US Navy Capability More Vital than Numbers

From DefenseNews

Admiral: Capability More Vital for U.S. Navy Than Numbers

By ANDREW SCUTRO

The U.S. Navy does not need to be larger, just more able, said Vice Adm. Joe Sestak, deputy chief of naval operations for warfare requirements, at the Navy League’s March 22-24 Sea Air Space expo in Washington.

Sestak said the Navy plans to fight as a smaller, more concentrated joint network to meet the demands of carrying on the potentially endless global war on terror, fighting a large-scale conventional war and reacting to other contingencies.

“Our Navy of the future is not measured in numbers of ships,” he told a seminar on force projection. “It’s measured in capabilities against specific threats.”

Expert: Delay DD(X)

The U.S. Navy should delay building the destroyer of the future, said a naval analyst.

Robert Work, of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, thinks highly of the DD(X), the Navy’s multimission warship now under design, saying he’d “buy them by the bushel” if the money was available.

But Work told a packed auditorium that the United States is so far ahead of all other potential competitors that it might be wise to slow down on DD(X), especially now whenbudgets are so tight and the average cost of a new warship tops $1.4 billion.

Speaking after the seminar, Work said the most likely future peer, China, will not catch up to the Navy’s capabilities for 20 years. The Chinese are working through a vertical-launch missile system that the United States has employed for years, he said, and the U.S. Navy should use its wide technological lead to design the ship the nation needs, not simply the next most advanced ship.

“Let us try to figure out what this next surface combatant will be,” he said. “If it turns out to be the DD(X), build it.”

Conway Cites Iraq Progress

After serving two tours in Iraq, Marine Lt. Gen. James Conway offered an upbeat assessment of progress there, although the Iraqi public would like nothing more than reliable electricity.

Conway, who directs operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, commanded I Marine Expeditionary Force during the 2003 invasion.

Speaking at a seminar on the war on terrorism — along with Vice Adm. John Morgan, deputy chief of naval operations for information, plans and strategy, and Coast Guard Rear Adm. Dennis Sirois, assistant commandant for operations — Conway said three recent polls of Iraqis put reliable electricity as their most important concern. It ranked before fuel availability, establishing a national government and even maintaining law and order.

“As soon as this nonsense has passed, their quality of life can go up dramatically,” he said.

Before the invasion of Iraq, Conway said the Marines thought back to Sept. 11, 2001, and were willing to take action in the Middle East if it meant preventing another terrorist attack at home. “We thought, that’s why we were there,” he said. “We believed it then, and we believe it even stronger now.”