Sept. 16, 2020
Secretary of Defense
Dr. Mark T. Esper
Good morning everyone. Thank you to Michael Rich for
that kind introduction, and to Dr. Edward Harshberger for moderating
today’s discussion.
It’s great to be here at the RAND Corporation, with many of the
thought leaders who have made significant contributions to national
security policy for more than seventy years. RAND has played a vital
role in connecting military planning with research and development
decisions since its founding in the wake of World War II.
Just two weeks ago, I stood on the deck of the USS Missouri, in Pearl
Harbor, to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the end of that
conflict. In its aftermath, the United States, our allies, and partners
led the creation of an international rules-based order, rooted in our
shared values, that has supported stability and prosperity around the
world for more than seven decades.
Yet this free and open order is now under duress. We all understand
that because peace is never fully assured. The United States and its
partners must continue to protect our founding principles and way of
life, and we are committed to doing just that!
Today, in this era of great power competition, the Department of
Defense has prioritized China then Russia, as our top strategic
competitors.
These revisionist powers are using predatory economics, political
subversion, and military force in an attempt to shift the balance of
power in their favor, and often at the expense of others.
China for example is exerting its malign influence through its
“One-Belt, One-Road” Initiative.This campaign has left weaker nations
with crushing debt, forcing them to take economic relief at the expense
of their sovereignty.Additionally, Beijing’s aggression and disregard of
its commitments in the South and East China Seas – such as the sinking
of a Vietnamese vessel and escorting of Chinese fishing fleets into the
exclusive economic zones of Indonesia and the Philippines – are further
examples of the CCP’s attempts to reshape the international order that
has benefitted nations, large and small.
At the same time, Russia is overtly redrawing international borders.
Moscow’s invasion of Georgia in 2008, annexation of Crimea in 2014, and
sustained aggression in Ukraine demonstrates its blatant disregard for
international rules and norms.
And both nations are expanding and modernizing their armed forces,
and extending their capabilities into the space and cyber domains, in
order to exert greater pressure against other nations.
Meanwhile, for nearly two decades the United States concentrated on
fighting violent extremist organizations in low intensity conflicts that
left us less focused and prepared for a high-end fight against near
peer adversaries. And in the last decade, the Department was crippled
by the devastating effects of sequestration.
For years our military was in a period of strategic atrophy, and our
adversaries watched from the sidelines, searching for opportunities to
erode our hard-earned gains.
Today, with a view of the world very different than our own, our
emboldened competitors are using their growing power to coercively alter
the strategic environment to our detriment.
Given these challenges, in 2018, the Department of Defense developed
the National Defense Strategy, which stated that we are now in this era
of great power competition. The NDS also directs us to adapt to this
increasingly complex security environment in order to deter conflict,
and if necessary, fight and win.
I am pleased to report that a great deal of funding and effort was
put behind this strategy over the past three years to ensure the U.S.
military is organized, manned, trained, equipped, and ready to compete,
deter – and fight and win if necessary – in this new age.
During my confirmation hearing last year, I made clear that my
highest priority would be the irreversible implementation of the NDS.
This strategy tells us that in order to succeed, we must follow three
lines of effort; first, enhance our lethality and readiness across the
force; second, strengthen our alliances and build partnerships; and
third, reform the Department to align our resources with our highest
priorities.
Soon after becoming the Secretary of Defense, I met with our senior
DoD leaders – uniformed and civilian – and we developed a list of ten
targeted goals to advance implementation of the NDS aligned under its
lines of effort.
Our first line of effort aims to maintain our advantages and continue
outpacing the competition. To modernize our capabilities, we have
successfully secured funding for game-changing technologies such as
artificial intelligence, hypersonics, directed energy, and 5G networks.
We have also made significant progress recapitalizing our strategic
nuclear triad. Among our other efforts, we conducted a comprehensive
review of the Future Naval Force to meet our requirements in the years
ahead– something I will discuss in greater detail in a few moments.
We are also modernizing how we maintain our readiness to fight. We
have re-reorganized our ready forces into Immediate Response and
Contingency Response Forces. And we’ve implemented enhanced readiness
concepts such as dynamic force employment – demonstrated recently by our
bomber task forces in the Indo-Pacific and the European continent. We
are also developing a modern Joint Warfighting concept, which will
ultimately become doctrine, and ensure the whole of the joint force is
far more effective than the sum of its parts.
Our second line of effort builds on our relationships with other
Nations, an asymmetric strategic advantage that no rivals can match.
To do so, we are implementing a coordinated plan, the first of its
kind, to strengthen allies and build partners. In our priority theater,
the Indo-Pacific, we have worked hard toward this end – as evidenced by
my multiple trips throughout the region —all in an effort to push back
on China and its bad behavior. This is part of our theater strategy
based on three-pillars: preparedness, strengthening partnerships, and
promoting a more networked region.
Our third line of effort drives us to reform the Department for
greater performance and effectively manage our Fourth estate, which
includes organizations such as the Defense Logistics Agency, Defense
Health Agency, and the Missile Defense Agency. In doing so, we are
redirecting our time, money, and manpower to our highest priorities
while maximizing the use of every taxpayer’s dollar.
We have made great progress on this front with our Defense-Wide
Review, where we identified $5.7 billion in defense reforms and
efficiencies across the Fourth estate last year, and we are on track to
identify billions more this year. We have also directed our Military
Services to conduct clean-sheet reviews to identify savings and
efficiencies, as well as to develop their plans for reform to the NDS.
Our Combatant Commands are going through a similar review to consolidate
and reduce legacy requirements in order to optimize our operational
footprint.
Underpinning all three of these lines, and principal to many of our
efforts, is to focus the Department on China. To fulfill this
objective, we stood up a new Defense Policy office on China, and
established a China Strategy Management Group to better integrate our
enterprise. I also directed our National Defense University to dedicate
half of its coursework to China, and I tasked the Military Services to
make China the pacing threat in all of our schools, programs, and
training.
These are just a few of our efforts to turn our attention to our
priority theater, the Indo-Pacific. Not only is this region important
because it is a hub of global trade and commerce, it is also the
epicenter of great power competition with China. And in the face of
destabilizing activities from the Peoples Liberation Army (PLA),
particularly in the maritime domain, the United States must be ready to
deter conflict, and if necessary, fight and win at sea.
So today, I want to talk to you about our efforts to modernize our
military, specifically the world’s greatest Navy. And over the next few
days here in California, I’ll get a chance to see first-hand, what we
are doing to prepare our force for the high-end fight, as I visit the
USS Carl Vinson, Naval Base Point Loma, and industry partners who are
developing unmanned naval systems.
Over the past year, I’ve had a chance to visit Navy ships and units
all across the globe, and have met hundreds of Sailors. And I can
assure you that we command, without a doubt, the best and most capable
Navy on this planet. No doubt.
But as the NDS states, our military does not have a preordained right
to victory on the battlefield. Beijing and Moscow have studied how we
fight, learning to exploit our vulnerabilities and developing asymmetric
capabilities designed to counter our strengths.
The Chinese Communist Party, specifically, intends to complete the
modernization of its armed forces by 2035. By 2049, it aims to dominate
Asia as a world-class military. In addition to developing advanced
weapons systems, Beijing is also investing in long-range, autonomous,
and unmanned submarines, which it believes can be a cost-effective
counter to American naval power.
I want to make clear that China does not have parity when it comes
to our Navy. Even if we stopped building new ships, it would take the
PRC years to match our capability on the high seas. Simple ship
numbers don’t address the capabilities of the vessels being counted, nor
the crews that man them. Nonetheless, we must stay ahead; we must
retain our overmatch; and we will keep building.
To compete in a 21st century high-end fight, we will need a future fleet that meets the following operational attributes:
- Distributed Lethality and Awareness;
- Survivability in a high intensity conflict;
- Adaptability for a complex world;
- Ability to project power and demonstrate presence; and,
- Capability to deliver precision effects at very long ranges.
The future fleet will be more balanced in its ability to deliver
lethal effects from the air, from the sea, and from under the sea. This
fleet will be need to be marked by more and smaller surface combatants;
optionally manned, unmanned, and autonomous surface and subsurface
vehicles; unmanned carrier-based aircraft of all types; a larger and
more capable submarine force; and a modern strategic deterrent.
At the same time, this fleet must be affordable in an era of tight
funding; sustainable over the long term; and operationally available at
higher rates. And it must have a robust and healthy industrial base,
with modern shipyards and highly-skilled workers, that have the capacity
to build and maintain the fleet we need.
That is why, earlier this year, I asked the Deputy Secretary of
Defense to lead a Future Naval Force Study, tasked with assessing a
wider and more ambitious range of “future fleet” options. The Navy,
Marine Corps, the Office of the Secretary, as well as outside advisors
conducted a comprehensive, cost and threat-informed review and analysis:
- First, they examined the fleet we currently have;
- Second, they explored future fleet options needed to retain dominance in 2045; and,
- Third, they wargamed these options, assessing the strengths and
weaknesses of each combination of ships against different future mission
sets.
This week I met with the Deputy Secretary and the team to discuss
their findings. The results are a game-changer that reflect a good deal
of serious work and effort based on facts and data. This study will
serve as our guidepost as we program and build our future fleet, and
conduct follow-on assessments. In short, it will be a balanced force of
over 355 ships – both manned and unmanned— and will be built in a
timely, relevant, and budget-informed manner. And we will build this
fleet in such a way that balances tomorrow’s challenges with today’s
readiness, and does not create a hollow Navy.
To achieve this outcome, we must increase funding for shipbuilding.
This means we must get back to the same levels of spending dedicated for
shipbuilding in the Navy budget that the sea service committed during
the Reagan era – 13%, as compared to today’s 11%. This is something
both the Secretary of the Navy and I are committed to pursuing.
As an example of where we are headed, earlier this year, the Navy
granted a $795 million contract to purchase the first ship of a new
class of guided missile frigates – with an option to purchase nine more
totaling nearly $5.6 billion. This is the first new major shipbuilding
program the Navy has sought in more than a decade. These ships will
support the National Defense Strategy across the full range of military
operations, with increased lethality, survivability, capability, and
capacity to conduct distributed warfare—a key requirement borne out by
the Future Fleet study.
As I visit with industry partners over the next few days, I will
learn more about the Navy’s latest transformational capabilities –
unmanned surface vessels and unmanned undersea vehicles. We are making
solid progress on this front. Earlier this month, for example, the Sea
Hunter prototype completed operations with the USS Russell,
demonstrating various aspects of manned and unmanned teaming. We are
planning on-going training events to continue developing tactics,
techniques, and procedures for these platforms. These efforts are the
next step in realizing our future fleet, one in which unmanned systems
perform a variety of warfighting functions, from delivering lethal fires
and laying mines, to conducting resupply or surveilling the enemy.
This will be a major shift in how we will conduct naval warfare in the
years and decades to come.
Finally, this future Navy and Marine Corps will employ novel concepts
such as Distributed Maritime Operations and Expeditionary Advanced Base
Operations, which will modernize the way we fight as they enable our
new Joint Warfighting concept, and ultimately doctrine, for the 21st
century.
Over the course of our history, the United States Navy evolved from
the earliest wooden frigates of the Revolution to the low profile
ironclads of the Civil War, and from the enormous steel battleships of
Teddy Roosevelt’s Great White Fleet to Admiral Rickover’s “nuclear navy”
of the Cold War, all the way up to today’s powerful supercarriers.
Each one of these eras was marked by great technological change and new
capability.
Today, we are at another inflection point – one where unmanned
technologies and long-range precision weapons will play an increasingly
leading role. The U.S. military, including the Navy, must adapt to that
future as the character of warfare changes.
Building this future fleet and maintaining our maritime superiority
now and into the future will require a whole-of-nation approach across
government, industry, and academia.
To our private sector partners, particularly in shipbuilding, we must
continue to work together to promote a robust and healthy industrial
base with modern shipyards, infrastructure, and highly-skilled workers.
We will need your help to match our level of ambition in the coming
years, on cost, performance, and schedule.
For our partners in Congress, this means we need your support to
continue our momentum, namely through adequate, sustained, predictable,
and timely budgets.To support critical next-generation capabilities, our
future budgets must be able to free up those resources by divesting
from legacy systems and lower priority activities.We would also like the
authority to put unused end of year Navy funding directly into the
shipbuilding account, rather than see it expire.We need Congressional
support to get these things done.
To our partners in academia and at think tanks, such as RAND, we need
your “outside the box” thinking, your research, and analysis to help us
adapt to this increasingly complex and challenging environment; to help
us refine our future fleet plans and warfighting concepts in follow on
studies; and to do so faster, in order to outpace our strategic
competitors.
Finally, to our allies and partners, know that we are committed to
preserving the international rules-based order that we have all
benefitted from for more than 75 years. We urge you to increase your
defense spending, and to make the needed investments to improve your
capabilities and capacity, just as we are doing with our future fleet
--- to protect our mutual interests, preserve our security, and defend
our common values.
We all have a collective responsibility to prepare for the challenges
of the future – while addressing the security issues of today. We
cannot be complacent and must recognize the shifting landscape,
otherwise we risk inviting greater aggression and further challenges to
our shared values and security.If we can do this, I am confident that we
will be able to maintain the rules-based order – that has given all of
us security and prosperity – for many more generations to come.
Thank you and I look forward to our discussion.
Posts
