Month: September 2022

Source: United States Navy

Below is a transcript of remarks as delivered:

ADMIRAL MICHAEL M. GILDAY:  Good morning.  Distinguished guests, family and friends, shipmates, MCPON Smith, MCPON Honea, thanks for letting me take part in this very special and historic event.  It’s an honor to be here and it’s humbling to speak in front of a crowd like this.

It’s also an honor to have several former MCPONs here with us today:  MCPON Bushey, MCPON Hagan, MCPON Herdt, MCPON Scott, MCPON Stevens, MCPON Giordano.  Each of you stood as anchors for our Navy.  Each of your legacies and service have helped shape today’s Navy.  Thank you for your leadership.  Thank you for being here.  And thank you to your families, who supported you through your lifetime of service.

In just a few moments, we’ll bear witness to the changing of the guard, a transfer of responsibilities in one of the Navy’s most important leadership positions, the office of the Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy. 

I’m going to deviate from my prepared remarks today.  I’m going to speak from a book that was given to me when I first became CNO by my first command master chief on my first destroyer.  The book is called “Winds of Change.”  It’s the history of the office of the Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy from 1967 to 1992.

MCPON Bushey will know the author personally, Charlotte Crist.  Charlotte was a journalist in the United States Navy.  She joined in the early ’60s.  Her dad was a World War II veteran.  She left the Navy – she worked for a newspaper in southern Georgia – [then] she came back to the Navy, [and] she married a submariner.  When she became pregnant, she was forced to leave the Navy.  I think it was one of your MCPONs that changed that rule.  But she came back into the [Navy] Reserves after that – she never lost her love for the Navy. 

And a four-month TAD assignment to your office, MCPON Bushey, led to a 17-month labor of love to write this book.

And I thought it was interesting.  It was given to me, as I mentioned, by a former command master chief of mine who, in his inscription, said, “The most important – one of the most important – decisions you’ll make in your term of office is choosing the next MCPON.  And so he said, read this book.  I said, “aye.”  And it definitely was informative.

I want to talk a little bit about the history of the office because most people equate the office of the MCPON with CNO Zumwalt, and it actually preceded him by probably three – at least two CNOs.  And it really started in 1964, under a secretary of the Navy named Nitze.  And Nitze saw that our recruiting and our retention was not doing well.  At that time, retention among first-term sailors was at 10 percent.  This was post-Berlin, post-Cuban Missile Crisis.  We were ramping up for Vietnam – we were in serious trouble.  And so he directed a one-star admiral named Alford, Adm. John Alford, who was a veteran of World War II – he was there during Pearl Harbor; he had sailed in Nimitz’s island-hopping campaign, finishing his term on a battleship off of Okinawa.  And so Alford did a study, and the study took two years so it finished up in 1966.  He and his team interviewed over 100,000 Sailors and they came away with some really incredible insights.

There were 115 in all.  He worked – he worked directly for the secretary and the secretary published the results.  And one of those recommendations, from a cryptologist technician first class named John Abraham, was to establish a leading chief petty officer of the United States Navy.  And his idea was that not only would we have a leading chief, but we would then have – that would be a master chief, actually – but we would have senior chiefs at each of the fleets, in each of the [type commands] so we’d have that connective tissue from the waterfront back to Washington and to our most senior levels. And so, interestingly, it was put into effect because the Secretary of the Navy deemed it so.

But I’d like to read a passage from MCPON Black, our first MCPON.  He requested to meet with the CNO at the time to talk about – and the CNO at the time was Admiral David McDonald – to talk about his expectations for the job.  So McDonald told him he never believed in establishing the office to begin with, so MCPON Black asked him, “’If this is what the enlisted people want, will you give us a chance to make it work?’  And he told me at that point that I could do anything that I wanted to do.” 

So, for Black – who was also at Pearl Harbor, who also crossed the Pacific on the USS Maryland and had eight battle campaign ribbons to prove it – that was a blank check, and so he established the office.  The office was to report to the CNO.  Within three months, it changed from the senior enlisted advisor to the CNO to the Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy and we were off and running.

Twenty-five years later, when this book was written, Adm. Zumwalt wrote the foreword.  And although I think I could capture this myself, I thought that Adm. Zumwalt’s words were quite poignant.  And I’d like to read them to you, so please bear with me.  Zumwalt writes in 1992, after he was out of office for a while: 

When the office of the Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy was created in 1967, the United States Navy took a giant step forward in untapping the leadership capabilities of its enlisted force.  In the act of adding an extra gold star to the master chief’s crow, the senior levels of command were in effect saying to our enlisted community, we respect and we value your opinion.  We need your input.  We will listen and we will act.  And just as they met the challenges of war and peace for more than two centuries, the enlisted community responded in a way that not only silenced those doubting Thomases, but responded – but also amazed those who initially believed.

No one could have known 25 years ago, writes Zumwalt, that the office would grow into a position of influence and credibility that it enjoys today.  No officer, regardless of his or her position in the chain of command or the Washington bureau, demands more respect, gains quicker access, or is listened to more intently than the Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy.  Wise congressmen, secretaries of defense and the Navy, chiefs of naval operations, and chiefs of naval personnel, and many others have benefitted from the sage counsel of the MCPON, for his voice is not only the voice of personal experience but of the broader and ever-changing spectrum of the enlisted experience.

Today, when there are so many avenues of communication open to modern Navy Sailors, it is difficult to imagine the breadth and the depth of the gap that that first MCPON was asked to bridge in 1967.  Among the most rewarding memories of my naval career are those snapshots of time that I spent listening to Sailors.  Whether they were manning riverboats in Vietnam or in the engine rooms of a destroyer underway, if I could get them to talk I always learned something.

But the Sailor of the ’60s rarely had the opportunity to speak to someone who could make the changes they suggested, or at least express interest in what they had to say.  We were far too busy running our ships, balancing our accounts, or making ourselves look good for the promotion boards.  And if by some miracle we did validate a Sailor’s suggestion by making the recommended change, we kept the credit for ourselves.  As a result, Sailors stopped talking and they started walking right out the door, or they stayed and they convinced younger impressionable shipmates that no one up above gave a damn about what he or she thought.

That’s where the Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy came in.  He went out to the fleet with a message, and I quote, “We do take care.  And if you tell me what’s on your mind, I’ll make sure that somebody listens.”  I had the honor of working with Delbert Black and Jack Whittet, the first and second Master Chief Petty Officers of the Navy.  What giants they were.

Like so many other good ideas that take years to ripen, the MCPON did not work overnight miracles.  But those of us who have spent our careers as officers know well there is no one more patient or more persistent than a chief with a mission.  He or she might yell and cuss.  They might bang on tables, stomp on a few toes.  But eventually, they get what they want if you give them the time and you give them the resources.

Between Delbert Black and Duane Bushey, 25 years have passed.  Seven master chiefs have worn an extra star on their sleeve.  They earned that star much the same way they earned that first crow as a petty officer.  They were tested and approved.  Once they had the title, they had to earn it.  Credibility gains the petty officer must grow with each added stripe.  Add an anchor, more to prove.  Add a star, still more.

But add that third star, and you’re out in no man’s land, wrote Zumwalt.  Those junior to you are looking up, perhaps holding you, perhaps pulling you down.  Those above may extend a hand of confidence or, lacking confidence in their own abilities, try to push you down.  Seven men have survived the winds of change – which is the title of this book.  They learned when to bend and when to stand firm.  They adjusted.  They adapted.  They adhered.  Nonetheless, they refused to change one common denominator that has served them well throughout their voyage to the top:  They continued to practice loyalty up and loyalty down.  They earned a keen sense of balance on the high wire which places them in that bridge between officers and enlisted.

With this history marking the 25^th anniversary of the office of the Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy, we gain insight into the job, the men who have held the title, their joint and their singular accomplishments, the support system they developed over the years, the organization, and last but not least the leadership capabilities of the world’s finest enlisted community.  In each and every sailor serving in the United States Navy today – and I think it’s still true – lies the potential to be a Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy and the opportunity to make the world’s finest navy just a little bit better.

Thank you, Adm. Zumwalt. A lesson for all of us.

MCPON Russ Smith, I want to take time to thank you specifically.  While I know you would rather defer all praise to your teammates, many of them sitting before me, your work and your service and your sacrifice deserve to be recognized.

For over three decades, you’ve stood the watch for our Navy and for our nation.  In 1988, you began your career as an airman, then becoming a weapons technician, before finally finding your true calling as an intelligence specialist.  You’ve always taken the tough assignments.  You’re a true leader.  You’re a chief to the core and a Sailor who is dedicated to Sailors, who’d do anything at any time of the day or night to help a fellow servicemember.  And I know that personally.

As our 15^th Master Chief Petty officer of the Navy, your candor to the Congress and thoughtful counsel to two CNOs and numerous secretaries have allowed Sailors to have a voice in our nation’s capital.  Your tireless efforts to provide Sailors with mental, moral, and spiritual support has helped make our fleet more resilient and much, much more effective.  Your leadership ensured that our most important resource, our people, are ready to serve and defend the nation that we love.  Having conducted more than 200 fleet visits all over the world, your outreach and willingness to be there for Sailors and their families is what truly made your service so remarkable.

You cared for Sailors like few other leaders that I’ve met in the Navy.  Thank you for everything you have done over these past four years.  Our Navy and our Navy family are much stronger than it was four years ago.  As you go ashore for the final time, know that this nation and our Navy are forever grateful for your lifetime of consequential and honorable service.

Now, just as we pause to send MCPON Smith off, we should also take a moment to look forward to the future excited for what lies ahead.  The soon-to-be 16^th MCPON, James Honea, has been an essential part of our Navy for 35 years with experience in assignments at sea and all over the world, with leadership positions at every single level.  He brings the exact kind of professional experience we need for this immense responsibility.  I’ve said it before:  He’s got saltwater running through his veins.  This boatswains mate will lead as MCPON with honor, courage, commitment, and respect.

We’re thrilled to see you build upon MCPON Smith’s momentum and accelerate America’s naval power.  I know that like so many other MCPONs here with us today, that you are a servant leader, truly, putting the needs of our Sailors and their families above all.  Without a doubt, our Sailors and their families are in good hands with you stepping in.  I’d also like to take a moment to thank Evelyn, James, Sara, and the rest of your family who are here with us today for their support and love over these three decades.

I’ll close with this.  MCPON Smith may be retiring, but his legacy will live on.  We would be wise to serve others first and to fight for our sailors always.

Thank you all so very much for being here today.  May God bless you, may God bless our Navy, and may God bless the United States of America.

Source: United States Navy

Good morning everyone and welcome!  Secretary Hicks, Secretary Del Toro, Chairman Milley, Admiral Grady, Admiral Fagan, fellow flag and general officers, friends and family, it is my distinct privilege this morning to preside over the promotion of Adm. Franchetti and this Change of Office ceremony for the Vice Chief of Naval Operations.

It is fitting that we perform this ceremony here in the Hall of Heroes, where we are inspired by the exemplary action, unwavering devotion, and extraordinary heroism of 3,500 men and one woman – Dr. Mary Edwards Walker – a Civil War surgeon, prisoner of war, and suffragist. 

These heroes exemplify the best of what it means to be a leader.  And it is a special honor for me to recognize not one, but two of the most exemplary, most accomplished, most impactful leaders in our Navy. 

It would be impossible for me to do justice to both of these officers in our brief time together, so I’m going to save the majority of my comments about Adm. Lescher for his retirement ceremony later this morning.  But for those present, I do want to take a few moments to recognize the extraordinary service he has rendered to our Navy and our nation during his tenure.

Over the past two years as VCNO, Adm. Lescher has taken on our Navy’s most challenging problems.

He has applied his superb judgment and analytical skills to improve our Navy’s performance and increase our warfighting readiness. 

The list of initiatives he has spearheaded and implemented includes:  Performance-to-Plan, the Naval Sustainment System, the Navigation Plan Implementation Framework, Unmanned Task Force, Project Overmatch, the Learning to Action Board, the establishment of the Navy Safety Command, and our Navy-wide Get Real, Get Better campaign. 

Any one of these initiatives would have been more than most individuals could realistically undertake, but Adm. Lescher has taken them all on masterfully. 

And this list just scratches the surface of what he’s achieved for our Fleet.  From helping formulate our Navy strategy, plans, and policy; to overseeing delivery of Navy programs; to advising and advocating for Navy interests during multiple budget cycles; to strengthening our alliances and partnerships; to identifying and promoting best practices for problem-solving and leadership across the force … his impact will be felt for years to come.   

So Bill, on behalf of a grateful Navy – and a grateful nation – let me thank you for your unwavering commitment to excellence, your servant’s attitude, your calm, confident professionalism, and your unwavering devotion to the mission.  You taught all of us how to get real … and how to get better.  So to you, and your wife Ruth, who has stood by your side, thank you.

Ladies and gentlemen, it is now my distinct honor to introduce to you the next Vice Chief of Naval Operations, Adm. Lisa Franchetti.

The story of Admiral Franchetti’s trailblazing military career begins in Evanston, Illinois, on the campus of the prestigious Northwestern University. 

There she was young, ambitious, tireless; by day a journalism major learning to gather information, ask hard questions, and communicate with precision; at night, a waitress working to pay for college; and early in the morning, a coxswain on her crew team, conducting a symphony of swinging blades.  She would go on to captain her crew team … while also coaching the men’s lightweight crew.

Lisa likes to say, “No one person can whistle a symphony – it takes an orchestra.” And she credits her rowing experience with some of her earliest lessons on leadership: every individual matters, you propel a team forward by believing in them, and no one person can do it alone.

Now it was also on the Northwestern campus where one afternoon Lisa happened to walk by Naval ROTC Midshipmen who were employing one of our most ingenious and persuasive recruiting strategies … the cookout.  

Now Lisa will tell you the rest of the story, but the strategy worked – and before long she joined their ranks as a midshipman. 

One of her advisors at the time was retired Capt. John Peterson—who is with us this morning.  John has a vivid memory of a “compact, energetic, focused, and grinning Lisa Franchetti” speeding by him on her bicycle one morning, calling out “Good morning Lt. Peterson” as she raced to her goal.  At that moment, John had a clear vision of a “woman on the move, destined for greatness.”  You could say she hasn’t stopped moving since.

When Lisa commissioned, she was determined to serve on a ship at sea.  Despite limited opportunities – which she will explain – she remained motivated and found an innovative solution.

She wanted to be operational.  As she puts it, “I didn’t join the Navy to drive a desk.”  And anyone who has served with her can testify, she is never happier than when she is aboard a ship, “haze grey and under way.”  It’s ironic – but fitting – that the person we need most behind the VCNO’s desk here in the Pentagon is the person whose heart remains with Sailors at sea.

The legendary Adm. Grace Hopper once said, “you manage things; you lead people.”  Similarly, one of Adm. Franchetti’s core leadership principles is that “people are the most important thing.”  As everyone she’s led can testify… she means it.  When she earned her way onto her first ship, USS Shenandoah, she immediately put that people-first approach into practice. 

There was a first-class petty officer in her division who remembered her some 30-years later.  As he recalls, “I was at the lowest point of my life, but she trusted me, she believed in me, and I made chief under her.  She saved me.”  You don’t have that kind of impact without empathy, personal engagement, and a genuine concern for people’s well-being.  That’s how important people are to her.

Another defining characteristic of Lisa’s style is exhaustive study and thoroughness in preparation.  Friends and colleagues describe her insatiable thirst for knowledge, inquisitiveness, and uncanny attention to detail. 

You can ask Adm. Jim Aiken, who commands our 4^th Fleet.  When Jim was a junior officer serving with Lisa on USS Monogahela, the junior officers were looking forward to a relaxing port call free of liberty plans.  You can imagine their dismay when Lisa started handing out an ambitious, highly detailed, hour-by-hour schedule of tours, museum visits, and other organized activities.  It’s an anecdote that illustrates how she promotes continuous learning, and empowers everyone around her.  I cannot wait to see what she has planned for our staff!

You know, this won’t be Lisa’s first time in the VCNO’s office.  Twenty-five years ago she was a flag aide for VCNO, working alongside a slightly younger John “Lung” Aquilino in VCNO’s office. 

Adm. Aquilino, who now leads our Indo-Pacific Command, says that she taught him everything in that tour, and he got through it “by doing whatever she did and following her lead.”  “You could say she trained a combatant commander” he says, adding, “I couldn’t be prouder to have her as our next Vice Chief.”

I think these early tours demonstrate the qualities and characteristics that Lisa has kept with her and which have made her so successful in some of our most challenging assignments both afloat and ashore.

When she commanded USS Ross, she was singled out both for her tactical expertise and for the climate of trust and empowerment she created. The ship earned the Battle “E”, and she selflessly shared operational best practices throughout the waterfront.  Her boss at the time said you could feel her crew’s pride and high morale from the moment you crossed the quarterdeck.

As Commodore for Destroyer Squadron 21, she was recognized for her “passionate and inclusive style,” setting up her commanding offers for success at every turn.  Simultaneously, she planned and executed one of the most successful Pacific Partnership exercises ever.

Her teams delivered humanitarian and civic assistance to tens of thousands of people in southeast Asia, showcasing her talents as a warfighter, diplomat, and operational leader. 

As flag officer in Commander of U.S. Naval Forces in Korea, she earned the respect and admiration of her Korean counterparts, who valued her advice and counsel.  By fostering teamwork and cultivating inclusivity, she strengthened the command … and the coalition.

A select few admirals have the coveted honor of commanding a strike group.  Lisa Franchetti was called upon to command not one, but two strike groups … at the same time. 

This included Carrier Strike Group 15, which is charged with training and certifying our west coast strike groups and is only entrusted to our sharpest tacticians and operators.  Because Lisa had gained the right experience, worked to achieve the highest levels of expertise, and earned the trust of her superiors, and when the doors of opportunity opened – she was ready to walk through and take command.

As Commander of Sixth Fleet – and Adm. Foggo will attest to this – she oversaw the safe and successful dynamic force employment of the USS Harry S. Truman Strike Group to the High North, surprising the hell out of Russia – and many Navy skeptics – who hadn’t seen such a deployment in a generation. 

Furthermore, she demonstrated operational innovation during BALTOPS ’18 by sending carrier-based aviation into the Baltic … from the Adriatic.  And when the President called for strikes against chemical weapons facilities in Syria, Lisa’s forces flawlessly executed their portion of a multi-fleet, multi-combatant command, multi-national strike. 

After the strike, Lisa visited one of the ships that shot the Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles into Syria.  In thanking the crew for their efforts, one of the cooks said, “I didn’t do anything.  I just make cookies.”  Lisa stopped and said, “you prepare food for the people that launch the weapons—you have just as important a role as they do.”  That’s how Lisa leads. Helping people, as she says, “connect the dots” to see how every individual contributes to the mission.

In her previous assignment here on the Joint Staff as the J-5, Lisa was one of the Chairman’s trusted agent in crisis, both during the historic withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan, and during the onset of the Russia-Ukraine war.

She provided counsel and advice, plans and policy, for some of our most difficult strategic challenges.  As always, the tougher the assignment, the more she excels.

Now, as Lisa’s friend, retired Adm. Mary Jackson, reminds us, it should not be lost on anyone how hard it is to live the Navy dream while also being a wife and a mother.  Lisa and her family have made hard decisions and sacrifices that have enabled her to be where she is right now.  But the reason she remains on the Navy team is because they support each other and have formed a circle of strength. 

The Navy is a family and we serve as families … and our Navy is fortunate to have Lisa’s husband Jim Sievert and her daughter Isabel by her side, along with her extended family who provide supporting fires:  her sister Meg, here from Duluth, her brother Lawrence from Miami, and her Uncle Lin and Aunt Sue Snider from Frederick, Maryland. 

Jim – a Naval Academy graduate, swimmer, runner, and voracious reader – has made the overseas moves with Lisa and provided stability at home.  Jim, thank you for being a source of strength and constancy for your family.  And Isabel – the apple of your mother’s eye – thank you for being an enduring well-spring of joy, pride, and love for your mom. 

Ladies and gentlemen, in closing, as we prepare to promote Adm. Franchetti and send off Adm. Lescher, I think back to the image of Midshipman Franchetti leading her crew team across the waters of Lake Michigan in harmony, balance, and rhythm. 

That image of a team pulling together as one, giving everything they have for one another, bound together in common purpose by pride, respect, humility, trust – and ultimately by love – that is a vision which describes our Navy at its finest.  And that is what the dream of America should inspire in all of us.  Clearly, it has inspired the two leaders we honor this morning. 

Thank you … let’s promote Vice Adm. Franchetti!

Source: United States Navy

Below is a transcript of the remarks as delivered:

MEGAN CLARK TORREY:  So we are so privileged and honored to have our keynote speaker today.  And it’s particularly an honor for me, as the daughter of Navy veteran.  So please welcome the 32nd Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Michael Gilday.

ADMIRAL MICHAEL M. GILDAY:  Ms. Torrey, good afternoon.  Can you hear me?

MS. TORREY:  Absolutely.  I can hear you, sir.

ADM. GILDAY:  Well, first of all, I’m just tuning in now, so I haven’t been able to hear much of the conversation today.  Although I have looked at the agenda.  I know that you’re talking about the age of instability and have likely touched a lot on both Russia and China, as well as perhaps North Korea and Iran.  And so what I thought I’d do, given the 30 minutes that we have, is to talk about two areas in particular with an aim towards maybe setting the table for Q&A on what we’re doing about the age of instability.

The first thing I thought I’d touch on briefly are the importance of allies and partners.  And so you have seen us in this administration – in the National Defense Strategy, Secretary Austin talks about integrated deterrence as an objective.  And the means by which you achieve that is campaigning.  And that campaigning is not solely done by the U.S. military, or even solely with other instruments of U.S. national power, but more broadly with our allies and partners.

And if I take a look at my calendar over the past two months, as an example, I am meeting with or talking to my counterparts from around the world once or twice a week.  Last night, and most of yesterday, I was with my Australian counterpart.  Today I’m with my counterpart from Belgium.  In two weeks, I’ll be with all our European partners at a conference in Italy talking about some key operational issues. 

When I think about major exercises we’ve done just in the last 90 days, the Baltic Operations exercise that we do annually had 16 allies and partners, including Sweden and Finland.  The Rim of the Pacific exercise, west of Hawaii, had nearly 30 partners.  And UNITAS, that we just finished down in the Southern Command [area of responsibility] had about 20 nations involved.  So that connective tissue with allies and partners is critically important because we know that we cannot maintain those international norms that were established long ago at Bretton Woods all by ourselves.

I’d also say with some of our allies and partners we’re trying to transition from just being interoperable to being interchangeable.  And I’ll give you a couple of examples.  In the Middle East there’s an example when we had a gap of a carrier strike group because we had one in the Western Pacific and we had another one in the Mediterranean.  We actually relied on the French carrier Charles de Gaulle to provide air support over Afghanistan.  And that carrier strike group from France actually came under the tactical control of the U.S. Fifth Fleet commander in Bahrain. 

We’ve done the same thing in the Mediterranean, with not only Charles de Gaulle but with also the Italian carrier Cavour.  And so we have done kind of this interchangeability piece and tried to use that to our advantage at times when we couldn’t cover down on specific pieces of battle space that we considered critical.  Other examples would be the Royal Navy, the Brits covering down for us in escorting ships through the Strait of Hormuz or the Bab-al-Mandeb between the Gulf of Aden and the Red Sea.  And so that happens now almost seamlessly as we shift tactical control of units under each other’s command, and we use our units in those interchangeable kind of ways.

I think that that needs to continue in the future.  It’s a little bit easier in the European theater because we have NATO as a framework – as a rigorous framework – we use to tie us all together.  But in the Pacific, it’s a bit more of a pick-up game, because we have less structure.  And so what we try to do is we try to knit together allies and partners, whether it’s bilaterally, trilaterally, or multilaterally, in order to work together closely, particularly as we stand firm against China’s malfeasance in the Western Pacific, in the Strait of Taiwan, and also in the South China Sea.

A couple of additional examples that I think are noteworthy.  The first would the Quad that we stood up with India and Australia, which is – initially it’s actually – the focus of that particular arrangement is diplomatic and economic, but there’s also a military thread there that’s played out very well.  I think particularly when we consider India’s strategic positioning, not only relative to the Indian Ocean but also the friction that they have right now and the border they share with China, has forced China to cast their gaze away from the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait over their shoulder at India.  We see that to our advantage and are leveraging India and partnerships to that end, to keep the Chinese occupied and to let them know that their circle of friends is diminishing and not growing.

The other relatively new security arrangement in the past year that’s come into place is AUKUS, or the Australia-U.K.-U.S. framework, that is really centered around, number one, it’s providing Australia with their own indigenous capability to produce submarines, to sustain them, and to deploy them in a continuous manner.  But secondly, it’s opening the floodgates with respect to sharing information more broadly, and [sharing] technology more broadly.  Think AI; think quantum computing; think the use of unmanned – so that we can leverage industry in each of our countries to a greater degree and put them against known operational problems very quickly – so that we can put capabilities in the hands of warfighters in months, rather than years.

I’d like to pause there with the international discussion and shift more to the United States Navy for just a few minutes and talk about where we are now and where we see ourselves going.  Based on China being the pacing threat – and that’s well-established in the last two defense strategies – it caused the Navy actually preceding the 2018 NDS to take a hard look on whether or not we thought that given the threat that we would face now and into the future, whether we were posturing the right fleet in terms of not only numbers but, importantly, composition in order to not only deter, but to succeed if we got into a fight.

And we determined that we were not satisfied with the current fleet that we had.  But in general, we thought that if we do come at the Chinese, it would be a in more distributed manner.  So think multiple vectors in all domains, from seabed to space.  And there’d be a transregional aspect of any kind of conflict with China as well, that would go beyond the Indo-Pacific area of responsibility.  So there’s this notion that we would fight in a distributed manner across many vectors, physical and virtual.

I think another aspect of that was to take a look at the current fleet that we had, and whether or not in a distributed manner [if] it would be most effective.  And we felt that, A) we needed more numbers.  But we also needed more capability spread over a vast space.  And so in terms of affordability, we know that we cannot continue to build or sustain a fleet like we did in the previous century.  So we have taken a deep look at unmanned.  We have an unmanned taskforce in the Middle East right now, where we are on track to have 100 unmanned vessels on the sea and in the air by the summer of 2023. 

We have a framework of partners involved in that effort.  So 80% of the effort is allies and partners.  20% is U.S., in terms of the investment.  And the real key to that is taking unmanned on the sea and in the air to sense the environment, and to make sense of it as the tactical edge and operation centers in countries like Saudi Arabia and Israel and Bahrain, so that they have a better sense of what type of potentially illicit traffic is transiting the waterways close to their [exclusive economic zones] EEZs or inside their territorial waters.

And if I use an example real quick to kind of put a punctuation point on it, if you take a look at the Red Sea, as an example, which is about the size of the state of California, and on a typical day we might have three, four, on a good day five, coalition ships patrolling that waterway.  That’s akin to having five patrol cars trying to police the state of California.  It just isn’t very effective.  So leveraging unmanned to sense the environment and then to push that data back to operations centers where we actually leverage applications that are aided by both AI and machine learning, to get a better understanding of what is flowing through that battlespace as proven in the testing that we’ve done over the past eight months to be very effective.

So this effort with unmanned has allowed us to understand how to connect not only platforms, but also importantly the artificial intelligence and the software integration that makes those unmanned platforms really come alive.  The secret is the AI software plug, and not necessarily the platform or the payload that the platform carries.  That’s helped us to understand how to command and control, how to integrate the assets more effectively. 

And that is giving us a better understanding of how we can accelerate our path to larger unmanned vessels, which would give us a hybrid fleet probably in the mid to late 2030s, where we would see 40% of the U.S. fleet to be unmanned or minimally manned, and 60% of the fleet be manned.  We’re doing the same thing with our airwings off of aircraft carriers, where by the mid-2030s we think that 40% of our carrier airwings will be manned and 60% will be unmanned.

So that is our path going forward in order to give us a force that gives us both capabilities and numbers that we could come at a potential adversary in a distributed way and, we think, a much more effective manner.  For all of these efforts, including high tech offensive weapons like hypersonics and, on the defensive side, laser technology.  So directed energy that we’re using on some of our ships that we’re experimenting with, as well as high-powered microwaves in terms of defending the fleet.  We’re working hand-in-glove with much of that experimentation with the U.S. Marine Corps, with the U.S. Army, and of course with the U.S. Air Force.  And so it is a joint effort to try and change the way not only how we fight, but what we fight with.

So with that, ma’am, I’d like to just pause and open it up to any questions that might be specific to what I just talked about or, more broadly, that might touch back to some of the previous speakers.  Thank you.

MS. TORREY:  Thank you.  So let’s talk a little bit, when we’re looking at the globe – and we know that we’re experiencing climate change, and the melting of ice.  Can you comment a little bit about naval operations in the Arctic, and some of the threats and challenges there?

ADM. GILDAY:  Sure.  So in 2018 – late 2018 – we did our first excursion, our first deployment in the Arctic Basin in a generation.  We hadn’t flown aircraft in those kind of conditions or operated ships for long periods of times in those conditions since the late 1980s, early 1990s.  Since then, we are operating routinely in the Arctic with exercises and operations going on with allies and partners at least a dozen times a year.

Most recently I was in Iceland.  And people tend to think of Iceland, which is obviously part of the NATO – a member of the NATO alliance, in kind of a transatlantic kind of way.  But we now have to consider Iceland in a geostrategic position there by Greenland, and the entryway into the Arctic Basin.  With the ice cap melting and with trade routes between Asia and Europe fundamentally changing over the next, let’s say, two decades, that space, that battlespace, is going to fundamentally change with respect to competition for resources, with respect to the need to make sure that those trade routes remain open and free for all.

I think that Sweden and Finland joining the alliance here shortly also adds to that dynamic in the Arctic.  And so it’s becoming a more competitive space.  Our presence in the Arctic is becoming more and more important.  It’s also a bit complicated, at least with the U.S. military, we have three combatant commanders that all touch that region.  So [Indo-Pacific Command] INDOPACOM, the commander of U.S. [Northern Command] NORTHCOM, and also the commander of U.S. European command.  So I think in terms of operations, what we’re likely to see in the future are those strong lines that stand between [combatant commands] COCOMs begin to dissolve a bit as we need to operate fairly seamlessly across those commanders.  I’ll pause there, ma’am, for any follow up.

MS. TORREY:  Absolutely.  So let’s talk a little bit about how you’re approaching the force itself.  So in your Navigation Plan that came out this July, you talked a lot about the importance of maintaining a culture of excellence that bolsters warfighting advantage.  Can you talk to us a little bit about the principles and practices that are constituting how you’re going about doing that?

ADM. GILDAY:  Yes.  So four words:  get real and get better.  So it’s really facing the problems that we have, understanding them, being transparent about the issues that we’re facing in the Navy before we decide to move forward with solution sets.  That has to be a mindset to self-assess and to then self-correct.  A disciplined mindset that we see in some of the world’s best learning organizations.  Companies that have flourished for decades have this kind of learning environment where they’re not embarrassed to admit that they have mistakes.

We need to get beyond status quo behavior.  And I’ll give you an example.  At least in the Pentagon when people give briefings they want to make sure that they have a stoplight chart with red, yellow, and green.  They want to make sure that their slides are green, that they’re showing that everything’s okay, and success is walking away from a briefing without any tasking form their boss.  That kind of behavior does not lend itself to actually embracing what’s wrong, admitting what’s wrong, and getting after what’s wrong. 

This became a realization to me as we took a look at the readiness of our fighter aircraft, our Super Hornets, that had not punched above 50% in well over a decade.  And so one would think in order to get from our baseline performance, which was 50%, to the North Star that we wanted to achieve, which was sustained 80% readiness – one would think in terms of inputs that we would have to lather that with more money and increase the budget to our aircraft maintainers by at least 30%.

We didn’t do that.  We took a look at process.  And we found that in terms of the way that we were doing our depot-level maintenance, that we had not significantly moved the needle or changed our processes since the mid-1980s, so in 40 years.  And so that led us to get real about where we were and then get better about the solution set to where we needed to – where we needed to go.  And now for nearly three years we’ve been sustaining that 80% fighter readiness. 

So I hope that example kind of sheds some light on, you know, as an exemplar of the kind of behavior that we want to model more broadly in the Navy, so that we can make sure that we – you know, as a learning organization, I believe that, you know, those that learn and adapt the fastest are going to win in combat.  There’s no doubt of that.  You’re seeing that on the ground in Ukraine right now.  And we have to embrace and adapt to that same mindset.

MS. TORREY:  On recruiting … there’s been a steady drumbeat in the news recently that the armed forces are struggling in that area. Can you talk about how the Navy is doing? Also, Navy has done a lot with social media and influencers — is that a way you are seeing success?   And in terms of retention, what is motivating Sailors to stay in?

ADM. GILDAY:  So in terms of meeting numbers, so we’re meeting numbers with respect to total end strength.  We’re meeting our goals with respect to retention.  And right now, we are meeting our recruiting goals for the active force, but we’re lagging by 2(00)-300 in the reserve force.  So in short, we’re not satisfied where we are, and see the storm clouds not only on the horizon but overhead with respect to being able to recruit.

In terms of, you know, a recruitable population of young people on which to recruit from or to focus on, in the aggregate that group is between 20 and 25 million 17- to 25-year-olds.  If you take a look at academic performance, if you take a look at physical qualifications, and then, importantly, when you take a look at their propensity to serve or their desire to serve, that number falls below 400,000 from, let’s say, 21-22 million.  So that’s a relatively small pool to go after, not only in the services but industry is also competing for that talent.

The Navy, during COVID, so about 18 to 24 months ago, we shifted to completely a virtual environment in terms of recruiting – near completely a virtual environment.  We moved away from television and we moved into social media quite heavily, as well as the gaming industry, and have found a lot of success there.  But we’re still not satisfied.  I think that person to person touch is important.  I think that we’re finding ourselves – realizing that we need to reach out to influencers.  You all in the audience are certainly among those influencers that you would hope would be positive about military service.

But also, guidance counselors and teachers in school, professors in colleges, administrators, so that they have a more positive outlook on the military as an option for those that they influence on a day-to-day basis.  Thanks for the question.

MS. TORREY:  Of course.  I think our first question is over here in the audience.

Q:  Good afternoon, sir.  Midshipman First Class Hummel, Naval Academy.

I was just curious if you could briefly touch on what you think the role of the carrier strike group will be in a potential conflict in the Pacific.  Thank you, sir.

ADM. GILDAY:  Yeah, so I would say there are two vitally important elements in any kind of fight in the Pacific.  One is under the sea, where the U.S. Navy right now has an advantage over any of our potential adversaries.  And that kind of competitive advantage is something that we aim to keep.  So we don’t want anybody catching up or surpassing us with respect to expertise and capability in the undersea.

With respect to carrier strike groups and surface ships, that’s our striking power, the striking arm of the United States Navy.  And our ability – along with our undersea capabilities – to basically conduct our two primary reasons for being.  One is sea control and the other is power projection.  The carrier itself is the world’s most survivable airfield. 

So I’m not sitting far from Reagan National Airport, which is going to be in the same exact spot at 1:50 p.m. tomorrow afternoon.  But if it were an aircraft carrier, it could be off the coast of Newfoundland.  It could be off of Miami, Florida.  Or it could be – if it could go west – I’d be west of the Mississippi and Missouri.  So you have that kind of mobility with an aircraft carrier that you do not have with static airfields.

With the carrier airwing itself, we now have the MQ-25 Stingray, which is an unmanned tanking asset that we have on the carrier that’ll have its initial operational capability in 2025.  It actually extends the range of the airwing by 20 to 25 miles – by 500 miles, excuse me.  So another 500 miles we can push those strike aircraft forward with weapons with range and speed.  And so we are investing in a number of weapons that have longer range, higher speed, higher survivability.  And that includes an air-launched hypersonics weapon.  Half of our [carrier] airwings by mid-decade are going to be a mix of fourth and fifth generation aircraft.  So the Super Hornets and F-35s.  And by the end of the decade, we’ll be mostly a fifth gen force.

And so the carrier remains an important, potent, survivable, lethal part of the U.S. military.  And our investments are really key to what the carrier carries.  We’re going to deploy the new carrier Ford here this fall.  That’ll be her first deployment.  And she has a new catapult and arresting gear system that, instead of being steam propelled, is actually done with magnetic technology that allows us to have an increased sortie rate.  So I think we’re in a pretty good shape in terms of where we are and where we’re going with aircraft carriers.  And, you know, in the decades ahead we’ll be looking at the aviation combatant of the future.  We think there will be a role to deliver some type of effects from the sea downrange, through the air, to an adversary.  Thanks for the question.

MS. TORREY:  Of course.  Next.  Over here.

Q:  Hello.  My name is Joe Cooper.  Former Marine.

General Thomas mentioned that China has a weakness when it comes to amphibious capabilities with regard to Taiwan.  We have a strength in the United States Marine Corps in amphibious capabilities.  And my question is, do we intend to maintain that?

ADM. GILDAY:  The commandant and I both signed out an agreed upon requirements document last spring that called for 31 traditional amphibious ships.  We believe that we have strong support on Capitol Hill to keep the funding in place for those.  There are two amphibious ships in the budget right now that’s being debated on Capitol Hill that was delivered by the president for FY ’23, which is about to begin on the 1st of October.  And so the short answer – the answer, sir, is, yes. 

And I would say, with respect to amphibious ships, if you consider the spectrum of war in total, the amphibious force plays an important role not only in the fight itself, but also in the mid-to-mid-right part of that spectrum of war where you’re campaigning [and] operating with allies and partners.  Those amphibious ships are like F-150 trucks out there.  Everybody loves to integrate and play with them, with respect to our allies and partners, also HA/DR missions that our amphibious force has been known for in terms of executing very quickly.  And the amphibious ready groups give combatant commanders more options.  They’re flexible.  They’re responsible.  They’re mobile.  I hope that answers your question.

MS. TORREY:  Excellent.  You, next.

Q:  Rory from the Air Force Academy.

With me in the room are a number of members of our joint force, both across the active duty and reserve elements.  And I was hoping to hear what you had to think regarding what role the joint force has to play and what supporting the Navy needs in order to succeed in the 21st century.

ADM. GILDAY:  Yeah, thanks.  So I think if you listen to the service chiefs, the Chief of Staff of the Army General McConville, he talks a lot about long-range fires as one element of the Army of not only the future, but really right around the corner.  And so the Army and the Navy are working together on a surface-launched hypersonic weapon.  The Army will field it first next year, in 2023.  The Navy will follow with employment on our Zumwalt-class destroyers in 2025.  So it’s a common weapon.  We’re working together on it.  It’s jointly funded.  We’re working shoulder to shoulder in terms of fielding it.  And so that’s an example of a weapon that General McConville talks about using to support sea control and sea denial for the Navy in a fight against China.

With respect to the Air Force, we are locked in very closely with the Air Force on F-35, F-35 technology, F-35 employment, F-35 concept of operations, integrated with fourth generation airwings and integration with our allies and partners.  The F-35 is the best jet in the world, bar none, in terms of combat capability, in terms of stealth, in terms of the ability to deliver ordnance in a contested environment.  So that work with the Air Force continues very closely.  And as we look to the next generation of fighter, the next generation of unmanned – so think sixth generation, which truly is achievable by the end of this decade – that’s an area that’s highly classified but that the Navy, Marine Corps, and the Air Force work on together very closely.

As a joint force, that’s one of the powers of the United States military, is that, you know, while, yeah, we do have these serious rivalries, the real power of the U.S. military is our ability to come together as a joint force, and come together against an adversary in a seamless way together, but come at him in many different vectors, both in the physical and in the virtual domains.

MS. TORREY:  Thank you, sir.  And I would be remiss if I didn’t say where those engines are being made for those F-35s, as I sit here in East Hartford, Connecticut, and I look out in the audience and see so many employees of Pratt & Whitney here. So –

ADM. GILDAY:  Well, I’m happy to give a shoutout to Pratt & Whitney and what they do, among other companies in the defense industrial base, to support the U.S. military.  Real patriots who are doing some phenomenal work that not only sustain what we have out there today, but they’re making significant investment in new technologies for the future.  Thank you.

MS. TORREY:  And I think we have an online question.

OPERATOR:  So we have a question from Naseem online.

China calls itself a near-Arctic country.  Have you seen any movement from them in the region?

ADM. GILDAY:  Some.  So there’s been some activity by the Chinese up in the Arctic.  I would expect that’s going to grow significantly, especially with the diminishment of the polar ice cap and the fact that those trade routes – that northern trade route’s just going to open wide here in the next 15 to 20 years.  And so I have no doubt that we’re going to see significant Chinese traffic up there.  If I were the Chinese, I would leverage that water space not only in terms of trade, but also in terms of natural resources.  I think it’s going to be a very competitive space in the future, and it’s why we need to continue to work with the other countries in the Arctic basin very closely, and as well as to increase our operations in that area.

MS. TORREY:  So I think we have time for a few questions.  And I do want to make a shoutout to my colleague Naseem from the World Affairs Council of Orange County who just asked that question.

One over here.  Oh, yeah.  There we go.

Q:  Good afternoon, Admiral.  First Class Cadet Turnalanafelter from the United States Coast Guard Academy.

To continue along with the questions on the Arctic, so Russia has about 50 icebreakers.  And the United States has maybe about two operating at a time, with a handful on the way.  So my question to you is:  What are the ways the Coast Guard and the Navy, and our other allies, can cooperate and use our assets to increase our presence and our security in the Arctic to combat Russia?

ADM. GILDAY:  Yeah.  I think, first and foremost, and you mentioned it, was allies and partners.  So you leverage whatever you can whenever you can in order to supplement the capabilities that we have, which are not great with two icebreakers.  And so there is funding under the Department of Homeland Security to increase our icebreaker fleet.  I’m a big proponent of keeping that funding in place so that we can deliver those ships as soon as possible and get them into the high north.  We’re not satisfied with where we are right now.  I don’t want to have you leave the conversation with that impression.  We need to keep that funding in place and get that capability out there. 

It’s just an area – you know, with two decades of ground wars, we have heavily invested in [special operations forces].  We’ve heavily invested in our ground force.  And a lot of that has been at the expense of the maritime.  And so what you’re seeing now – an example would be the largest shipbuilding budget that we’ve ever had proposed at $27.5 billion for FY ’23 – would be an example of beginning to get more serious about making those long-term strategic investments in the Navy, as well as in the Department of Homeland Security for the Coast Guard.  The Coast Guard just commissioned – just put its most capable five cutters in the Indo-Pacific as an example of their commitment to working hand-in-glove with the Navy and our allies and partners in the region as we face up to our pacing threat, China.

MS. TORREY:  So I know our time is swiftly running out.  And I can ask you one last question about your time as the 32nd Chief of Naval Operations.  What do you hope to be your greatest accomplishment?

ADM. GILDAY:  Yeah, you know, I hadn’t thought about that.  My short answer would be, I’m sure that there are plenty of others who have opinions on what my shortcomings or accomplishments have been.  I would tell you that my priorities since I’ve come into the job have been readiness, modernization of the current force, and the size of the Navy – in that order.  In other words, I’ve not been a proponent of having a Navy bigger than one we can sustain.  And I believe that having a lethal, capable, ready Navy is important than having a bigger Navy that’s less ready, less capable, and less lethal.

So we got to have a Navy out there.  It’s got to be forward every single day.  And places like the Middle East, which has pretty important choke points, remains a maritime theater.  In the Mediterranean and in the high north, squaring off with the Russians.  And in the Western Pacific with the Chinese.  And so we need ships out there in numbers.  But they’re irrelevant unless they’re fully manned, the Sailors on board those ships are well-trained and ready for combat, that we actually have magazines that are filled to the brim with ammunition and have supply part storerooms that are filled with those critical parts we need to self-sustain at sea. 

You need a force that can be ready to fight tonight, at the same time balancing that against the modernization of the Navy, 70% of which you’re going to have the same fleet that we have today in the water in 10 years from now.  I hope that answers your question.  But it’s really about readiness, modernization, and capacity, keeping those in balance.  And I hope that people grade me satisfactorily on my effort to keep those priorities in place and well-funded.

MS. TORREY:  Thank you so much, sir.  We’re honored to have you with us today.  And if we can all give a big round of applause to Adm. Gilday.

ADM. GILDAY:  Thank you for having me.

MS. TORREY:  Thank you, sir.

Source: United States Navy

The Royal Saudi Navy Western Fleet, concentrated in the Red Sea, is now contributing to IMSC missions near the Bab al-Mandeb Strait as HMS Al Jubail (828) conducts patrols in support. Its Eastern Fleet has been operating with IMSC since 2019, when Saudi Arabia joined the nine-member coalition.

“As the Western Fleet joins with IMSC, we are able to bring reassurance to our maritime industry partners as they transit the Bab al-Mandeb Strait into the Red Sea,” said United Kingdom Royal Navy Commodore Ben Aldous, commander of IMSC and Coalition Task Force (CTF) Sentinel, the operational arm of the maritime partnership. 

IMSC was formed in July 2019 in response to increased threats to freedom of navigation for merchant mariners transiting international waters in the Middle East. CTF Sentinel was established four months later to deter state-sponsored malign activity and reassure the merchant shipping industry in the Strait of Hormuz and Bab al-Mandeb.

Approximately 17,000 merchant ships transit through Bab al-Mandeb into the Red Sea annually.  

“The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s Western Fleet goes a long way to enhancing maritime security in this well transited region.”

The multinational coalition is headquartered in Bahrain with U.S. 5th Fleet and includes Albania, Bahrain, Estonia, Lithuania, Romania, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, and the United States.