Writing in The Hill last week, Steve Cohen asked “Is the US Navy totally at sea?” But a more worrying question is whether the U.S. Navy is fit and prepared for a conflict with an adversary that is at least as well equipped and armed as it is.
Of course, the same question can be asked of the other services — the Army, Air Force and Marines. The difference is that those services have been to war several times since 1945 because those conflicts were waged on and over the land and not at sea. The last battle the big Navy fought was the invasion of Okinawa in mid 1945.
The Navy was engaged in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq twice. But units going in harm’s way were largely naval aviation, SEALs, the Seabees (Naval construction battalions) and a few sailors like me who fought in brown and green waters and not major sea battles reminiscent of Jutland and Midway. During the Cold War, U.S. submarines played a potentially deadly cat and mouse game with their Soviet opposite numbers. But no admirals commanded fleets battling other fleets.
The Readiness Review, conducted for Secretary of the Navy Richard Spencer after the 2017 collisions, and his cyber study were searing critiques. The first identified cultural problems, many that still have not been corrected. The second concluded that China posed “an existential threat” to the Navy and Marines. So, what has happened since?
Junior officers (lieutenant commanders and below) across the Navy complain about the decline in leadership, readiness and morale. Much of this is anecdotal and understandable. But is anyone in the senior ranks listening?