ComNavOps largely focuses on peer war combat, quite
correctly, because that is, after all, the number one responsibility of the
military. Lesser conflicts are a subset
of the main responsibility and peacetime activities are a distant third
responsibility although they are the most common. For a change of pace, let me now focus on the
Navy’s peacetime activities.
As always, there are two levels to this: one, is the activities that the Navy actually
does and, two, is the activities that the Navy should be doing. Predictably, we’ll focus on what the Navy
should be doing.
Just to gather our thoughts and set the table for the
comparisons to come, let’s ever so briefly review what the Navy actually does
during peacetime.
The Navy engages in interminable deployments (see,
“Deployments or Missions?”), usually several months long, that amount to
nothing more than austere, low budget cruise ship ‘vacations’ for the
crews. The cruises accomplish nothing
other than adding wear and tear to the ships and running up huge operating
costs while plinking occasional pickup trucks and colliding with commercial
cargo ships.
The deployments are supposed to promote deterrence but are utterly
ineffective as such. China is still
engaged in annexation of the entire East and South China Seas and ordering us
out of the area while seizing our UUVs and expanding into Africa and other
countries. Iran is mining commercial
ships and shooting down our UAVs. Russia
is engaged in annexation and invasion of neighboring countries while engaging
in unsafe harassment of our ships and planes.
North Korea continues their ballistic missile program. Houthi rebels launch anti-ship missiles at
our ships, if the Navy is to be believed.
Clearly, our enemies are unimpressed with our deterrence cruises.
In addition, we engage in chasing pirates in skiffs, showing
the flag to anyone who cares, hosting foreign dignitaries, and exercising with
foreign navies whose biggest warship is, all too often, a patrol boat or
corvette – none of which prepares us for war.
So, if deployments accomplish nothing and we’re not
deterring anyone from anything, what should the Navy be doing during peacetime?
Well, the answer is obvious – we should be preparing for
war. We should be training hard,
exercising constantly, and performing maintenance when we aren’t training. We’ve discussed this in previous posts so I
won’t belabor it.
Beyond this, is there anything legitimate that the Navy
could and should be doing? Yes! The world is an unhappy, angry place marked
by unfriendly peers and near-peers, terrorists, and third world countries full
of unrest. These represent a threat to
our interests and should be monitored and dealt with before they become major
problems. In addition, we should be
preparing the battlefield for potential future wars (as distinct from training
for wars).
Let’s look a bit closer at these peacetime activities.
Monitoring. This consists of monitoring our potential
enemy’s capabilities and developments.
If we can better understand their capabilities then we can be better
prepared for the inevitable war. We
need to monitor signals, electronic capabilities, military testing and
exercises, and the like. This is where
the Navy can make a huge contribution.
Surveillance ships should be parked 13 miles off the coast of every
potential trouble spot in the world. As
a nation, we have many types of surveillance capabilities but ships offer the
one thing that no other surveillance asset can and that is persistence. A ship can sit off a trouble spot
continuously, providing uninterrupted, real time surveillance.
A lot of people will object to this out of fear that we
might offend or upset an enemy. Hey,
they’re called enemies for a reason. Who
cares what they think? If they don’t
want us monitoring them that closely then maybe they should consider being a
little more friendly.
For the case of countries that are harboring terrorists,
whether intentionally or not, we should be flying UAVs over those trouble spots
regardless of international law (see, “The Navy and the War on Terror”). There are two justifications for this:
1. I’ve previously discussed that a country that won’t or
can’t stop terrorists in their country forfeits their right to the protections
of international law.
2. Given the world’s evolving cavalier attitude towards
unmanned assets (the Chinese have seized our unmanned underwater drones and
Iran has shot down our UAVs) UAVs are quickly taking on the characteristic of
being above/beyond/outside of the constraints and protections of international
law.
If terrorists are forming, we need to know about it before
it becomes a major problem. If an
unfriendly country is testing and developing new radars to missiles, we need to
know about it so that we can develop countermeasures.
Interestingly, a suitably modified LCS would make an
outstanding surveillance platform (see, “The Electronic LCS” and “LCSAlternative Uses”). Modifications would
have to include a larger crew and facilities to conduct onboard maintenance as
well as specific surveillance equipment.
Such an LCS would have the speed to avoid trouble and enough firepower
to discourage troublemakers.
Pre-emptive Action. Monitoring is only half the peacetime
activity. Pre-emptive action is the
other half. We need to stop problems
before they become major. America should
not be apologizing for aggressively exercising our legal rights and our
inherent right to self-defense.
The Navy has much to offer in the realm of pre-emptive
action. In addition to the obvious
direct action such as air strikes and Tomahawk strikes, the Navy is ideally
positioned to support other, less obvious actions, direct or indirect. Navy ‘barges’ (could be a MLP, JHSV, AFSB or,
gods forbid, an actual barge) could be parked just outside territorial waters
(or inside, if needed) and used to host special forces and UAVs. That terrorist training camp that we’ve been
monitoring should be struck before it actually generates functioning
terrorists. That corrupt government that
is unofficially supporting terrorism should be ‘visited’ in various ways to
encourage them to cease their support.
Battlefield
Preparation. We know where war is
likely to occur (looking at you China and Iran) so let’s study the
battlefield. Let’s map the underwater
domain. Let’s map the electronic
‘geography’. Let’s practice trailing
enemy subs. Let’s fly practice missions
to the extent we can. Let’s intercept
any aircraft or ships that venture into international air/water. Let’s insert ourselves into enemy exercises
and observe the reactions and capabilities (China has done exactly this during
RIMPAC, for example).
Summary.
We see that there is much productive work that the Navy
could be doing during peacetime but it all starts with ending the useless,
interminable deployments that wear out ships and accomplish nothing. We need to pull our ships back and engage in intensive
maintenance and hard, realistic training.
That will free up ships to conduct the missions described above.
It is noteworthy that none of the peacetime missions
described require high end, sophisticated ships. Thus, the bulk of the fleet can undergo
maintenance and training without adversely affecting the peacetime missions that
should be done. Indeed, converted
commercial ships could perform most or all of the peacetime missions.
We need to make the Navy truly productive during peacetime
and now we know how to do it.