I. The Navy-Marine Corps Team:
America's 21st Century Force

On the eve of the 21st Century, the international environment is more complex than at any other time in America’s history. The number and diverse nature of nations, organizations, and other entities vying for international influence continue to grow. At the same time, the global economy is increasingly interdependent. Although this offers the promise of greater prosperity for the United States, it also further ties the security and well being of Americans to events beyond our borders. Incidents and crises once considered peripheral to U.S. security — the spread of ethnic and religious conflict, the breakdown of law and order abroad, or the disruption of trade in distant regions — now threaten our citizens and our interests. On the other hand, a fundamental restructuring of global economies, governments, and beliefs present new opportunities for a globally engaged United States, in concert with other like-minded nations, to advance long-term interests and promote stability in critical areas.

Throughout the 20th Century, the Navy and Marine Corps have played key roles in protecting U.S. interests worldwide — supporting America’s strategies of world leadership and engagement as an alternative to inward-looking isolationism. Although the Department of the Navy’s 1999 Posture Statement appears at the end of the 20th Century, a period that witnessed the emergence of the United States as a world power so clearly that some have called it “The American Century,” it marks the beginning of a new era in which naval power will become an even more critical element of U.S. national security. This Posture Statement provides a template for how the Navy and Marine Corps are preparing for the 21st Century.

A Global Strategy Demands a Global Naval Presence

Since the earliest days of the Republic, the United States has been a seafaring nation relying on the oceans for food, commerce, and defense, exerting influence wherever and whenever U.S. citizens, interests, and friends have been at risk. Today, America stands without peer in military and economic strength, freedom of expression, cultural appeal, and moral authority — all key indices by which global power and influence are measured. This standing has been earned by generations of Americans whose work ethic fueled unparalleled growth, who upheld the precepts of democracy, and who fought wars to win and preserve freedom at home and abroad.

The geopolitical and economic world have changed greatly during the decade since the fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989. The disintegration of the Soviet Union led to international relations free from competitive superpower tensions, but lacking the relatively stable Cold War frame of reference. Our victory in the Cold War has not, however, brought about a time of tranquillity. Today’s observers find neither an era of peace and international harmony, nor an era of clearly defined confrontation. Rather, in the closing months of the 20th Century, our world presents a complex and lethal mixture of trends, dynamics, and challenges. As a result, we find today’s smaller naval force — significantly reduced from the Cold War force of the mid-1980s — facing broad and frequent dangers.

Events during 1998 make it clear that the world is still a violent place. Last year, terrorist bombs destroyed two U.S. embassies. Factional and small-scale conflicts raged in at least 25 countries. Economic crises plagued regional and global economies, while growing economic and social inequities fueled long-standing as well as nascent animosities. Threats to U.S. lives, property, and interests are increasing worldwide, and potential threats to the U.S. homeland are likely to become an uncomfortable reality. The next century’s international security environment will assuredly place an even higher premium on the mobility, global access, self-sufficiency, sustainability, and competence of the Navy and Marine Corps. Naval forces remain the most agile and flexible tools of our national security policy — able to move unfettered on the high seas, unencumbered by regional or local political constraints. Our ability to maintain this mobility depends upon our ability to move unimpeded across the world’s oceans. In this regard, United States accession to the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea is essential to preserving navigational freedoms that underpin our forward deployed strategy. The United States must join the more than 130 nations, including the United Kingdom, Russia, France, China, and Japan that have already become Parties to the Convention.

U.S. leadership in global affairs, a function of American economic and military power, has long been a key ingredient in promoting peace and stability, facilitating free enterprise, and fostering democracy worldwide. The continued vitality of this leadership during the next century will depend in large part upon our willingness to remain visibly engaged in regions of importance to U.S. interests. On any given day, more than 50,000 Sailors and Marines, are embarked abroad. These forces carry out numerous national taskings, conduct multilateral exercises, and monitor and influence developments around the world. During times of crisis, Navy and Marine Corps units are often already on the scene, or are the first U.S. assets to arrive in force.

This ubiquitous presence, which makes Navy and Marine Corps forces uniquely valuable, has an additional potential benefit — positively influencing and shaping the global economy. As the U.S. increases its reliance on global trade, the Nation’s economic vitality is becoming more and more dependent on the stability and growth of the global economy. Thus, as the 21st Century moves into the era of the global economy, the Nation’s fundamental interests increasingly are linked to two objectives: the promotion of peace and stability and the growth of democracies and market economies. Forward presence naval forces, especially when enhanced by multi-agency, joint or allied operations, have a fundamental capacity to accomplish both of these 21st Century objectives.

Strategic Concepts of U.S. Naval Forces

Title 10, U.S. Code requires the Department of the Navy to be prepared to conduct prompt and sustained combat operations in support of U.S. national interests. Although this core role remains paramount, the complicated security landscape of today — marked by challenge and uncertainty — demands naval forces do much more than make ready for battle. Naval forces remain a critical component of the National Military Strategy’s imperative to “Shape, Respond, and Prepare” for the future. This blueprint for security dictates that America’s armed forces remain globally engaged to address emerging crisis and conflict far from our shores.

Naval forces implement this strategy through four enduring concepts: forward presence; deterrence; sea and area control; and power projection. These are the critical strategic concepts that naval forces provide in direct support of the nation’s security and military strategies.

Forward Presence: Maintaining forward presence capitalizes on the expeditionary nature of naval forces; it is the Department of the Navy’s primary peacetime task. Routine forward presence allows the timely arrival of naval forces at virtually any crisis throughout the world. We maintain naval forces forward deployed to essential regions around the world, covertly if needed and overtly if desired. And when necessary, we can deploy and sustain additional sea, land, and air forces to meet emerging needs.

Forward presence constitutes a subtle, yet visible, demonstration of security and commitment. In times of crisis, these forces embody the prompt and sustained response that our nation, our friends, and our allies expect. The sustained responsiveness of forward deployed naval forces is irreplaceable. There is no substitute for being on the scene with the full range of capabilities which carrier battle groups and amphibious ready groups possess. This visible guarantee that the United States will react to provocation and will support its friends, significantly influences any would-be aggressor’s calculations of risk and reward.

Deterrence: Throughout the 45 years of Cold War that were punctuated by regional crisis and conflict, the strategic concept of nuclear deterrence defined the primary U.S.-Soviet relationship. Yet, deterrence of crises and conventional conflicts is also attainable by creating the threat of unacceptable consequences to would-be aggressors. Forward deployed, combat-credible naval forces serve notice to potential aggressors that there will be a high price to pay for any hostile action.

Of continuing concern to U.S. national security are the remaining large numbers of nuclear warheads and the worldwide proliferation of other Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). The U.S. must maintain a credible deterrence against such devastating weapons for the foreseeable future. Although conventional strike weapons can assume increasingly strategic roles, today the Navy’s nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines remain the most stealthy and survivable element of the U.S. nuclear triad to deter the use of WMD.

Sea and Area Control: Sea and area control requires the ability to defeat coastal defenses and dominate a foe in the littoral battlespace — at sea, on the ground, and in the airspace — extending from hundreds of miles offshore to hundreds of miles inland. Unless command of the seas and the airspace is attained, deployed and follow-on forces will be at risk. Naval forces must control the sea lanes leading to a region because most of the troops, equipment, and supplies will travel to the region by sea. Once in theater, naval forces provide a powerful forcible-entry capability and are capable of conducting this mission anywhere in the world.

Power Projection: The projection of naval power ashore — beyond the reach of naval gunfire along coasts — was forged as a strategic concept in the World War II Pacific Theater and remains an essential naval capability today. Whether in the form of carrier- based strike-fighter aircraft armed with precision-guided munitions, a Marine Air- Ground Task Force (MAGTF) of combined air and ground forces, sea-launched cruise missiles, or clandestine special warfare forces, naval forces offer combat options tailored for the situation at hand. In a larger conflict, naval forces can seize and defend advance bases — ports and airfields — to facilitate the arrival of follow on land-based air and ground forces. They can simultaneously provide the necessary command and control capabilities for joint and allied forces. Major ground and air elements ashore depend upon the delivery of heavy equipment and the sustainment provided by the Navy’s strategic sealift assets. Protection of these critical sea- and land-based elements will be provided in the near future by Navy Theater Missile Defense systems. All of these capabilities help to underwrite deterrence.

In addition, with increasing overflight limitations and continuing reductions in overseas basing rights, only naval forces can maintain assured access to most regions of the world. Naval forces are powerful instruments of national policy because of their self-sufficiency and freedom from host-nation political constraints. Likewise, these forces may either be highly visible for an enhanced deterrent effect, or operate from stealthy and secure postures — above, on, or below the surface of the sea — ready to strike with maximum surprise.

These four strategic concepts — forward presence, deterrence, sea and area control, and power projection — provide the cornerstone of U.S. naval strategy and complement each other in ways that enhance their contribution to the security of the nation. Forward presence supports both conventional deterrence and deterrence against the threat and actual use of WMD. Deterrence, in turn, requires that power projection be credible. The ability to gain and maintain sea and area control makes power projection possible and sustainable. If deterrence should fail, the ability to control critical sea lanes and other areas provides the foundation for projection of both naval and follow-on, land-based forces. Only the nation’s naval forces have the capabilities to implement these strategic concepts to their fullest potential.


Challenges and Solutions for the 21st Century

As indicated late last year, budgets continue to be constrained, making it difficult to balance the need to sustain day-to-day operational readiness and the modernization necessary to ensure that U.S. naval forces are properly poised and ready to meet future requirements and threats. Although deployed readiness remains satisfactory, the key readiness indices of our non-deployed forces are worsening, thus posing risks for the future. Non-deployed readiness is currently funded at levels which minimize flexibility and hamper the ability of our assets to surge quickly in the event of a major theater war. The higher level of funding requested in the proposed President’s FY 2000 budget, along with savings realized by efficiencies in the way the Department operates, will begin to address some of these concerns.

Long-term readiness is also of concern. Investments in modernization of existing equipment and acquisition of new systems are based on a comprehensive assessment of future threats. Current threats can be dealt with by today’s highly capable naval forces. However, investments in future capabilities to defeat tomorrow’s threats are often deferred to fund today’s readiness. A higher level of overall Department of Defense funding as initiated by the FY 2000 budget and the savings realized by efficiencies in the way the we operate are required to provide the resources critical for the Navy and Marine Corps to sustain global presence and power.

Throughout America’s history, a modern and capable fleet has been the linchpin for protecting important U.S. interests wherever and whenever they might be in jeopardy. Since the end of the Cold War, several comprehensive analyses and assessments have addressed the force structures needed to ensure that U.S. forces can carry out the operations and taskings that underwrite America’s security and military strategies. Today, the stated requirement is for a Marine Corps of three Active Marine Expeditionary Forces (MEFs) and one Reserve division air wing and force service support group and a Navy of at least 300 ships, including as core assets:


In order to sustain these force levels beyond the FYDP, the Navy must achieve a building rate of eight to ten ships per year. Our current and projected building rate of six-to-eight ships per year will not sustain minimum essential force levels for a 300-ship Navy. Therefore, shipbuilding rates must improve early in the next decade.

Similarly, to maintain our ability to carry out all missions implicit in ...From the Sea (1992), Forward...from the Sea (1994), and Operational Maneuver from the Sea (1997), the Department of the Navy is pursuing several keystone programs, including the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet strike aircraft, the future CVNX aircraft carrier, the MV-22 Osprey aircraft, and the Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle (AAAV).


Refining their respective Service’s collaborative efforts to meet the Nation’s naval and maritime security requirements, the Chief of Naval Operations and the Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard in September 1998 signed a joint Navy/Coast Guard policy statement on the National Fleet. This policy re-emphasizes the way the two Sea Services serve the nation while recognizing the broad contributions that the Coast Guard makes to America’s maritime security. It commits the Navy and the Coast Guard “to shared purpose and common effort focused on tailored operational integration of our multi- mission platforms.” This complementary partnership calls for the Navy and the Coast Guard to work together to build a National Fleet of multi-mission surface warships and maritime security cutters to maximize our joint effectiveness across all naval and maritime roles, missions, functions, and tasks. The National Fleet offers enhanced effectiveness in the way that both Sea Services approach the challenges of meeting tomorrow’s needs in a most cost-effective manner.

Several other initiatives are being pursued and implemented in the Department to more efficiently utilize the resources we have, while instituting a new paradigm for the way we work. Programs such as the Secretary of the Navy’s Smart Work program, Information Technology for the 21st Century (IT-21), the Revolution in Business Affairs (RBA), and Strategic Business Plan (SBP) are but a few examples that will help sustain our efficacy for tomorrow while making the most of the resources we have today. Additionally, the Department of the Navy must continue to capitalize on cost reduction initiatives and chart a vision for global security and economic prosperity into the 21st Century.

This 1999 Department of the Navy Posture Statement continues with discussions of the need for operational primacy and how we do our day-to-day mission; the Sailors, Marines, and civilians at the heart of America’s naval forces; the means by which we will gain efficiencies and flexibility for the total force; and key technologies supporting current operational concepts and future naval forces.

Return to the Contents Page