Submarines are indeed an integral part of the U.S. Navy’s future. Many agree that the United States needs more submarines if it is to deter China in the Indo-Pacific and maintain its maritime superiority.
Submarines are stealthy, survivable, and lethal platforms that can operate in contested waters and deliver precision strikes, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and special operations.
However, the U.S. submarine industrial base is facing serious challenges that threaten its ability to deliver the submarines that the Navy needs on time and on budget.
The submarine industrial base consists of two main shipbuilders — General Dynamics Electric Boat and Huntington Ingalls Industries’ Newport News Shipbuilding — and hundreds of suppliers across the country that provide parts, materials, and services for submarine construction and maintenance.
The submarine industrial base is struggling to keep up with the growing demand for submarines, which has increased from one Virginia-class attack submarine per year in 2012 to two per year in 2021, plus the addition of the Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine program, which is the Navy’s top acquisition priority.
The Navy has recognized the importance of stabilizing and strengthening the submarine industrial base and has taken some actions to address its challenges. However, these actions are not enough.
The submarine industrial base needs more support and investment from Congress, the Department of Defense (DoD), and from our view, especially from the American public if we’re going to get anywhere. Decisions surrounding our national defense and industrial capabilities shouldn’t just be left to policymakers in isolation.
In our history, we’ve seen time and again the profound impact public opinion and support can have on shaping policy decisions. For our submarine industrial base and broader naval defense, public support isn’t just a nice-to-have; it’s the lynchpin.
While experts can identify problems and policymakers can draft solutions, it’s the collective will of the American people that determines our nation’s priorities.
By becoming informed, involved, and vocal about the importance of a strong and capable Navy, the American public can be the driving force that ensures our naval defense remains robust and prepared for the challenges of the 21st century.
We echo the sentiments of urging Congress and DoD, and we further advocate for the American public to support and invest in the submarine industrial base.
Specifically, we need to:
Raise awareness of the imminent risks facing our naval defense. The U.S. Navy’s capability to deter potential threats, maintain maritime superiority, and ensure national security is at stake. Delays and shortcomings in our submarine and surface fleet programs could leave us vulnerable in a rapidly evolving global security environment.
It’s essential to mobilize public support now for increased funding for both submarine and surface fleet programs alike, including infrastructure, support services, and the often overlooked but equally important logistics.
Invest in education and training in career techical education for shipyard building and management in areas such as welding pipefitting and for naval STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) fields. Beyond immediate funding and infrastructural upgrades, there’s an underlying need to address the skills gap.
If you are interested in learning more about the industrial base, the need for education and training, or supporting our cause, you can find more information at StrongerNavy.org.
Welcome back to our series: From Depths to Skies: Exploring the Future Landscape of U.S. Naval Power. In this series, we aim to inform and engage our members and friends on behalf of Americans for a Stronger Navy. We examine the current and future challenges and opportunities for the U.S. Navy in maintaining its global leadership and superiority in the maritime domain.
In the previous segment, we focused on the submarine fleet, one of the most important and complex elements of the U.S. naval power. We discussed its role, capabilities, and plans for modernization and acquisition. We also reviewed some of the reports and studies that have been published on this topic and provided our own analysis and recommendations.
In this segment, we will shift our attention to the submarine industrial base, which is the backbone of the submarine fleet. We will explore how the AUKUS defense technology partnership, which involves supplying Australia with nuclear-powered submarines, will affect the U.S. submarine industrial base and its ability to meet the demand for both domestic and foreign submarines. We will also look at how Congress and industry are responding to this challenge and what are some of the potential benefits and risks of this deal.
Proposed Funding for Submarine Industrial Base
On October 22, 2023, President Joe Biden submitted a supplemental budget request to Congress, which earmarks $3.4 billion for further investments in the U.S. submarine industrial base. This funding is intended to improve the build and sustainment rates for attack submarines in order to meet U.S. military requirements, and to support the commitments under AUKUS.
The supplemental budget request comes after 25 U.S. Republican lawmakers urged Biden in July to increase funding for the U.S. submarine fleet, saying that the plan under AUKUS to sell Australia Virginia-class nuclear-power submarines would “unacceptably weaken” the U.S. fleet without a clear plan to replace them.
The U.S. Navy also supports the supplemental budget request, saying that it is “critical” to ensure that the submarine industrial base can deliver both Virginia-class and Columbia-class submarines on time and on budget. The Navy also says that AUKUS will “strengthen our ability to deter aggression, defend our interests, and maintain our technological edge”.
Key Takeaways from Congressional Hearing
On October 25, 2023, a subcommittee of the House of Representatives Armed Services Committee held a hearing on AUKUS and its implications for the U.S. submarine industrial base. The hearing featured testimony from Mara Karlin, acting deputy under secretary of defense for policy; Vice Admiral William Houston, commander of the U.S. Navy’s Submarine Force; Rear Admiral Scott Pappano, program executive officer for Columbia-class submarines; and Rear Admiral David Goggins, program executive officer for submarines.
Some of the key takeaways from the hearing are:
• AUKUS contributes to building a more robust defense industrial base ecosystem that contributes to integrated deterrence; and … the submarine industrial base can and will support AUKUS.
• Congress is critical to the success of AUKUS, and needs to approve four legislative proposals this year: authorizing transfer of submarines to Australia; allowing maintenance of U.S. submarines in Australia and Britain; authorizing Australian funding for U.S. shipyards and training of Australian workers; and streamlining defense trade between AUKUS partners.
• The U.S. submarine industry is hoping to increase its production rate from 1.2 Virginia-class submarines per year to two – this on top of one Columbia-class submarine – but faces challenges such as supply chain fragility, labor shortages, and cost overruns.
• The AUKUS deal will require sharing sensitive U.S. technology with Australia and Britain, which poses risks such as leakage, espionage, or reverse engineering by adversaries or third parties.
• “AUKUS is an unprecedented opportunity to deepen our cooperation with two of our closest allies in developing cutting-edge capabilities that will ensure our collective security well into this century.” – Mara Karlin
• “This funding is critical to improve build and sustainment rates for attack submarines in order to meet U.S. military requirements, and will also support our commitments under AUKUS.” – Joint statement by Navy representatives
• “The fact is, the supply chain still remains very fragile. Any additional funding and support, whether it’s through the supplemental or other Navy support would be extremely helpful.” – Jason Aiken, General Dynamics’ chief financial officer
• “We are confident that we have the appropriate measures in place to protect our technology as we move forward with this initiative.” – Vice Admiral William Houston
• “The administration’s plan to sell Virginia-class submarines to Australia will unacceptably weaken our own submarine fleet without a clear plan to replace them. … The administration has not provided any evidence that our submarine industrial base can handle this additional workload without jeopardizing our own submarine programs.” – Representative Rob Wittman, ranking member of the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces.
Where We Stand
AUKUS deal is still being debated and negotiated by the governments and parliaments of the three countries involved: Australia, the UK, and the US. The deal also faces opposition and criticism from some other countries and groups, such as France, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, New Zealand, some Australian political parties and unions, some US lawmakers and analysts, and some environmental and anti-war activists.
The AUKUS deal has two main components: one is to help Australia acquire nuclear-powered submarines, and the other is to enhance joint capabilities and interoperability in areas such as cyber, artificial intelligence, quantum technologies, and undersea capabilities.
The first component is expected to take at least 18 months of consultation and planning before the actual construction of the submarines can begin. The US plans to sell between three and five Virginia-class submarines to Australia in the 2030s, before Australia starts building its own submarines in the 2040s. The US Navy and the US submarine industry are hoping to increase their production rate to meet the demand for both domestic and foreign submarines, but they face challenges such as supply chain fragility, labor shortages, cost overruns, and technology protection.
The second component is intended to foster deeper information sharing and technology sharing among the three AUKUS partners, but it also requires streamlining defense trade and export controls between them. The US Congress needs to approve four legislative proposals this year to authorize the transfer of submarines to Australia, to allow maintenance of US submarines in Australia and Britain, to authorize Australian funding for US shipyards and training of Australian workers, and to simplify defense trade between AUKUS partners.
The AUKUS deal is a historic and strategic initiative that aims to enhance the security and stability of the Indo-Pacific region and beyond. However, it also poses significant challenges and risks for the three countries involved and their allies and partners. The deal will require substantial investments, coordination, and oversight from the governments, parliaments, militaries, industries, and publics of the three countries.
Conclusion
The AUKUS deal is a historic and strategic initiative that aims to enhance the security and stability of the Indo-Pacific region and beyond. However, it also poses significant challenges and risks for the U.S. submarine industrial base, which is already under pressure to deliver submarines for the U.S. Navy and its allies. The deal will require substantial investments, coordination, and oversight from Congress, the Pentagon, the Navy, and the industry to ensure that it does not compromise the quality, quantity, or timeliness of the U.S. submarine fleet.
We at Americans for a Stronger Navy believe that AUKUS could be a worthwhile and beneficial endeavor that could strengthen our naval power and our alliances. However, we also acknowledge that there are different views and perspectives on this deal, both within and outside the U.S. We think that it is important to learn more from those who support and those who oppose the deal, and to understand their arguments and concerns. We also think that it is vital to hear from the American public, who ultimately have a stake in the future of our naval force and our national security. Therefore, we invite you to share your opinions and feedback on AUKUS with us, and to join the conversation on this topic with your fellow Americans.
• Some Republican lawmakers, such as Representative Rob Wittman, the ranking member of the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces. He said that the plan to sell Virginia-class submarines to Australia would “unacceptably weaken our own submarine fleet without a clear plan to replace them” and that the administration has not provided any evidence that the submarine industrial base can handle the additional workload. Click here to review additional detail.
• Some defense analysts, such as Bryan Clark, a former Navy strategist and senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. He said that selling submarines to Australia would reduce the number of attack submarines available to the U.S. Navy and that the Navy should prioritize building its own next-generation attack submarine (SSN-X) before exporting it. Click here for additional detail.
Some of the groups and individuals who are concerned about U.S. technology getting into the wrong hands are:
• Some Democratic lawmakers, such as Senator Edward Markey, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He said that he was “deeply concerned” about the potential for nuclear proliferation and leakage of sensitive technology as a result of the AUKUS deal and that he would seek assurances from the administration that it would not undermine the global nonproliferation regime. Click here for additional detail.
• Some former U.S. officials, such as Richard Armitage, a former deputy secretary of state under George W. Bush. He said that he was “very nervous” about sharing nuclear propulsion technology with Australia and Britain and that he feared that it could be compromised by China or other adversaries. Click here for additional detail.
The AUKUS deal, which involves supplying Australia with nuclear-powered submarines, has sparked a heated debate among various stakeholders in the U.S. and abroad. Some of them have expressed opposition or concern about the deal, based on different reasons and perspectives. For example, some Republican lawmakers, such as Representative Rob Wittman, argue that the deal would weaken the U.S. submarine fleet and industrial base, without a clear plan to replace the submarines sold to Australia. Some defense analysts, such as Bryan Clark, suggest that the deal would reduce the availability of attack submarines for the U.S. Navy and that the Navy should prioritize building its own next-generation submarine (SSN-X) before exporting it. Some Democratic lawmakers, such as Senator Edward Markey, are worried about the potential for nuclear proliferation and leakage of sensitive technology as a result of the deal and seek assurances from the administration that it would not undermine the global nonproliferation regime. Some former U.S. officials, such as Richard Armitage, are nervous about sharing nuclear propulsion technology with Australia and Britain and fear that it could be compromised by China or other adversaries.
We will continue to monitor and report on this topic as it unfolds. We invite you to follow along and read more reports and studies on this topic as we delve deeper into this important and timely issue. We also welcome your feedback and suggestions as we seek to inform and engage our members and friends on behalf of Americans for a Stronger Navy. The time to act is now. Stay tuned for more updates soon.
Celebrating a new milestone in the Navy’s pursuit of defense and innovation, the christening of the Virginia-class submarine Massachusetts (SSN 798) at HII’s Newport News Shipbuilding division on May 6, 2023, showcased the pride, craftsmanship, and patriotism of the shipbuilders, crew, and their families.
The Christening:
The ceremony, attended by more than 2,000 guests, highlighted the progress and innovation achieved by the shipbuilders, crew, and their families. The ship’s sponsor, Sheryl Sandberg, emphasized the significance of progress and the submarine’s intentional design to allow both men and women to serve. Sandberg performed the traditional honor of breaking a bottle of American sparkling wine across the submarine’s bow during the ceremony.
Key Features and Benefits:
The Virginia-class submarine Massachusetts (SSN 798) is the 25th Virginia-class submarine and the 12th to be delivered by NNS. HII is one of only two shipyards capable of designing and building nuclear-powered submarines for the U.S. Navy. The advanced capabilities of Virginia-class submarines increase firepower, maneuverability, and stealth to support critical missions worldwide. The submarine’s intentional design to allow both men and women to serve makes our military stronger and more diverse.
Key Takeaways:
The Virginia-class submarine Massachusetts (SSN 798) was christened at HII’s Newport News Shipbuilding division, showcasing the pride and patriotism of the shipbuilders, crew, and their families. The submarine’s design intentionally allows both men and women to serve, making our military stronger and more diverse. HII is one of only two shipyards capable of designing and building nuclear-powered submarines for the U.S. Navy, providing advanced capabilities in firepower, maneuverability, and stealth to support critical missions worldwide.
Conclusion:
The christening of the Virginia-class submarine Massachusetts (SSN 798) is a testament to the Navy’s pursuit of defense and innovation. It showcases the pride, craftsmanship, and patriotism of the shipbuilders, crew, and their families who work tirelessly to deliver critical capabilities and protect peace and freedom around the world. The Americans for a Stronger Navy invites you to support our cause and join us in rallying for a stronger Navy. Together, we can ensure that our nation’s maritime dominance and the freedom we all cherish are maintained for generations to come.
USS Ohio, during her commissioning ceremony in 1981.
Introduction
The United States Navy has been a cornerstone of American security and global stability for over 200 years. As a member of the Navy community, we are proud to support the Americans for a Stronger Navy organization in their mission to promote a strong, modern Navy capable of defending America’s interests worldwide. In this article, we explore the recent decision by the US Navy to publicly announce a visit by a nuclear-armed submarine to South Korea, and its significance in promoting peace through strength.
Summary
The US Navy’s decision to publicly announce a visit by a nuclear-armed submarine to South Korea has sparked debate about the wisdom of increased transparency for what has traditionally been known as the “silent service.” Despite concerns about violating the core mission of secrecy, this move by the Navy represents a commitment to promoting Peace Through Strength. By demonstrating America’s resolve and willingness to defend its allies, the Navy is helping to maintain stability in the Indo-Pacific region.
Key Takeaways
The US Navy’s decision to publicly announce a visit by a nuclear-armed submarine to South Korea represents a significant shift in the Navy’s traditional “silent service” approach. While there are concerns about the wisdom of increased transparency, this move by the Navy is a commitment to promoting Peace Through Strength. By demonstrating America’s willingness to defend its allies and maintain stability in the Indo-Pacific region, the Navy is playing a critical role in promoting American security.
Conclusion
As members of the Navy community, we are proud to support the Americans for a Stronger Navy organization in their mission to promote a strong, modern Navy capable of defending America’s interests worldwide. The US Navy’s decision to publicly announce a visit by a nuclear-armed submarine to South Korea is a powerful demonstration of America’s commitment to promoting peace through strength. We urge all Americans to join us in supporting the Navy and its mission to protect America’s interests at home and abroad.
