Funding the Fleet of the Future by J. F. Kelly, Jr.

A commentary by J. F. Kelly, Jr. Is the enormous cost of shipbuilding, combined with the current dismal economic climate and the historic projected deficits caused by stimulus spending and the Obama administration’s social spending plans, pricing our “blue water” Navy out of business? Can America continue building major combatant ships like aircraft carriers, guided missile cruisers and destroyers, amphibious ships and attack submarines? Can we even afford to maintain our current, greatly diminished and rapidly shrinking numerical fleet levels? The short answer to these last two questions is that we must for two reasons, to wit: (1) we need them for reasons discussed below and (2) if we lose the capacity to build these large, multi-mission, highly capable, complex and durable warships, which we are in danger of doing, we may never again regain it. Because of the long lead times involved in new ship procurement and construction, these questions need urgently to be debated and answered now. The current fleet consists of about 280 deployable ships, approximately one-third of which are deployed on distant duty at a given time. Maintenance, training and work-up generate a high tempo of operations and the crews spend large amounts of time away from their families. The fewer the ships, the higher the tempo, since the commitments only seem to grow, regardless of who is in the White House. But the proposed shipbuilding program will not sustain even the current fleet size which is the lowest since the early 1930s and less than half what it was during the Reagan administration. Our fleet will grow smaller, decreasing the president’s options to react to contingencies unless additional funds are committed to shipbuilding and associated personnel, maintenance and training costs. Why should we care? Some analysts point out that our navy is already many times larger in tonnage and capability than that of any other nation. We are no longer in a cold war race with the former Soviet Union for dominance at sea and although China is clearly expanding its deep water navy and its ability to project power, its navy is no match for ours at present. But this argument misses the point entirely. We should not base the size of our navy on the size of any other because we do not envision a war at sea with opposing navies slugging it out, reminiscent of World War II in the Pacific. Rather, our fleet is needed to project power to any point on the globe in range of their weapons in order to protect America’s vital interests. Those interests are many and varied and they must be protected. We are a maritime nation, dependant upon seaborne commerce for survival and prosperity. The threats to these interests are also numerous and now include the growing danger of piracy. The sea lanes must be kept open and we are nearly alone in the capability to reliably ensure this. We must maintain the ability to project this force anywhere without having to rely on overseas bases or over-flight clearances. Our current deepwater fleet gives us that capability and much more. Our carrier-based aviation and ship-based missile systems have a reach that extends from international waters to far inland into hostile territory. Moreover, many of our Ticonderoga-class guided missile cruisers and Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyers are equipped with SM-3 missile systems capable of intercepting and destroying short- and mid-range ballistic missiles and are a vital part of the anti- missile defense system, a part, incidentally, that is mobile, unlike fixed land based installations. Some analysts argue that the days of major warships are over and that Navy shipbuilding should focus on smaller, cheaper, less-complex vessels designed to operate exclusively in inshore waters. There is clearly a need for these so-called “green” or “brown water” assets and the Navy’s new Littoral Combat Ships (LCS) will hopefully fill this need if the costs can be controlled. But not at the expense of the blue water Navy. Past experience with low end, smaller, less capable and less survivable vessels has not always been favorable. The world’s only superpower, with world-wide vital interests, will continue to require a superpower-size blue water fleet to ensure freedom of the seas that cover four-fifths of our planet’s surface. The decline of the Royal Navy presaged the decline of the British Empire as the world’s dominant power. We should learn from history. Copyright 2009 by J. F. Kelly, Jr. Dr. Kelly is a retired Navy Captain and bank senior vice-president. A veteran of over thirty years of naval service, he commanded three ships and the Navy Personnel Research and Development Center in San Diego. He joined Great American Bank in 1983, serving first as Training and Development Director and later as Director of Human Resources. He retired from the bank in 1994 and has since devoted his efforts to community services. He served as foreman of the San Diego County Grand Jury in 1997-1998, president of the Lions Club of San Diego, the San Diego Council of the Navy League of the United States, the Lions Foundation, the Boys and Girls Foundation, Vice-president of the City of San Diego Salary setting commission and as chairman of the Business Council of the San Diego County Drug and Alcohol Abuse Prevention Task Force. He currently serves on the board of the Boys and Girls Foundation and the Coronado Roundtable. He currently teaches ship handling, seamanship and navigation at the Naval Base, San Diego. A freelance writer, his weekly column on current events appears in the California Republic, the Coronado EagleJournal, eCoronado.com and other publications. Dr. Kelly has degrees in education, management and leadership including a doctor of education degree from the University of San Diego. He and his wife, the former Charlane Hughes, reside in Coronado.