Our Journey to Clarity
Throughout my review, several key insights emerged:

Dissecting the Sources: Captain Sadler’s article calls for a revolution in U.S. naval shipbuilding. He writes, “For too long, needed investment in and action to bolster our nation’s maritime industrial base have been elusive. That luxury is no longer feasible given the threat from a revanchist and massively invested Chinese military.” His words, combined with insights from War on the Rocks and historical reflections, remind us that our Navy must once again balance combat readiness with essential peacetime missions.

Clarifying Terminology: We now clearly distinguish between “naval statecraft”—focused on rebuilding our fleet and shipbuilding capacity—and “maritime statecraft,” which encompasses the broader economic, diplomatic, and logistical roles at sea. Recognizing that these two concepts are mutually reinforcing helps create a coherent strategic message.

Refining Our Message: After extensive review and discussion, our distilled, bold message is: When America Ships, America Wins. Coupled with the rallying cry, Wake up, America—our destiny depends on it, this encapsulates the urgent need to invest in our naval statecraft to secure our maritime future.

Key Takeaways and Implications

Integrated Mission for a Modern Era: A strong Navy is not just about preparing for war—it is the foundation of national security, economic prosperity, and global maritime influence. When America builds its ships, it reinforces its entire maritime domain.

Economic and Security Benefits: Investment in our shipbuilding industry creates high-quality jobs, revitalizes our manufacturing base, and ensures our fleet is capable of sustaining military operations and global trade. Without sufficient modern vessels, our ability to maintain critical supply chains is at risk.

Historical Lessons for Today: The interwar period showed that the U.S. Navy once balanced readiness for war with vital peacetime missions like humanitarian aid and diplomatic engagement. Recalling these lessons provides a blueprint for integrating naval and maritime statecraft in today’s complex environment.

In my efforts to understand the challenges facing the U.S. Navy and our maritime infrastructure, I have spent a fair amount of time reviewing the Jones Act and the range of views surrounding it. While there are differing opinions on how best to strengthen our domestic shipping industry, one thing is clear—America needs more ships, a stronger supporting infrastructure, and a Navy that is fully equipped to protect our national security. Regardless of where one stands on the specifics of maritime policy, we can all agree that a Stronger Navy is critical to American security and economic resilience. My focus remains on ensuring that we have the industrial capacity, shipbuilding capabilities, and logistics networks necessary to maintain U.S. maritime strength in an increasingly contested world.

Why Americans Should Care

For over two centuries, American maritime strength has been a cornerstone of our global leadership. Yet today, our domestic shipbuilding industry has shrunk from over 300 shipyards in the 1980s to just 20, and our U.S.-flagged commercial fleet has dwindled to fewer than 80 vessels. With China dominating global shipbuilding and maritime trade, the equation is simple: When America Ships, America Wins. Our shipyards are the engines powering our Navy, safeguarding our commerce, and securing our freedom.

Implications for the Navy and the Maritime Domain

For the Navy: Modernizing our fleet enhances operational readiness, supports a skilled and sustainable workforce, and allows the Navy to execute both war and peacetime missions. A modernized Navy is essential to deter adversaries and defend our national interests.

For the Maritime Domain: A thriving shipbuilding industry is vital for protecting American commerce, ensuring free navigation, and fostering economic resilience. Strengthening our maritime statecraft reinforces strategic partnerships and maintains our global influence.

The Legislative Response: SHIPS for America Act

Bipartisan efforts led by figures such as Senator Mark Kelly, Congressman Mike Waltz, Rep. Trent Kelly, and Rep. John Garamendi have culminated in the introduction of the Shipbuilding and Harbor Infrastructure for Prosperity and Security (SHIPS) for America Act. This comprehensive legislation proposes to:

  • Revive U.S. Shipbuilding: Offer tax incentives and targeted investments to rebuild our shipyards and attract private-sector growth.
  • Expand the U.S.-Flagged Merchant Fleet: Implement cargo preference laws to ensure more goods travel on American ships.
  • Strengthen National Security: Increase the supply of ships available for military logistics and rapid response.
  • Develop a New Maritime Workforce: Establish apprenticeships, trade school incentives, and recruiting programs to restore critical skills in ship maintenance and marine operations.
  • Forge Strategic Partnerships with Allies: Collaborate with trusted nations like Japan, South Korea, Finland, and Canada to enhance our shipbuilding capacity while ensuring American oversight.

This legislation is not about partisan politics—it’s about survival. With global supply chains vulnerable to disruption, the urgency to rebuild our maritime strength has never been greater.

Conclusion & Call to Action

History teaches us that nations fall when they lose control of the seas. Today, as our adversaries grow stronger and our industrial base shrinks, we cannot afford to dawdle. It’s not war we desire, but peace achieved through strength—and our enemies must know that America will not stand idly by.

Join us in this crucial mission. We call on policymakers, industry leaders, and every American who values freedom and prosperity to support transformative initiatives that invest in our naval statecraft. By strengthening our shipbuilding industry and modernizing our Navy, we secure a robust maritime future that benefits us all.

When American Ships, America Wins.
Wake up, America—our destiny depends on it.

Visit StrongerNavy.org to learn more, get involved, and help ensure that our nation’s shipbuilding efforts pave the way for a secure and prosperous future.

In service to a stronger America,
Bill

Posted on

Is DeepSeek, Deep Trouble? The U.S. Navy Thinks So.

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

The U.S. Navy has issued a firm directive banning the use of DeepSeek, a Chinese artificial intelligence platform, citing serious security and ethical concerns. This move highlights growing apprehensions over foreign AI technology, particularly when developed in adversarial nations like China.

What’s the Issue with DeepSeek?

On January 28, 2025, the Navy sent out an “all hands” email warning all personnel to avoid using DeepSeek “in any capacity.” The directive explicitly prohibits service members from downloading, installing, or using the AI for work-related or personal tasks.

The concerns are rooted in the platform’s Chinese origins and its potential ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Like TikTok, DeepSeek is suspected of being subject to Chinese laws that compel companies to share data with the government upon request. Cybersecurity experts warn that the AI may be capable of tracking user keystrokes and collecting sensitive data.

Why Now?

DeepSeek has recently made headlines for surpassing OpenAI’s ChatGPT in popularity on Apple’s App Store. The app’s sudden rise, its free access model, and its reportedly advanced reasoning capabilities have made it an instant disruptor in the AI space. But its low-cost development and unclear data security policies have set off alarm bells.

Government and Industry Reaction

  • President Donald Trump called DeepSeek’s success “a wake-up call” for American tech companies, urging greater innovation in AI.
  • Marc Andreessen, a billionaire tech investor, likened the rise of DeepSeek to a “Sputnik moment”, referring to the Soviet Union’s early lead in the space race.
  • Cybersecurity analysts warn that if DeepSeek gains widespread adoption, it could become a national security risk due to potential espionage capabilities.

The Bigger Picture

The U.S. has a history of banning or restricting Chinese tech over security concerns, with TikTok being the most high-profile example. The DeepSeek ban aligns with a broader generative AI policy shift within the Department of Defense, which prioritizes domestic and trusted AI sources for operational use.

Final Thoughts

The Navy’s ban raises critical questions about how foreign AI might be used for surveillance, data gathering, and influence operations. While DeepSeek might be an impressive technological achievement, the potential risks far outweigh the benefits—at least in the eyes of U.S. military leadership.

For Americans concerned about national security, this move should serve as a reminder: Who controls the technology, controls the information..

Stay updated on U.S. Navy news at StrongerNavy.org.

Posted on

Sealab and the Silent Frontier: Why Undersea Exploration Still Matters for America

SEALAB I was lowered off the coast of Bermuda in 1964
Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

In the 1960s, while the world marveled at NASA’s race to the moon, the U.S. Navy was quietly conducting its own groundbreaking experiments in the depths of the ocean. Capt. George Bond, a visionary Navy medical officer, saw the ocean floor as humanity’s next frontier. Through the Sealab program, Bond and his team pioneered technologies and techniques that pushed the boundaries of what was possible underwater.

Why this matters

Though it lacked the glory and attention of space exploration, Sealab revealed the untapped potential of the ocean and laid the groundwork for advancements that still benefit us today. But the real question remains: Why should Americans care about undersea exploration now, decades after the Sealab program ended?

The answer lies in what the oceans represent—security, resources, and innovation. In an increasingly competitive and interconnected world, America’s ability to operate and protect its interests underwater is more critical than ever.

The Vision of Sealab

The Sealab program was nothing short of audacious. In an era when divers could barely spend 30 minutes underwater using compressed air, Capt. Bond and his team envisioned a future where humans could live and work on the ocean floor for weeks or even months. Through Sealab I, II, and III, they developed and tested the revolutionary concept of saturation diving, which allowed divers to stay submerged for extended periods without suffering from decompression sickness.

Sealab II, in particular, demonstrated the viability of underwater living. Teams of aquanauts conducted scientific experiments, tested tools for underwater construction, and explored how the human body coped with prolonged exposure to the deep sea. The program even incorporated whimsical innovations, like a trained dolphin named Tuffy, to deliver supplies.

Despite its promise, the program ended tragically with the death of aquanaut Berry Cannon during the Sealab III mission. But the legacy of Sealab lived on, influencing both naval operations and the oil industry’s offshore drilling advancements.

The Ocean’s Strategic and Economic Importance

While Sealab was ahead of its time, its lessons are more relevant today than ever. The oceans cover 71% of the Earth’s surface and hold the key to global trade, communication, and resources. Undersea cables, for instance, carry 95% of the world’s internet traffic—making them critical to both commerce and national security.

Moreover, the ocean floor contains vast reserves of minerals, rare earth elements, and other resources essential for modern technologies. Nations like China are actively pursuing undersea mining and infrastructure projects to secure these resources, positioning themselves as dominant players in the maritime domain.

The U.S. Navy plays a vital role in safeguarding these interests. From protecting shipping lanes to monitoring underwater activity, the Navy’s ability to operate in the undersea domain is essential to America’s security and economic stability. Sealab’s pioneering spirit reminds us that exploration and innovation are necessary to maintain this edge.

The Lessons of Sealab for Today

The Sealab program was a testament to human ingenuity and resilience. The aquanauts’ willingness to push physical and technological limits paved the way for modern advancements in undersea exploration. Technologies developed during Sealab, such as saturation diving, are still used by the Navy and commercial industries today.

But the program also underscores the importance of readiness and adaptability. The challenges faced by the Sealab teams—equipment malfunctions, extreme cold, and life-threatening situations—are reminders that operating underwater requires constant vigilance and innovation.

As competition for undersea resources intensifies and adversaries like China and Russia expand their capabilities, the U.S. cannot afford to fall behind. Investing in undersea technologies, such as autonomous underwater vehicles and advanced submarines, is critical to maintaining America’s strategic advantage.

Why America Should Care

The oceans may not capture the public’s imagination like space, but they are no less important. Sealab showed us that the ocean floor is not just a mysterious expanse—it’s a frontier of opportunity and strategic importance. The Navy’s ability to operate effectively underwater is essential for protecting our economy, ensuring global stability, and deterring aggression.

And let me add this—while Elon Musk is busy dreaming of Mars, I think we can start a little closer to home. We live here. This planet is our home, and the ocean is a wealth of untapped opportunity. Supporting our Navy’s efforts to explore and protect the undersea domain isn’t just about national security; it’s about investing in the place where humanity will continue to thrive. Sorry, Elon, but this sailor would rather stay right here, on Earth.

A Call to Action

Sealab may be a forgotten chapter in America’s history, but its lessons remain vital. The program was a bold attempt to explore the unknown and push the limits of human potential. Today, we face new challenges and opportunities in the undersea domain, and we must rise to meet them with the same spirit of innovation and determination.

As Americans, we have a responsibility to support the Navy and ensure it has the resources and technologies needed to protect our interests. The oceans are a silent frontier, but their importance to our security and prosperity cannot be overstated. Let’s honor the legacy of Sealab by championing the Navy’s mission and investing in the future of undersea exploration.

The U.S. Navy’s commitment to undersea exploration and innovation lives on through the work of institutions like the Naval Undersea Warfare Center (NUWC), the Office of Naval Research (ONR), and the Naval Postgraduate School. These organizations, alongside collaborations like the National Institute for Undersea Vehicle Technology (NIUVT), continue to push the boundaries of what is possible beneath the waves. Their efforts ensure that America remains at the forefront of undersea research, protecting vital resources and advancing technology in ways that honor the legacy of Sealab and its pioneers.

Posted on

Strengthening America’s Maritime Future: A Wake-Up Call for Action

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

At Americans for a Stronger Navy, we have long advocated for a robust maritime strategy that includes both a stronger U.S. Navy and a revitalized civilian maritime industry. Our commitment to this cause is rooted in a belief that America’s strength at sea is indispensable to its national security, economic stability, and global leadership.

Recently, the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) released findings from an investigation into China’s dominance in the shipbuilding, maritime, and logistics sectors, revealing practices that undermine fair competition and threaten American interests. This news reaffirms the urgency of revitalizing our shipbuilding industry—a call echoed by U.S. legislators like Senator John Garamendi and others who are leading efforts to rebuild our maritime capabilities.

What the Investigation Found

The USTR investigation, launched in response to petitions by five unions, highlights how China’s aggressive industrial policies have positioned it as a global leader in shipbuilding. According to USTR Katherine Tai, China builds over 1,700 ships annually—dwarfing the fewer than five built by the United States. The report emphasizes that Beijing’s practices displace foreign firms, foster dependencies, and create significant economic and security risks for the U.S.

Quoting Katherine Tai:
“Beijing’s targeted dominance of these sectors undermines fair, market-oriented competition, increases economic security risks, and is the greatest barrier to revitalization of U.S. industries.”

Why This Matters

America’s maritime industry was once the backbone of our global influence and security. Today, it is a shadow of its former self, leaving us vulnerable to external dependencies. The decline of U.S. shipbuilding not only erodes our military readiness but also jeopardizes our economic security, particularly in the face of escalating geopolitical tensions with China.

The implications extend beyond shipbuilding. Logistics, supply chains, and the broader maritime ecosystem are critical to ensuring that America can sustain its global commitments and respond to crises effectively. As Alliance for American Manufacturing President Scott Paul aptly noted:
“Failing to take decisive action will leave our shipbuilding capabilities at the mercy of Beijing’s persistent predatory market distortions.”

Legislative Efforts to Revitalize U.S. Shipbuilding

Amid these challenges, leaders like Senator John Garamendi are working to reverse the tide. Garamendi, alongside Senators Mark Kelly and Todd Young, recently introduced the SHIPS for America Act—a comprehensive, bipartisan effort to rebuild the U.S. shipbuilding industry and expand the U.S.-flagged fleet. Key provisions of this legislation include:

  • Establishing a national maritime strategy and a White House Maritime Security Advisor.
  • Expanding the U.S.-flagged fleet by 250 ships over the next decade.
  • Rebuilding the shipyard industrial base with tax credits, financial incentives, and funding for workforce development.
  • Strengthening regulations to ensure government-funded cargo is transported on U.S.-flagged vessels.

These efforts align closely with our own calls for a balanced strategy that integrates the needs of both the Navy and civilian maritime industries.

What Needs to Be Done

The USTR’s findings, combined with the SHIPS for America Act and related initiatives, offer a roadmap to reclaim America’s maritime leadership. However, this will require decisive action from policymakers, industry leaders, and the American public. We need to:

  • Invest in shipbuilding infrastructure and workforce development.
  • Expand the U.S.-flagged fleet to reduce dependence on foreign shipping.
  • Foster innovation in shipbuilding technologies to compete globally.
  • Unite bipartisan support for maritime legislation that prioritizes national security and economic resilience.

A Call to Action: Wake Up, America!

The stakes have never been higher. As we outlined in our recent open letter, the decline of America’s maritime capabilities is not just an industry problem—it’s a national security crisis. For too long, we have allowed complacency to erode our standing as a maritime power. It’s time to wake up.

We urge you to contact your representatives and demand support for legislation like the SHIPS for America Act. Share this message with your community, and join us in advocating for a stronger Navy and a revitalized civilian maritime industry.

America’s future at sea depends on it. Let’s make it happen.

Credit to AFP for their reporting on the USTR investigation and to the Alliance for American Manufacturing for their continued advocacy.

“`

Posted on

Reflections on the U.S.-China Science and Technology Agreement: A Legacy of Neglect

On Jan. 31, 1979, Vice Premier Deng Xiaoping and President Jimmy Carter sign historic diplomatic agreements between the United States and China. (Photos: Jimmy Carter Library

Introduction: A Decision Made in Haste

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

The December 2024 renewal of the U.S.-China Science and Technology Agreement (STA) has left some Americans questioning its timing and rationale. While the original 1979 agreement aimed to foster collaboration and mutual respect, today’s geopolitical realities demand a more cautious approach. As an American deeply concerned about our nation’s security and technological leadership, I share the frustration of Senators Marco Rubio, Bill Hagerty, and Jim Risch, who criticized this rushed decision. Senator Risch aptly noted, “The era when this agreement made sense is long gone,” a sentiment that reflects the growing consensus among those wary of China’s strategic ambitions.

Historical Context: Cooperation vs. Competition

The STA, first signed under President Jimmy Carter and Premier Deng Xiaoping, symbolized a hopeful era of collaboration. It was a landmark moment in U.S.-China relations, with industries and policymakers believing that shared knowledge could lead to mutual prosperity. However, over the decades, successive administrations—Republican and Democratic alike—failed to reassess the agreement’s implications. Instead, they allowed industries to prioritize market access over national security, kicking the proverbial can down the road.

Now, as the stakes grow higher, the optics of renewing this agreement without public scrutiny are troubling. Worse, the decision was made just before a presidential transition, effectively denying the incoming administration an opportunity to weigh in. This lack of transparency is a glaring issue, especially given how previous agreements with China have often left the U.S. vulnerable.

The Costs of Neglect: Knowledge Shared, Power Shifted

The consequences of this complacency are clear:

Industrial Espionage: Cases like Motorola and Micron Technology illustrate how China has systematically exploited intellectual property to advance its technological and military capabilities.

Military Implications: From stealth fighters to missile technology, stolen innovations have directly bolstered China’s ability to challenge U.S. military dominance.

A Navy Left Holding the Line

While industries reaped profits, the Navy was left to address the fallout:

Countering Advanced Threats: The Navy now faces adversaries equipped with technologies once exclusive to the U.S., making global readiness more challenging.

Strategic Vulnerabilities: Decades of neglect have created gaps in naval capabilities, leaving our sailors to pick up the pieces without the tools they need.

A Call for Accountability and Action

The renewal of the STA should have been an opportunity for reevaluation, not a rushed decision made behind closed doors. While the updated agreement includes some safeguards, such as excluding critical technologies like AI and quantum computing, these measures fall short of addressing the broader risks.

As Dr. Steven T. Wills, Ph.D., Captain (USN Retired), author of Strategy Shelved: The Collapse of Cold War Naval Strategic Planning and Senior Advisor for American for a Stronger Navy, explains: “The renewal of the U.S.-China Science and Technology Agreement must be viewed with a critical eye, especially given China’s consistent exploitation of open collaborations to advance its military and technological objectives. As a former U.S. Navy officer and author focused on strategic naval planning, I’ve seen firsthand how seemingly innocuous decisions can have long-term implications for national security. This agreement, while framed as a step forward in modernizing cooperation, risks overlooking the broader strategic context. If we fail to adopt a comprehensive approach that aligns scientific collaboration with national security, we risk repeating the mistakes of the past—leaving our Navy and national defense community to address the consequences without adequate tools or support. The time for a unified, forward-looking strategy is now.”

Dr. Wills’ perspective highlights a critical point: this isn’t just about protecting intellectual property—it’s about ensuring that strategic decisions today don’t leave the Navy and the broader defense community vulnerable tomorrow.

The renewal of the STA should have been an opportunity for reevaluation, not a rushed decision made behind closed doors. While the updated agreement includes some safeguards, such as excluding critical technologies like AI and quantum computing, these measures fall short of addressing the broader risks.

It’s time to demand:

Comprehensive Evaluation: Policymakers, industry leaders, and defense experts must scrutinize agreements like the STA to ensure they align with national security interests.

Support for the Navy: Our sailors deserve the resources and tools necessary to address the consequences of decades of neglect.

A Unified National Strategy: The U.S. must adopt a cohesive approach to balancing innovation with security, ensuring industries that benefited from globalization contribute to safeguarding national interests.

Conclusion: Enough Is Enough

The optics of this renewal are undeniably poor. It sends the wrong message at a time when China has consistently exploited partnerships for strategic gain. Americans for a Stronger Navy stands for transparency, accountability, and vigilance. We cannot afford to be naïve or complacent when the stakes are so high.

As someone who served in the U.S. Navy during the Cold War, I’ve had enough of watching decision-makers prioritize short-term gains over long-term security. In upcoming podcasts, we will examine this agreement and its implications in greater detail, bringing together experts to discuss how America can reclaim its leadership in science and technology while safeguarding its future.

It’s time for all Americans—especially industries that have profited most—to step up and support the Navy and national security. This isn’t just about science; it’s about our freedom, our future, and our ability to stand strong in the face of growing challenges.

Posted on

An Open Letter: Strengthening America’s Maritime Future

Dear Captains Hendrix and Sadler,

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

Thank you for your recent article, Restoring Our Maritime Strength, which provides a compelling blueprint for addressing the urgent challenges facing the U.S. Navy and the broader maritime industry. Your insights underline the critical need for immediate, decisive action to secure America’s maritime future. As a former U.S. Destroyer Navy sailor and the founder of Americans for a Stronger Navy, I wholeheartedly support many of the recommendations outlined in your piece, though I believe there is room to expand and refine the conversation further.

Recognizing the Threats

Your framing of the maritime challenges posed by China’s growing naval and economic dominance is sobering and accurate. The convergence of military, commercial, and strategic threats from adversaries like China and Russia requires a holistic approach to maritime security. However, these challenges are not just Navy problems; they are American problems. As you noted, the decline in U.S. shipbuilding capacity and the neglect of our maritime industrial base have left us vulnerable. This is where public understanding and support become crucial.

Mobilizing Public Engagement

While your article rightly focuses on policy and institutional reform, the broader American public must be engaged in this conversation. Without public buy-in, even the most robust plans risk losing momentum. We must explain to Americans why our maritime strength is foundational to national security, economic stability, and global leadership. Initiatives like the “Ships for America Act” are a good starting point, but they need champions who can connect these policies to everyday American interests—from jobs in the shipbuilding industry to the safety of international trade routes.

Expanding the Workforce and Industrial Base

Your call to revitalize the maritime industrial base is vital, but it must also include targeted efforts to expand and diversify the workforce. Career Technical Education (CTE) programs, apprenticeships, and incentives for careers in shipbuilding and repair can rejuvenate a sector that has been overlooked for too long. Creating “maritime prosperity zones” could serve as a model for incentivizing investment in these industries while offering opportunities to underfunded high school and community college communities.

Addressing Maintenance and Readiness

The maintenance backlog you describe is a glaring vulnerability. Your suggestion of public-private partnerships to expand dry dock capacity is pragmatic and actionable. However, we must also address inefficiencies within existing shipyards. Streamlining repair processes, modernizing facilities, and investing in advanced technologies like AI and robotics can accelerate maintenance timelines and reduce costs.

Leadership and Culture

The emphasis on cultivating warfighting leaders is critical. As you noted, the Navy must identify and elevate officers who can think and act decisively in high-stakes environments. However, this cultural shift should also extend beyond leadership to include every sailor, including those with an interest in peace through strength. A Navy ready to face 21st-century challenges must foster innovation and adaptability at all levels.

Dale A. Jenkins, distinguished Staff Director of the Council on Foreign Relations, Senior Advisor for Americans for a Stronger Navy, and author of Diplomats and Admirals, has noted, “Leadership within the Navy must not only prioritize operational readiness but also inspire a culture of innovation and strategic foresight at every level of command.” His extensive experience underscores the necessity of aligning leadership reforms with strategic imperatives.

Dr. Steven Wills, Senior Advisor at the NAVALIST Center for Maritime Strategy and Senior Advisor for Americans for a Stronger Navy, reinforces this sentiment: “To meet the multifaceted challenges of the modern maritime domain, the Navy must embrace technological innovation and cultivate a culture prepared for high-intensity conflict.” His expertise highlights the importance of integrating advanced strategies with a focus on readiness.

Cybersecurity and Emerging Technologies

While your article focuses primarily on traditional maritime strategies, the increasing threat of cyber warfare cannot be ignored. My decades of experience in telecommunications and web technologies have demonstrated how adversaries exploit vulnerabilities in telecommunications and critical infrastructure to gain strategic advantages. A robust cybersecurity framework must be integrated into the Navy’s modernization plans, ensuring that new ships and systems are protected from digital threats. Additionally, emerging technologies like uncrewed systems and quantum sensing should play a prominent role in our maritime strategy.

Conclusion

I understand that many Americans feel overwhelmed by calls for urgent action on numerous fronts and are skeptical of government programs that promise change but fail to deliver. That is why it is essential to approach these efforts with a focus on accountability, transparency, and tangible benefits for the American people. By demonstrating clear progress and measurable outcomes, we can rebuild trust and show that investing in our maritime strength is an investment in our shared future.

Your article provides a vital roadmap for reinvigorating America’s maritime strength, but the implementation of these ideas will require a unified effort from policymakers, the Navy, industry leaders, and the American public. At Americans for a Stronger Navy, we are committed to fostering the public understanding and support necessary to drive these changes. Together, we can chart a course toward a stronger, more resilient Navy that is prepared to meet the challenges of today and tomorrow.

Posted on

Introducing Our Three-Part Series: Shaping the Future of Aerial Combat

Are Spaceships in the U.S. Navy’s future?
Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

F-35 vs. Drones in U.S. Defense Strategy

Why This Matters to All Americans

As technology evolves and global security challenges intensify, the conversation about the future of aerial combat grows increasingly critical. At Americans for a Stronger Navy, we believe this debate is not just for defense experts and policymakers—it’s a conversation that impacts every American. The decisions we make today about our military capabilities will shape the safety, security, and strategic posture of the United States for decades to come.

The stakes are monumental. From the taxpayer dollars funding advanced fighter programs to the geopolitical implications of maintaining air superiority, this is a topic that demands both transparency and public engagement. That’s why we’re launching a comprehensive three-part series to explore this issue from every angle.

What We Plan to Cover

Part 1: The Debate Over the F-35 Program

  • We will present the current arguments surrounding the F-35 program, including Elon Musk’s critiques of manned fighter jets, Lockheed Martin’s defense of the aircraft, and the U.S. Navy’s position on its strategic importance. This installment will provide a clear and balanced view of the differing perspectives.

Part 2: Behind the Scenes of Defense Planning

  • This segment will peel back the layers of what goes into planning programs like the F-35. From research and development to operational strategies, we’ll dive into the complexity of balancing current needs with future threats. This part will highlight the challenges faced by military planners and strategists, giving Americans a deeper appreciation of the decisions at hand.

Part 3: The Future of Aerial Combat and Public Involvement

  • In our final piece, we’ll explore how advancements in technology and evolving geopolitical dynamics will shape the future of aerial combat. This installment will conclude with a call to action, inviting the American public to engage with this issue and weigh in on the path forward.

Why This Topic Is Significant

The F-35 program has been a cornerstone of U.S. airpower, but it is also a lightning rod for criticism. High costs, technical challenges, and emerging alternatives like drone swarms have sparked intense debate. At the same time, the world is witnessing rapid advancements in hypersonics, artificial intelligence, and unmanned systems—technologies that could redefine the very nature of warfare.

This is about more than aircraft. It’s about maintaining America’s technological edge, ensuring national security, and spending taxpayer dollars responsibly. The choices we make today will determine whether the U.S. remains a global leader in military innovation or cedes ground to competitors like China and Russia.

Why Americans Should Care

At its heart, this is a conversation about priorities. Should the U.S. continue investing in programs like the F-35, or pivot to emerging technologies? How can we ensure our military remains strong while being fiscally responsible? These are questions that affect every American, and they deserve thoughtful, informed discussion.

We encourage you to follow this series, engage with the content, and share your thoughts. As citizens, we have a vital role to play in shaping the future of our nation’s defense. Together, we can ensure that America’s Navy remains not only stronger but also smarter and more efficient.

Stay tuned for Part 1 of our series, where we dive into the debate over the F-35 program and explore the arguments from all sides. Let’s navigate this complex topic together.