Q and A: The North Korean Missile Threat (Segment 7)

Q and A: What is the Impact of Sequestration on American Seapower (Segment 6)

Question of the Week January 23-27, 2017

Each week Information Dissemination will present a Question of the Week for professional consideration and discussion. The question will remain at the top of the blog from Monday at 12:00am until Friday 5:00pm. Please scroll down for new contributions. This weeks question:

Does a world of Great Power friction require a different fleet architecture than a uni-polar world?

The question asks why, not how.

What Are You So Worried About? (Segment 5)

Phillip Bilden Nominated as Secretary of the Navy

From the White House press release.

President Donald J. Trump today announced his intention to nominate Philip Bilden as the 76th Secretary of the Navy.

Mr. Bilden, a highly successful business leader, former Military Intelligence officer, and Naval War College cybersecurity leader will bring strategic leadership, investment discipline, and Asia Pacific regional and cyber expertise to the Department of the Navy.

Bilden has longstanding trusted relationships with senior military leaders, particularly in the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps, through his years of national security engagement, including service on the Board of Directors of the United States Naval Academy Foundation and the Board of Trustees of the Naval War College Foundation. Mr. Bilden understands the strategic, operational, and readiness challenges our Navy and Marine Corps leaders confront in maintaining our naval maritime presence around the globe.

Bilden is deeply committed to military service members and their families, coming from a military family with four consecutive generations of seven Bilden Navy and Army officers, including his two sons who presently serve in the US Navy. He greatly respects the sacrifices that Navy and Marine Corps families make to serve their country.

Mr. Bilden served ten years in the U.S. Army Reserve as a Military Intelligence officer from 1986-1996. He was commissioned as a Second Lieutenant and served through the rank of Captain at Strategic Military Intelligence Detachments supporting the Defense Intelligence Agency. He resigned his commission in 1996 upon relocating to Hong Kong.

“As Secretary of the Navy, Philip Bilden will apply his terrific judgement and top-notch management skills to the task of rebuilding our unparalleled Navy,” said President Trump. “Our number of ships is at the lowest point that it has been in decades. Philip Bilden is the right choice to help us expand and modernize our fleet, including surface ships, submarines and aircraft, and ensure America’s naval supremacy for decades to come. I am proud of the men and women of our armed forces. The people who serve in our military are our American heroes, and we honor their service every day.”

“I am deeply humbled and honored to serve as Secretary of the Navy,” said Philip Bilden. “Maintaining the strength, readiness, and capabilities of our maritime force is critical to our national security. If confirmed, I will ensure that our Sailors and Marines have the resources they need to defend our interests around the globe and support our allies with commitment and capability.”

Mr. Bilden has three decades of international management, leadership, and investment experience building an investment management business across global markets with diverse international partners. After 25 years, Mr. Bilden recently retired as a co-founding member and Senior Advisor of HarbourVest Partners, LLC, a leading global private equity investment management firm with institutional assets under management currently in excess of $42 billion. He became a founding member of the firm following the management buyout of HarbourVest’s predecessor company in 1997. Mr. Bilden joined the firm in Boston in 1991 and relocated to Hong Kong in 1996 to establish the firm’s Asian presence as a pioneering investor in the region. Throughout his 25 year tenure at HarbourVest Partners, Mr. Bilden served in senior leadership roles in the firm’s global management, including the firm’s four person Executive Committee responsible for governance.

Mr. Bilden serves on numerous philanthropic boards of non-profit organizations supporting military veterans, national and regional security, and cybersecurity missions. He serves on the Board of Visitors of Georgetown University School of Foreign Service; the Asia Pacific Advisory Board and Dean’s Board of Advisors of Harvard Business School; the Board of Directors of the United States Naval Academy Foundation; and the Board of Trustees of the Naval War College Foundation, where he serves as the inaugural Chairman of the Center for Cyber Conflict Studies.

Mr. Bilden graduated as Distinguished Military Graduate, U.S. Army ROTC, from Georgetown University, earning the President’s Cup as the top graduate in the corps. He received a B.S. (magna cum laude) in Foreign Service from Georgetown University in 1986, with a concentration in International Politics and Soviet bloc studies. Mr. Bilden earned an M.B.A. from Harvard Business School in 1991.

President Trump's selection of Phillip Bilden can be described as the expected choice, as he was the only name specifically promoted by the Trump administration transition team for the position. While there was a public campaign for the selection of Randy Forbes for the position, that campaign primarily came from outside the transition team. Once General Mattis had endorsed Phillip Bilden, this was pretty much a done deal.

I think it is a good pick. There are a number of different opinions on how Presidents should pick the cabinet positions for the various military service Secretary's, and there has never been a single proven way to make such a selection. In the eyes of many who campaigned for Randy Forbes, a Randy Forbes selection would have been great for the Navy because it could build upon existing relationships in Congress and he has relevant experience as the House Seapower Subcommittee chairman that would have allowed Mr. Forbes to hit the ground running. In the end I saw that close relationship Randy Forbes has with top uniformed leadership in the Navy as the reason he wasn't selected.

I like and respect Randy Forbes a lot, but I never believed Randy Forbes was going to get the nomination. Had any other Republican President among the list of candidates who ran for President in 2016 been elected, then Randy Forbes would have almost certainly been nominated, and I believe the Undersecretary of the Navy position would have led to a nomination of someone like Bryan McGrath or Jerry Hendrix. With that said, I also don't believe any other Republican President but Trump would have selected General Mattis for Secretary of Defense, which is to note that each administration looks at these top positions in National Defense differently. With the exception of General Flynn, I believe President Trump has done a decent job filling out his National Security cabinet, but people will ultimately be judged by what they do once installed into office, not what their reputation says going in.

The selection of Philip Bilden does bring an outsider into the Navy. Phillip Bilden has been successful in his career, and to me being good at what you do professionally is very important, regardless of the profession. For me, success is also defined by what one does outside of their career, and for Philip Bilden that includes having two children choose and get accepted into the US Naval Academy. Both the choosing and the being accepted aspect of that detail says something about Philip Bilden that I respect. Another part of Mr. Bilden's success is financial, and what exactly is the relevant criticism of a private citizen who donates time and money to support the US Naval Academy, US Naval War College Foundation, and the United States Naval Institute? As a private citizen I have supported all three organizations, and would do so with more monetary resources if I had the means to do so.

For me, I like the signaling of nominating Philip Bilden as Secretary of the Navy on multiple levels. First, I believe it is good for the Navy to have an outside voice advocating for the Navy from the Secretary position. In the end Ray Mabus may have departed the Secretary of the Navy position unpopular for several of his choices, but as Secretary of the Navy his record is that of the Secretary of the Navy who got Congress to fund the second most naval vessels of any Secretary of the Navy since World War II, and unlike John Lehman who remains in first place, Mr. Mabus was able to do that during a time where the relative budget growth for the Navy was either static, or in decline. I tend to believe outsiders tend to prioritize some things better than insiders, and prioritizing shipbuilding was one of those things Ray Mabus did effectively.

Phillip Bilden has the opportunity to do the same thing, particularly with the charge by the Trump administration to grow the size of the US Navy. Until the Budget Control Act is dealt with, that's going to be very difficult to do. Mr. Bilden also has to address the consequences of choices made by his predecessor, specifically how Ray Mabus chose to build ships at the cost of maintenance and upkeep for existing ships and aircraft - particularly but not limited to less popular priorities like the helicopter squadrons. Mr. Bilden must address the broad scope of problems that are a direct result from maintenance shortages for existing ships and equipment over a period of many years, and doing that while also growing the fleet is going to be a significant challenge, and potentially impossible without additional funding from Congress.

Second, another signal I really like here is that it suggests President Trump intends to at least attempt to keep Sean Stackley on as Undersecretary of the Navy. I may be misreading this, but I certainly hope not. A major distinction between the Navy's poor return on investments during the Bush administration compared to the better rate of return on investment during the Obama administration was the presence of a strong Undersecretary of the Navy with a clear understanding of how to work inside the Department. While there was never a strong Undersecretary of the Navy during the Bush administration, there were two very capable Undersecretary's during the Obama administration - Bob Work and Dr. Janine Davidson.

Those are enormous shoes to fill, and if we remove all the names from the National Security letter against President Trump during the campaign as potential Undersecretary of the Navy choices, and we remove Jerry Hendrix because I highly doubt the President will seek another exemption from Congress for a recently retired military officer,*** the only logical choice I see representing someone who can fill the shoes of the last two Undersecretary's of the Navy with a clear understanding of the challenges that lie ahead for the Trump Administration's Navy growth policy is Sean Stackley. In my mind selecting Sean Stackley for the Undersecretary of the Navy is probably the smartest way for the Trump administration to put themselves in a position for success with Phillip Bilden as Secretary and with the stated National Security Policy intent to grow the US Navy.

With that said, I have no idea if Sean Stackley would take the job, I just think it's important that he does take the job given the position and direction of the Navy right now going forward.

Finally, the other signal being sent by the selection of Phillip Bilden is that the Trump administration doesn't appear to have a high degree of confidence in the US Navy to execute the administrations priorities successfully. I think this is related to events as they unfolded immediately following the election of Donald Trump as President. There were two things that became unquestionably obvious, at least from a public perspective, and fueled the gossip coming from the Navy immediately following the election results.

Navy uniformed leadership was shocked Donald Trump won the election. To be honest, so was I and whether you admit it or not - many of you were too. Being shocked by the 2016 Presidential election outcome is hardly something unique.

But, Navy uniformed leadership was also completely unprepared for the possibility of Donald Trump winning the election, and that was the narrative that kept going well into December following the election results, and that is a narrative that isn't easily forgotten. When there are only two possible known outcomes of an election, uniformed leadership of any military service is not allowed to be unprepared for either known outcome, ever. There is one truth about military officers in the United States; the only skill every single military officer over the grade of O-5 can always put on their resume is 'contingency planning expertise.' Contingency planning is what the US military does, all day, every day, whether awake or asleep. US military officers are judged by that standard, and often the standard of quality for a military officer is based on how many contingencies for unknown outcomes they have prepared for. Known contingencies? That's the bare minimum, and yet, somehow, the Navy made the impression publicly, and more importantly - to the Trump administration transition team, virtually every reporter that covers the Navy, and every think tank that follows naval affairs in Washington DC that the Navy was completely unprepared for Donald Trump winning the election with no budget work of value planned for that possibility.

Now, while that was a serious problem, I have no doubt that the CNO and Sean Stackley will leave no evidence that this was ever an issue by the time the budget season arrives, but the seed of doubt was planted. As soon as it became obvious the US Navy had done virtually no FY18 budget planning of consequence in preparation for the possibility of Trump winning the election, I was fairly certain President Trump was going to select someone from outside the known Navy community to be Secretary of the Navy. Randy Forbes was the chairman of the House Seapower Subcommittee, so please don't try to suggest he is an outsider. Under the circumstances as they unfolded after the election, one would expect any smart executive to look for a fresh voice capable of taking an independent, objective view, so that person could get in there and figure out what the administration is dealing with before the administration can effectively move forward.

This isn't a knock against Randy Forbes, but because of his existing relationships with the uniformed Navy leaders at the top, I wouldn't have picked Randy Forbes to get in there and be objective about the situation either. When Flag officers appear completely unprepared for a known contingency - it is so unexpected that it is very hard to ignore. While I see the lack of preparation by the Navy for Trump being elected as a mistake that can be corrected, in my mind one of the top priorities for Phillip Bilden once confirmed is to find out if the mistake is a reflection of a bigger problem, or if the mistake was the wake-up call Navy leaders needed to do some self reflection and get to work.

Answering that question determines where the Navy is today, and what is actually possible for the Trump administration going forward with the people in place.

*** This article originally discussed retired Captain Jerry Hendrix as needing a waiver from Congress if retired for less than five years in order to accept an appointment. This is inaccurate, only retired Flag officers and General officers require Congressional waivers.