The United States Navy is of critical importance to the defense of this country and to maintaining freedom of the seas internationally. Freedom of navigation, as ensured by the Navy, is critical to America's ability to project power by moving men and equipment over 70 percent of the earth's surface and to maintaining world trade and commerce. The Navy's missions in this regard have expanded significantly in recent years. Simultaneously, the Navy faces a strategic challenge from China in the Pacific. Yet the number of ships in the fleet continues to fall. If this trend is not reversed quickly, American security and influence in the world will be diminished for many years to come.
Among other tasks, the U.S. Navy is supporting sustained combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, patrolling the Gulf of Aden and Indian Ocean to deter Somali pirates, providing sea-based ballistic missile defense (BMD) to US forces and allied countries such as Japan and Israel, interdicting illegal arms shipments and WMD trafficking, stopping illegal narcotics and human trafficking, providing humanitarian relief in Haiti and elsewhere, performing its traditional role of maintaining the freedom of the seas and deterring attacks on the homeland and American interests abroad.
In addition to these missions, the Navy is confronting the rise of a new world power that appears intent on playing the leading role in the Pacific, an ocean once dominated by the US. Last year, China issued a new strategy "far sea defense" and is building a long-range blue water capability for its navy. An element of China's new strategy is to extend its operational reach beyond the South China Sea and the Philippines to the "second island chain" of the Pacific, where America has traditionally exercised naval supremacy.
Whereas the US views its naval role in the Pacific as a force for keeping the seas free for navigation by all, China sees things quite differently. China contends that it can control virtually any activity within its 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone, making those waterways off limits to foreign merchant and naval vessels without Chinese permission. China also asserts the right to take democratic Taiwan by force and is rapidly developing the means to prevent America from intervening should China decide to invade or blockade the ROC. Chinese officials have plainly informed American officials that it will tolerate no foreign interference in its territorial issues in the South China Sea. China's dramatic naval expansion has been so rapid as to surprise American policy makers.
To back up its strategy, China has deployed 60 submarines and 75 major warships. China has also announced its intention to build indigenous aircraft carriers to end the US monopoly of such ships in the Pacific. Over the past several years, China has acquired three former Soviet carriers and one Australian carrier, which are being studied by its naval architects. China's well established anti-ship and ballistic missile programs, its extensive submarine fleet and new carrier initiative shows that China will be a serious Pacific naval power and, if not checked, could turn much of that ocean into a "Chinese lake".
Fulfilling its multitude of missions and confronting the growing Chinese challenge is not the 600 ship Navy built by Ronald Reagan. Nor is it the 313 ship navy that the Pentagon set as the floor number of warships necessary to protect American interests just two years ago. Today, the United States Navy operates 284 warships. While current plans call for increasing the size of the Navy over time, several respected commentators suggest our current budget path will result in a Navy of a mere 215 ships in the near future if the planned 4.5 percent cut in the Navy's annual budget holds.
The consequences of the downsized Navy are not good for the United States. Without command of the seas ensured by the Navy, it will become more difficult to project American power where necessary to defeat terrorists, interdict WMDs and illegal arms trading and deter nations, including the new super power China, that might do America and its allies harm. World trade and national economies will be harmed as shipping costs soar due to critical sea lanes being restricted or choked off by hostile or ambitious coastal powers. Further, piracy and general lawlessness on the high seas will result in loses and the sharp increase of insurance premiums for shipping companies. Rapid humanitarian relief efforts will be more difficult to mobilize in response to disasters such as the Indonesian tsunami, earthquakes in Pakistan, and floods in the South Pacific islands.
Seeing the surge of the Chinese Navy into the Pacific, the former leader of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, gave the following warning in Washington recently: "U.S. core interests require that it remain the superior power in the Pacific ... To give up this position would diminish America's role throughout the world."
Steps that can be taken now to strengthen American sea borne defense include reversing the planned cuts in the Navy's budget and increase funding immediately to a level to appropriate to sustain a 313 ship navy with 11 carrier battle groups. Building and deploying additional destroyers and frigates specifically designed for anti-submarine warfare (ASW) and patrol duty should be a high priority. Such ships have been the work horses of all past major conflicts involving sea power - including both World Wars and the Korean and Vietnam wars. Likewise, building lower-cost littoral combat ships (LCS) and faster small ships such as the experimental Sea Fighter catamaran being tested by the Office of Naval Research would be a less expensive way of carrying out missions such as special operations and counter terrorism, drug interdiction and humanitarian missions that now occupy the time of larger warships better suited for blue water action.
Increasing the capacity of the United States' primary land based BMD site in Alaska and building additional BMD sites in the continental U.S. and Europe would further protect the America and its allies from North Korean, Iranian and other ballistic missile threats. The Navy could then deploy its Aegis destroyers and cruisers for missions other than sea-based BMD duty.
Raising the level of maintenance of the recently decommissioned carriers such as the John F. Kennedy, which remain in the reserve fleet, is a low cost-high impact program to give our fleet additional depth. The carriers should be kept ready to reenter the active fleet on short notice. An effective maintenance program for these mothballed carriers would send a clear message to our foes that even if they were lucky enough to sink or damage one of our active carriers with a cruise missile or torpedo, another similar platform would quickly take its place, especially if its air wing was comprised of the F-35 vertical take off and landing (VTOL) fighter-bombers.
When international conflicts flare or natural disasters strike, the first question asked by American policy makers (and friends and foes alike) is, "where are the carriers?" The ability of the United States to project power around the globe and ensure peace through strength is largely dependent on the U.S. Navy and its core carrier battle groups being the superior force in the Pacific and worldwide. In order to maintain the relevance of the foregoing question, America must immediately reverse the decline of its Navy.
Robert C. O'Brien served as a United States Representative to the 60th Session of the UN General Assembly. He is the Managing Partner of the Los Angeles office of Arent Fox LLP.
That is because both our platforms and our sailors have better capabilities than the Chinese do. (For example the Chinese have yet to launch their first aircraft carrier. So they have yet to catch up with the American fleet of the 1930s in that area.)
The problem is maintaining American capabilities in the future against constrained budgets. The answer is to build sufficient numbers of fewer classes of ships so that the per-ship costs are kept down. That is why the DDG-1000s are being replaced with the DDG-51s.
-HJC
As far as building more ships goes, the US no longer has the capacity to do that. In fact, we can't build any at all without relying on the Chinese for certain critical components.
There is something else as well. Such a naval arms race could bankrupt the US. Many understood that the great naval arms build up in the 1980's was a one shot event. All the chips were bet.The National Debt is laden with bonds issued for warships that were built, sailed and have already been decommissioned. Now... Mr. Reagan's bill has come due for the nation.
Someone alert the Internet!
Finally, China gets it: if you want peace, prepare for war.
China is the only member of the P5 without a history of having engaged in military aggression or bellicose imperialism. Rather, until recently, China was on the receiving end of war and colonialism from Japan, England, Germany, the U.S., and Russia. And why was that? One reason was because China had no deep water navy.
Uncle Sam's empire is in the process of collapse, while China is regaining might and cultural significance.
It's time to fill the tub!
Mindful that the United States military marches under the banners of torture and "preventive war," I do not support timetables, benchmarks, or exit strategies. I enthusiastically support the most lavish spending on any and all of Uncle Sam's wars.
This is a huge clue toward providing me an explanation! I'll have to look Norquist up.
Fan #33, here.
Buy sheets and household linens made in Italy or Portugal or France. That way, you'll know that you're not being poisoned.
Buy fewer, but better quality European-made or US-made toys for your children. That way, you'll know that they're not being poisoned.
Buy food at local farmer's markets/CSAs.
Stock up on paper goods from Whole Foods (their 365 brand is cheapest).
American consumers are building a Chinese superpower.
Tell me when, and let me join the banksters to short the heck out of the correct sectors .
So, if the US navy is not the absolute rulers of the waves, they will fall into anarchy and lawnessness.
That the Somali pirates face a multinational patrol (that includes the Iranians), as we saw in Haiti, the biggest problem in a large scale disaster is coordinating where the torrent of aid and responders from all around the world goes, and getting it distributed. As for drug interception, spending vast sums of money to drive the profit margins up, when it would be a lot more effective to spend half that amount on education (just education, not 'drug education') and job creation (inner city grocery stores for example).
Yes, the US navy may no longer rule the waves, but that doesn't mean they'll become lawless.
Rank↓ Country↓ Spending ($ b.)↓ World Share (%)↓
— World Total 1464.0 100
1 United States United States 607.0 41.5
2 People's Republic of China Chinaa 84.9 5.8
3 France France 65.7 4.5
4 United Kingdom United Kingdom 65.3 4.5
5 Russia Russiaa 58.6 4.0
6 Germany Germany 46.8 3.2
7 Japan Japan 46.3 3.2
8 Italy Italy 40.6 2.8
9 Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia 38.2 2.6
10 India India 30.0 2.1
11 South Korea South Korea 24.2 1.7
12 Brazil Brazil 23.3 1.6
13 Canada Canada 19.3 1.3
14 Spain Spain 19.2 1.3
15 Australia Australia 18.4 1.
look at the major wars today and the US is central to every one the Middle East , AF/Pak
Even in Africa its the US and its allies arming both sides of the conflict while grabbing the natural resources. Apartheid in South Africa , wars in Angola Mozambique the list is endless.
Stop drinking the CIA kool- Aid and do some research ! Who is the major supporter of Israel in its dehumanizing of the Palestinians ? the USA.
With friends like that who needs enemies ?