Waiting for a New Naval Strategy?

a simply cure for analysis paralysis

American, allied, and friendly navalists everywhere keep talking about what would be the best US maritime strategy to address the most likely war to crop up next in the Western Pacific; a Taiwan crisis that goes hot.

Sure, we have last year’s “Navigation Plan” from the CNO … but … that’s not quite what people are looking for to make the sale.

Not surprisingly, a lot of people are looking back to what was done when ‘ole Sal was a NROTC MIDN in the 1980s.

The 1986 Maritime Strategy was a solid rollout and presentation backed up by super pre-Goldwater Nichols intellectual work. The fact that almost four decades later people are still referencing it and other similar efforts across the NATO alliance - and for good reason. - speaks for itself.

A lot of the “sale” to the Western public to explain why such a strong naval force was needed was in simple black and white graphics.

Over on twitter, Elizabeth Buchannan pulls a great graphic from the time you can find in the 1991 book by the late great Eric Grove, Battle for the Fiords: NATO's Forward Maritime Strategy in Action.

No need to reinvent the wheel. People are busy, policy makers even busier. No need for complicated graphics.

We all know the challenges west of the international date line - a challenge even greater than what we would need to have done in Europe back when I was a pup.

Update this graph, but make it for the Pacific and let friend and the PRC know in broad terms what we plan to do - and back it up with the forces to do it.

More importantly - let the citizens of the USA and her allies know what we are asking for them to support.

It worked in the 80s.

h/t Rabb.