Prepare For Casualties in the Coming Shipbuilding War

The Navy is about to fight its first war in the 21st century, and make no mistake, there will be casualties for the loser of this fight. With an expected cost ranging from $2.8 - $5.0 billion depending upon source, the Zumwalt class is the largest surface combatant constructed for the Navy since the late 1950s, but is sold as being as stealthy as a submarine with the firepower of an aircraft carrier. Unfortunately, the cloaking device was not invented for this 14,500 ton dreadnought, nor the ability to reload its primary missile magazines, and the price tag is potentially half that of a nuclear aircraft carrier or twice that as a submarine, depending upon source.

Government Executive has a short but on target report regarding the way the discussion is being framed on Capitol Hill.

A bipartisan group of 12 senators on Thursday asked Defense Secretary Robert Gates to review the Navy's decision this week to end its DDG-1000 destroyer program after the first two ships are built and instead buy older but more affordable destroyers.

The twelve Senators are Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), John Kerry (D-Mass.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.). Susan Collins (R-Maine), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), Jim Webb (D-Va.), Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.), Herb Kohl (D-Wis.), Mel. Martinez (R-Fla.), and Norm Coleman (R-Minn.). The report continues.

In a letter, the senators told Gates they were alarmed by the Navy's plans, which follows more than a decade of statements from senior service officials expressing the need to modernize the surface combatant fleet.

"In light of this apparent disconnect between more than a decade of Navy testimony and the recent advocacy against the President's budget, we urge you to undertake a thorough review and evaluation of the Navy's proposal," they wrote.

The Navy is caught in a number of catch-22s thanks to twelve years of total confusion in shipbuilding and strategic direction. Previous CNOs have not done any favors for the leadership of today, and if the DDG-1000 is canceled, with the kind of political and industry lobbying effort that is plainly obvious we will see some casualties of this war.

In the political catch 22, the Senate is essentially challenging the Navy to throw the last decade of leadership under the boat, because the Senate doesn't believe for a minute the Navy can do that. Probably true, particularly considering one of those leaders that would have to be tossed is the current Chairmen of the joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen. Does anyone honestly see that happening? We don't think the current leadership has the brass to do it. That opinion is based on the historic, and as it was pointed out to us, the common view among the officer ranks that accountability for decisions made doesn't exist once you make Admiral unless it has to do with conduct. And the Navy wonders why they can't retain the good Captains...

Another catch-22 is the Navy trying to sell the DDG-51 as the alternative to the DDG-1000. This is a really tough sell, because the argument suggests the critical technology needed by the 21st century Navy right now is AEGIS ballistic missile defense, the only technology that the Burke can do and the Zumwalt can't. The problem there is that ballistic missiles hardly represent the major challenge facing the Navy today, indeed all it really represents is the latest big war threat with the big war crowd hype. This would have so many consequences it requires its own post, one we intend to make before Thursday.

Finally, one wonders if the Navy has even considered the fallout from Thursday mornings hearing, because if they haven't, they should. It took us about ten minutes today to come up with several dozen quotes by Ms. Allison Stiller and Vice Admiral Barry McCullough regarding the DDG-1000, and they have a long history of singing praises for the ship. Lets be clear, their credibility will be completely lost on Capitol Hill on Thursday, and the careers of both will probably be done.

Short of singing the praises of the DDG-1000, and completely rejecting the DDG-51 as an alternative, it is questionable if their careers will survive the political fallout given how much political money is at stake here. Too many Senators are looking straight in the face of political blow back, and if given the chance they will have blood for this... and it won't be their own, rest assured of that. Both Ms. Allison Stiller and Vice Admiral Barry McCullough will have dozens of previous statements matched up against whatever they say on Thursday, and both will be roasted on the fire of politics as an offering to the American defense industry idol.

Gordon England was Secretary of the Navy when the DDG-1000 was developed, and John Young was the Navy's Senior Acquisition Executive when the DDG-1000 was developed. Both are now top guys in the Pentagon, they will sacrifice Allison Stiller to the political fallout of the DDG-1000 in a heartbeat to cover their own careers, even if she is ultimately nothing more than the middle man for their leadership. Just like the Navy will toss Vice Admiral Barry McCullough overboard instead of take on the decisions of previous CNOs. Fair? No way, they are the ones who have done their job, but in Washington it has always been more convenient to screw the middle men then highlight the failures of those currently in major leadership positions.

We keep thinking that the only way either of them survive the coming shipbuilding war is if their bosses testify on their behalf, in other words, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Admiral Gary Roughead. At least under that model, they can state they have changed the plans and it has nothing to do with previous leadership or previous spokesman. I don't expect either of them to do it, but if they would putting themselves in a position to leave a meaningful impact on the Department of Defense for the change they both appear to advocate leading into the 21st Century.

Finally, we don't expect the Navy to come out anything short of blooded badly here unless they make the strategic argument, which AEGIS BMD is not. The 313-ship argument that Navy spokesman Lt. Clay Doss was trying to make in the media last week isn't compelling and doesn't connect, and will fall flat against the political weight of the Senate. The FY-10 POM argument isn't much better, all it does is stall for time. That may work, but if the Navy doesn't fill that time finding something besides AEGIS BMD, the net effect is simply to delay the bloodbath.

Should be an interesting week.