Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

Military Hardware: Tanks, Bombers, Submarines and More

The U.S. Navy Isn’t Ready for Cold War II

PHILIPPINE SEA(Feb. 22, 2016) USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74) sails through the Philippine Sea. Providing a ready force supporting security and stability in the Indo-Asia-Pacific region, Stennis is operating as part of the Great Green Fleet on a regularly scheduled 7th Fleet deployment. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Cole C. Pielop/Released).
PHILIPPINE SEA(Feb. 22, 2016) USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74) sails through the Philippine Sea. Providing a ready force supporting security and stability in the Indo-Asia-Pacific region, Stennis is operating as part of the Great Green Fleet on a regularly scheduled 7th Fleet deployment. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Cole C. Pielop/Released) .

The U.S. Navy Can’t Win Cold War II: The United States is engaged in a new Cold War confronting four aggressive and colluding adversaries—China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea—that is more complex and dangerous than the previous Cold War against the Soviet Union. The United States, alongside other Western powers, stands opposed to these authoritarian, revisionist states actively working to destroy the current international order led by the United States.

Unfortunately, the U.S. Navy is ill-prepared to deter, contain, and, if need be, defeat these four adversaries if Cold War II turns hot.

The Ford-class aircraft carriers, despite facing years of delays, cost overruns, and criticisms, have revolutionized maritime power projection with groundbreaking technologies.

The Ford-class aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) and the Italian aircraft carrier ITS Cavour (CVH 550) transit the Atlantic Ocean March 20, 2021, marking the first time a Ford-class and Italian carrier have operated together underway. As part of the Italian Navy’s Ready for Operations (RFO) campaign for its flagship, Cavour is conducting sea trials in coordination with the F-35 Lightning II Joint Program Office’s Patuxent River Integrated Test Force to obtain official certification to safely operate the F-35B. Gerald R. Ford is conducting integrated carrier strike group operations during independent steaming event 17 as part of her post-delivery test and trials phase of operations. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Riley McDowell)

The U.S. Navy’s Greatest Challenge

First, the character of warfare experienced an inflection point with Ukrainian drones from the air and on the sea, sinking numerous Russian Navy warships and preventing Russia’s unrestricted use of the Black Sea.

Using similar drones in the Red Sea, the Houthis disrupted global merchant shipping and placed the U.S. Navy on the wrong side of the cost curve. The Navy is using multi-million-dollar missiles to destroy drones, only costing thousands, and is on a pace to deplete its munitions inventories to unsafe levels while scrambling to develop cheap, effective counter-drone weapons.

Second, in a series of embarrassing public fora, the U.S. Navy displayed the earmarks of a poorly managed organization with seemingly intractable problems, one that cannot design, build, maintain, or crew its warships. The Navy’s Littoral Combat Ships, Zumwalt-Class destroyers, and Ford-class aircraft carriers delivered warships years late, billions of dollars over budget, and designed on flawed operational concepts. Following this pattern, in April 2024, the Navy reported one-to-three-year delivery delays for its four marquee shipbuilding programsMaintenance shortcomings abound:  in the summer of 2023, nearly 40 percent of the fleet’s nuclear attack submarines were out of operation, awaiting repairs. The same is true concerning manpower. In February 2024, the Navy experienced a shortage of 22,000 Sailors to crew its ships.

Finally, the nation is unprepared to fund the number of ships the Navy needs. Between 2016 and 2022, the Navy consistently declared it needed 355 ships, but had on average 287 ships, resulting in a shortfall of 68 ships. In 2023, the Navy upped its requirements to 381 ships, and by July 2024, it had 296 ships, with a new and worse shortfall of 85 ships.

Course Correction: What The Navy Must Do Now

Over the last decade, Congress and the administration, regardless of party, have not wanted to fund a larger Navy. If the requirement for 381 ships is valid and unattainable, then the nation is at significant risk, especially for Cold War II. So, why is the Navy still pursuing this requirement? By doing so, the Navy is either (1) misleading the nation or (2) unwittingly positioning the United States for a catastrophic defeat in a war with China.

U.S. Navy Submarine Los Angeles-Class

090320-N-XXXXX-001
PERSIAN GULF (March 20, 2009) The Los Angeles-class attack submarine USS Hartford (SSN 768) is underway in the Persian Gulf after a collision with the amphibious transport dock ship USS New Orleans (LPD 18). Hartford sustained damage to her sail,
but the propulsion plant of the nuclear-powered submarine was unaffected by
this collision. (U.S. Navy photo/Released)

Instead of pursuing this fantasy of 381 ships and putting the nation at risk with an inadequate defense, the current CNO, Admiral Lisa Franchetti, must offer an alternative—a Plan B—that offsets the gap in required ships. This major course correction entails introducing a new strategy that embraces new technologies, developing new operational concepts, and accelerating procurement of selected platforms and weapon systems.

CNO Franchetti must speak up and speak out for the Navy and, indeed, for the nation. Admiral Arleigh Burke, an iconic World War II hero, and former CNO, advised Navy officers not to stand in awe of civilian leaders and forcefully make a case for the Navy by “pounding the table” if need be.

It is time for CNO Franchetti to be candid about the Navy’s abilities and requirements. Recent Navy posture statements for Congress reflected a “happy talk” approach, devoid of helpful discussions about critical issues such as the growing danger to the nation’s security, the Navy’s manning and shipbuilding problems, the size of the Navy, and the changing character of warfare, to the point of being deceptive.

Constellation-Class Frigate U.S. Navy. Image Credit: Industry Handout.

Constellation-Class Frigate U.S. Navy. Image Credit: Industry Handout.

It is time for CNO Franchetti to speak with candor about the ways U.S. adversaries, especially China, are threatening U.S. national interests and to set forth a new, well-crafted strategy whose execution will enable the U.S. Navy to fulfill its role in preserving the nation’s security in an increasingly dangerous world. In the hit television series, Game of Thrones, “Winter Is Coming” is the motto for eternal vigilance against the bad guys.

Applied to the Navy’s real world of today, “Winter Is Here.”

About the Author: Bruce Stubbs

Bruce Stubbs was the director of Navy strategy and strategic concepts in the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, producing Navy and maritime strategies to align with emerging security trends and national guidance. Stubbs also served as the deputy under secretary of the Navy (Acting) advising the secretary of the Navy and the under secretary of the Navy on national security, foreign policy and intelligence issues. He was also the maritime security advisor to the special envoy for middle east regional security and one of the principal author of the National Strategy for Maritime Security.

Bruce Stubbs
Written By

Bruce Stubbs was the director of Navy strategy and strategic concepts in the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, producing Navy and maritime strategies to align with emerging security trends and national guidance. Stubbs also served as the deputy under secretary of the Navy (Acting) advising the secretary of the Navy and the under secretary of the Navy on national security, foreign policy and intelligence issues. He was also the maritime security advisor to the special envoy for middle east regional security and one of the principal author of the National Strategy for Maritime Security.

1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. 1KoolKat

    August 14, 2024 at 6:20 am

    Cold War 1.0 stayed cold because a strong Nuclear Deterrence (ND) was maintained. Without ND none of the US military operational plans would work. The majority of today’s Military Blog Articles (MBA) never mention ND. Perhaps because it is assumed to always be there. Well, guess what? If they lose ND then everything these MBA write about are meaningless.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You May Also Like

Military Hardware: Tanks, Bombers, Submarines and More

Summary and Key Points: China and Russia are accelerating the development of new stealth bomber platforms, likely in response to the U.S. Air Force’s...

The Treaty

Unpacking the Capability Behind Hezbollah’s Threat to Expand its War: Less than a day after U.S. Special Envoy Amos Hochstein was in Beirut to...

Military Hardware: Tanks, Bombers, Submarines and More

Summary and Key Points: Russia’s only aircraft carrier, Admiral Kuznetsov, remains plagued by challenges despite promises of a return. -After years of repairs marked...

Military Hardware: Tanks, Bombers, Submarines and More

Fewer Ships, Recruiting Shortfalls: DEI Has Left Our Navy Less Prepared: In the past several weeks, the U.S. Coast Guard and Navy have announced...