A devastating review of the U.S. Navy claims its surface fleet would be outgunned, outnumbered, and woefully unprepared in a potential conflict with China, owing to a "distracted" leadership class that’s more concerned with being "woke" than with warfighting — but there may be a way to stop the sinking.
The scathing report — commissioned by Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., and Reps. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, Mike Gallagher, R-Wis., and Jim Banks, R-Ind. — was largely prompted by several collisions at sea involving U.S. Navy warships in the Pacific, but also examined other recent Naval disasters, including the mysterious fire that led to the USS Bonhomme Richard being decommissioned and the surrender of two small craft to Iran.
"Many sailors found their leadership distracted, captive to bureaucratic excess, and rewarded for the successful execution of administrative functions rather than their skills as a warfighter," according to the report, which was prepared by Marine Lt. Gen. Robert Schmidle and Navy Rear Adm. Mark Montgomery, both retired.
The report stated: "Finding and sinking enemy fleets should be the principal purpose of a Navy. But many sailors found their leadership distracted, captive to bureaucratic excess, and rewarded for the successful execution of administrative functions rather than their skills as a warfighter."
J.E. Dyer, a retired U.S. Navy Intelligence officer who’s written extensively about national security and military preparedness, said the report’s startling outline of the fleet’s failings — especially in comparison to the Chinese Navy — should be eye-opening for Americans.
"While some of the concerns in the Schmidle-Montgomery report have been perennial issues for the Navy, others stand out as critical at a time when China has enlarged and modernized its fleet significantly and Russia is putting emphasis on unprecedented maritime training profiles and high-capacity weapons," Dyer said.
The report’s findings were based on "long-form" interviews with 77 sailors and included commissioned officers and enlisted personnel, both active duty and veterans.
One interviewee, an active-duty black female lieutenant, said she was troubled by the military’s recent emphasis on diversity training.
"Sometimes I think we care more about whether we have enough diversity officers than if we’ll survive a fight with the Chinese navy," the unidentified officer said. "It’s criminal. They think my only value is as a black woman. But you cut our ship open with a missile and we’ll all bleed the same color."
That emphasis on "wokeness" appears to be coming increasingly from the military’s very highest levels and isn’t limited to a single branch.
When Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley appeared before the House Armed Services Committee on June 23, he openly defended the military using leftist literature to give officers "situational understanding."
"I've read Mao Zedong. I've read Karl Marx. I've read Lenin. That doesn't make me a communist," Milley said. "So what is wrong with understanding — having some situational understanding about the country for which we are here to defend?
"And I personally find it offensive that we are accusing the United States military, our general officers, our commissioned, noncommissioned officers of being, quote, 'woke' or something else, because we're studying some theories that are out there."
But despite Milley’s defense of "studying some theories," the conclusions reached in the Schmidle-Montgomery report suggests Navy leaders might be better served studying tactics for battle.
"The findings of this report are very concerning," Cotton said in a statement. "Our sailors are too often deprived of the training and leadership they need to fight and win at sea. A Navy that puts lethality, warfighting, and operational excellence at the heart of its culture is absolutely essential to our national security.
"America counts on the Navy to keep us safe and keep our seas open. I appreciate the hard work of the distinguished veterans who wrote this report. I intend to work with them, Navy leaders, and my colleagues in Congress to implement the report’s recommendations."
Dyer highlighted the silver lining, however, noting the report provides a roadmap to rebuild.
"All of the report’s recommendations are excellent," she said. "I would emphasize Number 4 here: Developing a warfighting course with ‘a combat focus on the integration of surface naval capabilities to achieve strategic end states,’ because that’s where unity of purpose as a Navy begins. It’s what the Navy exists for: fighting for, on, and from the sea."
But the Navy isn’t only at a low-water mark when it comes to training — it’s also failing when it comes to the fleet itself.
In May, the Navy Times reported the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Navy fleet consisted of 360 battle force ships, according to Naval Intelligence estimates. The U.S. Naval fleet lagged that total by nearly 20 percent, with 297 ships.
And China may soon be winning when it comes to ship size, too.
When it was commissioned in June 2017, the USS Gerald R. Ford became the largest and most expensive U.S. aircraft carrier, measuring 1,092 feet in length and costing a whopping $12.8 billion, plus an estimated $4.7 billion in research and development.
Satellite imagery taken in June of China’s Jiangnan shipyard, however, revealed a warship under construction that was estimated to be at least 1,050 feet.
Crenshaw emphasized the importance of a strong U.S. Navy both in times of war and times of peace.
"A strong Navy is critical to our national security interests around the world," said Crenshaw, a former Navy SEAL. "The findings clearly indicate that our sailors are not receiving the training they need to perform the essential functions of the Navy: to find and sink enemy fleets and ensure freedom of navigation. We must immediately address the concerns detailed in the report."
Dyer’s prescription for the service is to go back to focusing on what made the U.S. Navy such a fearsome force on the waves for decades.
"The bottom line is that the surface escort ship, the cruiser or destroyer, is the basic unit of combat for the Navy," she said. "It’s a movable envelope of multidimensional sea power that has no equivalent. There is no making up for weakness in it. The report’s case that it has been shortchanged in the last two decades is compelling."
Dyer added: "give the fleet a reason to reprioritize. Develop that warfighting focus, make it tangible and executable, and that will go a long way to resetting priorities for the fleet’s always-overburdened time."
https://www.newsmax.com/platinum/navy-woke-politics/2021/07/19/id/1029091/
