U.S. Navy aims to flex 'soft power'

Goodwill missions could become the Navy's chief strategy in the war on terror.

from the December 27, 2007 edition

Page 2 of 2

Page 1 | 2

"Historically, we've been doing that but it's [been] more of a pick-up game," says one Navy official.

Such nonmilitary approaches are fundamental to addressing the nation's security problems, says Defense Secretary Robert Gates. In what many in and outside the Pentagon believe was a seminal speech at Kansas State University last month, Secretary Gates argued for dramatically more funding for nondefense agencies such as the State Department and the US Agency for International Development.

"[B]ased on my experience serving seven presidents as a former director of CIA and now as Secretary of Defense, I am here to make the case for strengthening our capacity to use 'soft' power and for better integrating it with 'hard' power," Gates said.

Some members of Congress aren't so sure the new strategy has the right focus, and many believe the service needs to build more ships. Although it plans to have as many as 313 ships in the coming years, many would like to see it grow more.

On Capitol Hill earlier this month, Republicans and Democrats alike spoke out against the Navy's plan, saying it failed to lay the groundwork for building more ships and didn't take into account emerging naval threats like those posed by a country like China.

Republican presidential contender Duncan Hunter lamented that the new strategy didn't seek more funding to build new ships during a congressional hearing on Dec. 13. The California congressman noted that China is building commercial ships at a much faster rate than the US.

"If that shipbuilding capability, which is presently focused on commercial construction, is translated or turned into warship construction, the Chinese government has the ability to quickly outstrip the construction of American ships and the fielding of a large Navy," Representative Hunter said.

"The best way to deter adversaries and to dissuade potential competitors is to have the baddest, most operationally capable and flexible, and most lethal military possible," says Robert Work, a senior analyst at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, a Washington think tank.

After nearly five years of war in Iraq, Bush's go-it-alone strategy has angered many inside the Pentagon who believe the only way forward is to rebuild the trust and confidence of allies so they can be counted on if and when needed.

"There are a lot of Americans who are inside the US government who have the knowledge and have a pretty good and clear sense of what needs to happen," says Rick Barton, a senior analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank in Washington.

But Mr. Barton, who had not been briefed on the Navy's new strategy, says such approaches are mere "tokenism" if they aren't backed up with the resources they need to be effective.

"Until you see the incentives, careers, and capital expenditures lining up, all you have is more rhetoric than fact," Barton says.

1 | Page 2