The New Maritime Strategy is finally on the streets — download your copy here (PDF) or here.
Some quick takes whilst reviewing (feel free to leave comments below):

6 Core missions (some of which had fallen out of favor in the past, or so it seems):

  • Forward Presence
  • Deterrence
  • Sea Control
  • Power Projection
  • Maritime Security
  • Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Response

> Deterrance ("preventing wars is as imprtant as winning wars") is up front
> Training and maintaining critical skills is mentioned and emphasized early
> Seapower as a unifying force/common denominator across the globe
> The expected head-nod to globalization
> US seapower (emphasis added) to be globally postured (back to gobal presence from a surge force we wonder?)
> More emphasis on deterring and failing that, winning wars with forward deployed forces
> Emphasis on building trust through maritime cooperation
> A ‘punt’ it seems on how it will be implemented (head nod to experimentation, wargamming, etc.); no force structure recommendations or specific capabilities mentioned  – (leave the messy details to other documents to follow?)
> "
Adversaries are unlikely to attempt conventional force-on-force conflict and, to the extent that maritime forces could be openly challenged,their plans will almost certainly rely on asymmetric attack and surprise,achieved through stealth, deception, or ambiguity."  (hmm- while this is the lead-in to a requirement to strengthen ISR, makes one ponder the sea-denial forces being built in a certain Far East nation which is not named in this document)

More to follow, as we read it in depth…stay tuned.

– SJS

15 Comments

  1. *Snicker*

    …not like I have any room to talk. Our doctrine is simple: Buy more Raptors, make sure the other services keep their grubby hands off of UAVs, and task as many “battlefield airmen” to do as many Army jobs as possible so we can say we’re contributing to the fight

    Could be worse, though…at least none of us are the RN…

  2. IMO, it lacks clarity and vision.

    The absence of the word “mine” or “mines” says a lot.

    I
    am
    under
    whelmed.

    It isn’t awful, but it doesn’t even have the clarity to name specific places smaller than bodies of water and continents.

  3. Steeljawscribe

    Still reviewing, but have to say I’m a bit disappointed at the generic nature. Yeah, there’s hooks in there for more detailed writings (maybe) that could come later (perhaps).

    I don’t like the way they punted on implementation of the strategy – with the usual sop to “experimentation and wargamming” to determine the way forward.

    I like seeing sea control and forward deployed/global presence again with the hope the detestable surge from CONUS plan can have a bullet put in its head.

    Yes, MIW isn’t explicitly spelled out – and neither is AAW, ASW, BMD, etc. which presumably would come in a Maritime CONOPS document to follow (please don’t let it be as awful as the NCJO…), but how wide will the audience be for that? Believe that what we have before us was the very product some of us feared would result from the roadshow this past summer – slick PR stuff but lacking the substance that maritime professionals are looking for.

    Bottomline, at this point it looks like a base hit, maybe a double when we were hoping for a home run…but then I’m sure there’s some subtlety I’m missing.
    – SJS

  4. Strategy1

    Hello—good discussion here. I’m on the team that wrote the document. It isn’t intended to have an implementation plan; resources for the strategy are discussed in a classified document called the Navy Strategic Plan (classified because of the risk guidance–as in, “take more risk in X mission area, less in Y mission area”. Force structure debates to follow–but this is clearly a “growth” strategy. Naval Operations Concept (NOC) is where the missions cited are discussed; 2006 NOC will be revised in early 2008 based on this strategy.

  5. MR T's Haircut

    Strategy1,

    Can I inquire if you are a SES, GS, Naval Officer or Contractor? Also can you let us know approx how many “teams” were employed to develop?

  6. Steeljawscribe

    For reference, I know Strategy1 personally – he is an active duty senior naval officer on the OPNAV staff working in the same code (N3N5) that I did while on active duty. His bonafides are for real and I’ve offered up a spot as a guest author here to tell his side of the development of the MS, which has pretty well consumed his time over the last year plus. He’s agreed and I know I’ll be looking forward to hearing what he has to say.
    – SJS

  7. MR T\'s Haircut

    Scribe,

    As will I. Thanks for the reference on Strategy1. Will be interesting to see how this was developed.

    cheers,

    MTH

Trackbacks for this post

  1. The Flight Deck » New Maritime Strategy Released
  2. Steeljaw Scribe » Flightdeck Friday: RF-8 Crusaders and BLUE MOON
  3. Steeljaw Scribe » Russian Chief General Staff to be Sacked?
  4. Connecting News, Commentaries and Blogs at NineReports.com -
  5. A Cooperative Strategy For 21st Century Seapower: An Assessment
  6. Thoughts on the Maritime Strategy: Round II
  7. Navy launches New Strategy « New Wars

Comments are closed.