One of the memorable moments in the 2012 presidential debates came when Mitt Romney pointed out that the U.S. Navy's fleet was at its smallest size since 1917 — and trending downwards.
"Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of military's changed," retorted President Barack Obama.
The president is right: Our military is always changing. But our ships, submarines and aircraft can still only be in one place at one time. In 2003, when I headed Fleet Forces Command, we could still meet our commitments, though we didn't have much wiggle room.
Today, we face a situation where the number of ships in our Navy is insufficient to meet the demand. To deal with this situation, the Navy is being forced to make impossible choices between competing priorities.
For the first time in decades, the Navy has determined that it can no longer keep one carrier group on station near each hotspot. Budget pressures are forcing the Navy to put into mothballs 11 very capable guided missile cruisers. And because of inadequate funding, the nation is forgoing the acquisition of necessary amphibious ships, modern strike fighters, and other capabilities needed for conventional missions. With this shortfall, the Navy's fleet of attack submarines will also fall from 53 boats at present to just 41 in 2029.
Perhaps most critically, however, our Navy is being forced to choose where it will still be able to project U.S. power. In 2011, the Obama administration announced that the United States would "pivot" to the Asia-Pacific region in response to China's growing military power and its outrageous territorial claims. But with the Navy's numbers and resources so constrained, increased presence in Asia comes at the expense of other regions. In the Middle East, this has resulted in a three-month "gap" during which no carrier has been present, undermining our ability to deter threats like Iran.
In European waters, U.S. presence has dwindled to almost nothing, even as Russia conducts naval exercises in the Mediterranean and uses its reconstituted submarine force to penetrate allied waters and menace America's Eastern Seaboard with sub-launched cruise missiles and nuclear torpedoes. In Asia, the region where some 60 percent of our forces are being deployed, the resources provided may not be sufficient to deal with China's aggressive maritime activities and the alarming rate at which its military forces are modernizing.
With the growing threats around the world and the constraints that have been imposed on our Navy, several stark choices appear. First, we can sustain the "pivot" to Asia, leaving Russia unchecked and ongoing operations in the Middle East under-resourced. Second, we can pivot again to Russia at the expense of Asia. Or, third, we can try to spread our shrinking forces among all three regions, and risk having insufficient forces to sustain our objectives in any of them.
But there is a fourth choice. With more responsible presidential leadership, we can reverse the historic decline in funding for defense, regrow our fleet and bring the level of U.S. naval forces back into alignment with their growing demand. Jeb Bush has been a strong advocate for the U.S. military, strong enough to earn my support. As he said on Hugh Hewitt's radio show earlier this year, our Navy has "kept the sea lanes open... created a much more peaceful world... [and enabled] us to take advantage of prosperity in the world as well."
This week Bush will unveil his plan for rebuilding the military. Hampton Roads' large Navy and military community will see much to like. The plan commits to growing the Navy fleet, accelerating the building of Virginia-class submarines, and modernizing older ships now slated for retirement. It eliminates the budget cuts held into law by the sequester, a word this community has learned to hate. And it recognizes that our sailors have spent far too much time at sea, vowing to do away with extended Navy deployments that have become the new ordinary.
As part of a balanced military, a strong U.S. Navy is critical for our national security, the maintenance of peace and prosperity overseas, and the health of the economy in Hampton Roads and nationwide. The 2016 field has many talented candidates, but for this old sailor, Bush has presented the strongest plan in the field for rebuilding our military.
Jeb Bush, Jeb Bush Campaign Press Release - Admiral Robert Natter: Rebuild the U.S. Navy Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/node/312976