ARTICLE: U.S. Navy aims to flex 'soft power', By Gordon Lubold, Christian Science Monitor, December 27, 2007 edition
Good article. Gates' role is seminal, and I don't know Winter, so I'll reserve comment there, but I also see a huge imprint in this new naval strategy from CNOs Mullen (now Chairman) and his succesor, Gary Roughead.
Roughead brought me out to PACOM in 2006 to address his component commanders' conference, and our off-line discussion fit this strategic shift to a "T."
Of course, the shipbuilding constituency in Congress will fight back, but that only shows that all serious discussion on the War on Terror begins with the question, "How do you view China's rise?"
Gates, apparently, has the right view.
(Thanks: Jim Zolinski)
| Permalink |
Comments (9)
Tom you should check out this months issue of Proceedings. Not only are authors including your graphs, but they are citing your work.
And in some cases, they are talking your language and not citing your work, but the roots are clear...
Either way, the message is getting out, slowly but surely.
Posted by Galrahn | January 8, 2008 9:14 AM
Other interesting blue developments from this week's Navy Times:
Navy considering reviving 4th Fleet to facilitate more SOUTHCOM operations like USNS COMFORT's recent South American / Caribbean humanitarian cruise.
Congress asking Navy & USCG to evaluate using common hull for the Littoral Combat Ship & National Security Cutter. NSC goes 12000 miles at 30 knots, with long unsupported station keeping. LCS goes 3500 miles @ 45 knots (and way over budget) with swappable mission modules.
Posted by TEJ | January 8, 2008 1:11 PM
Speaking of the Navy, this latest incident off the coast of Iran reminds way too much of the past. It looks like George Bush's "Tonkin Gulf". American surface warships "threatened" by Iranian "gun boats". We have been playing bumper tag with the Iranians for a very long time. Why are we "threatened" now? How can a few small boats from a 10th rate naval power be a threat? If we don't want trouble with the Iranians (it is, after all, their coast) then we should leave. If we have a legitimate reason to be there then we should just blow them out of the water and be done with it. It
Posted by Ted O'Connor | January 8, 2008 4:01 PM
Mr. O'Connor
USS Cole. That's how a few small boats from a 10th rate naval power can be a threat. Also consider they were dropping objects in the water, and remember the USS Samuel Roberts - her keel was broken by a mine a few years ago. Indeed, why it is a threat this time & not last time, who knows? I don't pretend to be a good reader of tea leaves. Need for restraint on our part is painfully obvious, though.
Posted by TEJ
|
January 8, 2008 6:57 PM
Good stuff. Instead of the Great White Fleet of Battleships showing we have arrived it will be a Great White Fleet of Hospital Ships showing we have arrived and are here to help. (Sean: Tom can use that in one of his slides, I won't mind:).
Posted by Jeff J | January 9, 2008 4:06 AM
JJ: ;-)
Posted by Anonymous
|
January 9, 2008 6:25 AM
So how can we get some help from the Euros with this "soft power" stuff? Isn't that right up their alley?
Posted by Wiredman | January 9, 2008 12:24 PM
I believe that this may be an acknowledgement that:
(1) China can be expected to threaten the United States on both the soft and the hard power fronts and
(2) An acknowledgement that the soft power front is where we are most vulnerable presently.
Posted by Bill C. | January 9, 2008 5:09 PM
4th Fleet will happen.
Posted by Tom Barnett | January 10, 2008 2:07 PM