“Joe Biden” |

Person of Interest: General Llyod Austin, Biden’s Pick for Secretary of Defense.

On December 9, President-elect Joe Biden nominated retired General LLoyd Austin to be his Secretary of Defense. General Austin retired from the United States Army in 2016 after a distinguished military career that saw him, after his graduation from the United States Military Academy, fill assignments at some of the Army’s most elite units including the 82nd Airborne Division, the 10th Mountain Division and a stint as instructor at his alma mater, West Point.

General Austin saw combat duty in both Afghanistan and Iraq. In 2010 he was put in charge of all US forces in Iraq where he oversaw the draw-down of US forces. In 2011 he was appointed Army Vice Chief of Staff and in 2013 he took command of US Central Command, or CENTCOM. General Austin retired in 2016 and moved to the private sector where he was on the board of Raytheon Technologies, a major American military contractor.

According to US law, to be appointed as Secretary of Defense a retired officer must have been out of uniform for a minimum of 7 years. General Austin has only been retired for 4 years, so it will be necessary for him to get a congressional waiver before he can take up the post. There is precedent for this, as recently as the current Trump administration where retired General James Mattis had the 7-year requirement waived.

The question is whether a hostile and divided congress reflecting the mood of a hostile and divided nation will give General Austin a “pass.” For Biden and the Democrats Austin checks off a lot of boxes in terms of experience. He would be the first black Secretary of Defense. General Austin has also teamed up with Joe Biden in the past, and they reportedly have a good working relationship.

Will General Austin face some grilling during his Senate confirmation? He probably will. Will he appear as a competent and knowledgeable interviewee? Surely he will. And finally will General Austin achieve another “first” in his long and distinguished career of government service? He probably will.

What do you think? Let us know your opinion on this and any other topic that we cover here at RG-21.

Photo: Wikipedia

RG21’s Predictions for 2021

by David Parmer / Tokyo

Here are a few “predictions” from RG-21 for 2021. None of them are really new, but rather the ways that existing situations might develop in the New Year.

China-VS-US: We took a look at this topic before here at RG-21, and our conclusions have not changed much. The new Biden administration will not fundamentally change its relationship with the People’s Republic of China. Certainly the bellicose tone favored by President Trump and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will be toned down. Diplomacy will be back in fashion and this includes relations with the PRC. The constant attacks on the CPC (Communist Party of China) will cease from the US government, but not from right-wing elements within the US.

As former Secretary of Defense James Mattis saw it, China is a “strategic competitor” but not an enemy. This may very well be the approach that the Biden administration takes. Also, the Trump administration has left the Biden people with several cards to play vis-a-vis China. While some sanctions may be lifted as a “good will” gesture, the others will be bargaining chips which the US will happily remove in return for concessions from the PRC.

As for the South China Sea issue, neither China nor the US will budge much if at all. As for the Indo-Pacific, the US will continue to do what it has been doing to form a coalition around the area to maintain a “free and open Indo-Pacific.” From the Chinese side this may very well be seen as an effort to contain or encircle China.

The US will continue to evaluate Huawei’s role in building and re-building infrastructure worldwide. The case of Meng Wanzhou might be re-evaluated and dropped or settled out of court as a “good will” gesture to the PRC.

President Biden will get US allies on board with whatever China policy the US decides to adopt. This may be easier than might be imagined since, for now, China and Europe are not on the best of terms.

Finally, with better US-China dialogue, consular facilities that were closed on a tit-for-tat basis may be quickly re-opened.

Iran-VS-US: Relations between the US and the Islamic Republic are at such a low point that almost anything done in a positive manner would be seen as significant. After China, Iran is next on the list threats to the US as seen by the Trump administration.

To this end President Trump pulled the US out of the JCPOA or “Iran Deal” despite Iran’s independently verified full compliance with the terms of the agreement. As we have written previously, the Europeans (together with China and Russia) have kept the agreement on “life support” after the US withdrawal. The US and Israel have kept Iran in their sights, and have taken provocative actions that only strengthen the radical elements within Iran, and then use the results of those provocations to show how dangerous Iran is.

Here again, the Trump administration has left the US with some cards to play. Sanctions could be lifted in exchange for that which the US and its allies want. For example, a whole host of sanctions could be lifted for some movement on Iran’s limiting its missile program, one that causes much more threat to its neighborhood than a nuclear capability.

It was the US and Israel that wanted Iran to re-negotiate the JCPOA to include this program that caused the US to withdraw from the JCPOA. The strategy was that crippling sanctions would drive Iran back to the table to negotiate over its missile program. This did not happen. The Iranians, just like the Cubans bore the brunt of US sanctions and did not fold.

The Biden administration could begin immediately to re-weave the JCPOA. First by re-joining, and then when Iran is found in compliance, to release much-needed funds to the government of Iran.

The original strategy of the JCPOA was to strengthen the moderate elements in the Iran power structure, and it is likely that this strategy will again be used.

Taiwan-VS-China-VS-US: The bottom line is this–the US Taiwan policy will not fundamentally change, but the tone will. Support for Taiwan (as is) is rock solid in the US congress. Weapons sales will continue. What will happen first is the rhetoric regarding China will be toned-down.

Also, the drawing of Taiwan closer to US will probably stop. Despite the Taiwan Relations Act, high-level visits by US officials will be seen for what they are: provocative acts which could potentially de-stabilize a precarious situation. Acts that could be seen as re-recognizing Taiwan as “China” will be toned-down or eliminated. But the US will not budge on Taiwan or on the “freedom of navigation” within the Taiwan Strait.

In a sense, this takes the US out of the equation in the question of China-vs-Taiwan. In another sense, both parties are back to “square one.” And what is “square one?” China claims Taiwan as its territory and has promised to return the island to the PRC even using force if necessary. Taiwan sees itself as a de-facto independent country, and clings to the Republic of China name not as an anachronism but as a reality. Again and again the people of the island have reported that they see themselves as Taiwanese and not Chinese.

President Tsai Ing-wen’s Democratic Progressive Party is called an “independence” party, but it knows that if it declares “independence” it will cross a redline that will probably lead to the PRC invading.

China may be thinking (and hoping) that if the DPP does not deliver to its constituents, then the pro-Beijing Kuomintang opposition party may take power and relations would again improve significantly.

The situation for now: stalemate. But from the PRC’s point of view, the clock is ticking. Tick-tock, tick-tock.

US-VS-Europe: Old friends meet again. Traditional allies close ranks. Relations between the US and Europe will take a monumental leap forward once Joe Biden raises his hand and takes the oath of office of the President of the United States. Trump’s distain for diplomacy and for long-standing relationships that do not benefit the US in his way of calculating will no longer be policy.

The Biden administration will again re-assert US world leadership and call on the Europeans to join. With its strong traditional allies the US will have a joint face regarding both China and Russia.

US-Turkey-NATO: President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey is going his own way and is far along on making Turkey a viable regional power. There have been comments that he is creating a new Ottoman Empire with himself at the center. Turkey is the only Muslim member of NATO, and the US has for years had a base at Incirlik on Turkish soil. And yet, Turkey despite its NATO membership went ahead and bought the powerful and capable Russian Triumph S-400 missile system. In retaliation, the US removed Turkey from a lucrative and advanced program in fabricating the cutting-edge F35 fighter.

Erdogan also has brought force to bear on the Kurdish fighters in Syria whom it counts as terrorists. These same Kurds are seen as staunch US allies, or at least they were before the Trump administration pulled US advisors out, thereby signaling Erdogan that is OK to do what he wishes with the Kurds.

It is likely that the US will mend fences with the Kurds as well as soon as Donald Trump is gone. But the US will now have to face new challenges in the region. Both Iran and Turkey will be mid-level players who will be calling the shots in their neighborhood. It will be up to the Biden administration to formulate a strategy to deal with these two emerging and powerful regional powers.

Korea-VS-The World: There are no signs that the Kim dynasty will go away any time soon. Kim Jong-un will continue to rule and will continue to hone his nuclear powered military. He will probably try to upgrade his submarine fleet (if anyone will sell him the boats) and will continue to strengthen his special forces as well.

Kim’s strategy for the South in the event of war would be asymmetrical warfare to start with including the use of special forces to disrupt communications and transport in the South and then use his massive conventional forces to invade following a withering rain of artillery fire on Seoul and a missile attack on the largest US base in the country, Camp Humphreys, which is just 97km (60 miles) from the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ).

Donald Trump’s attempt to get concessions from Kim failed. His meetings resulted in nothing taking place except the optics of a meeting. The Biden administration will have to deal with the Korea stalemate as well. Kim will probably use his nuclear arsenal to try to intimidate the US and Japan, and extract some kind of concessions from the South.

Perhaps the only negative to be found in the departure of Donald Trump from the office of US president will be the fact that Kim could never be sure of Trump’s mental state, and he could never be sure that Trump would not “press the button” on the DPRK.

With a more measured and professional Biden in office, it is likely that Kim, without the fear of immediate nuclear reprisal from Trump, will again begin to stir things up on the Korean peninsula.

There are a few more areas of interest that could heat up in 2021. Next time we will take a look at a few including Russia, Syria, Central Africa, and the Nordic countries.

Photo: Marshall Space Flight Center via flickr

Person of Interest: Tony Blinken, Biden Foreign Policy Advisor.

To get an idea of former Vice President Joe Biden’s foreign policy when he becomes president, the best person to listen to is his top advisor, Tony Blinken.

Blinken, a graduate of Harvard College and Columbia University has been around politics and policy since 1994 when he was on Bill Clinton’s National Security Council staff. From 2002-2008 he was Democratic Staff Director for the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Mr. Blinken was Deputy Secretary of State from 2015-2017 and Deputy National Security Advisor. It is possible that he will be chosen to be National Security Advisor in a Biden administration.

In two interviews (links below) he outlines a possible direction for Biden foreign policy. It should come as no surprise that one of the first priorities will be mending relations with US allies who have been alienated by the substance and manner of Donald Trump’s policies toward allies, toward Europe and toward NATO.

The big question is relations with China. In the interviews Blinken suggests that the US is operating from a position of weakness regarding China and the first task is to reestablish good relations with US allies before dealing with China. He suggests that the US and China share many common interests internationally and that these are areas for cooperation. However, he stresses that the US must do this from a position of strength.

As for Iran, the US withdrawal from the JCPOA or “Iran Deal” did not force Iran back to the bargaining table as the Trump administration had planned, nor did the crippling sanctions create regime change in Teheran. It is possible that the US might even return to the JCPOA under a Biden administration. The Europeans have been keeping the deal on life support, and it might well get new life.

While it is possible that a Biden administration would have to look inward to repair the damage done to all areas of American politics and daily life brought about by 4 years of the Trump policies, the US would still have both its international commitments and interests, and those would be addressed by people of a like mind to Tony Blinken.

Dialogue on American Foreign Policy and World Affairs: A Conversation with Former Deputy Secretary of State Anthony Blinken (Hudson Institute)

Transcript: Joe Biden foreign policy adviser Anthony Blinken on COVID shortfalls, failures in Syria (CBS News)

Photo: US Department of State via flickr

How Will A Democratic Win in November 2020 Affect US-China Relations?

by David Parmer / Tokyo

US-China relations aren’t at their lowest ever–before President Richard Nixon’s visit to China in 1972, the US and the PRC were not even talking to each other. No, things are not that bad, but in many ways they are still pretty bad.

The current US-China tensions are fueled by an ongoing trade war between the two superpowers mostly based on the Trump administration’s underlying assertion that the US has been taken advantage of by China over the decades and that it is now time to the US to stop being victimized by China. The second point of contention is that China is a rising superpower and now the world’s number two economy and that the US must compete with China.

This translates into seeing China as America’s most dangerous potential adversary and building alliances to handle this perceived threat. And of course, there is the question of Taiwan. The US continues to sell weapons and to upgrade weapons systems for Taiwan. China objects to this, but the US ignores those objections.

What’s more, in 2018 the Trump administration did a $225 million upgrade of its Taiwan mission facilities. On top of this, in 2018 the US Congress passed the Taiwan Relations Act which encouraged high-level officials from both the US and Taiwan to make reciprocal visits. As noted earlier, this could be construed by the PRC as the US walking back recognition of the PRC and the One-China Policy and upgrading of the status of Taiwan.

So US-China relations are not at their worst, but they are certainly not very good. Now there is a good chance that in the 2020 election Donald Trump will not get a second term and that former Vice-President Joe Biden will be elected to replace Donald Trump as president. All indications are that it will be a contentious, dirty, hard fought election with allegations of foreign interference, vote tampering and vote suppression. Past performance indicates that Donald Trump will not be a graceful loser.

So with a Democratic president in the White House in the form of former Vice President Joe Biden, what could we expect with regard to US-China relations?

Indo-Pacific Strategy–Don’t look for much, if any, change here. This area is seen as of significant importance to America’s global power and reach, and is seen as a potent force to counter Chinese influence in the region.

South China Sea–Same again; not much, if any, change. America’s presence in this area will not diminish. It is seen as much too important to the overall US strategy to give any leeway on this issue.

Taiwan–The long-standing US commitment to Taiwan, especially from the US congress is not likely to change. What might change, however, is the US government’s emphasis on Taiwan. The support will be there, but actions by a Biden administration would be less confrontational than those of the Trump administration. US support goes all the way back to its support of Chiang Kai Shek and the Republic of China after WWII. So a less provocative stance by the US might be on the cards, but fundamentally no real change in policy except the avoidance of overtly-provocative actions that the PRC could not ignore like port calls by US warships for example.

Hong Kong–Not much change here either. Democrats are basically liberals, and what they consider human rights will be a priority for them. If US prestige is restored after the Trump debacle presidency, then “human rights” as preached by the US might again have some meaning around the world. Moral support for Hong Kong democracy will continue.

Xinjiang–In the same manner as with Hong Kong, American Democrats will continue to push for human rights in Xinjiang and Tibet.

Trade–This is a real problem for the US, and the Biden administration will have to do some serious “fence mending” with China (and many others). Tough negotiations are part of the game, but politically-motivated trade policies only hurt the perpetrator. One great concern is whether Chinese buyers will trust American suppliers again after relations have been fractured during the Trump Administration’s trade war with China. American products might be attractive in terms of quality and price, but buyers will have to consider whether the flow of commodities will be turned on and turned off like a faucet at a political whim in the future.

Overall: If there is a Biden administration in power, China can expect a return to normalcy in the US, i.e. a government run by professionals and not by ideology. There will be an end to the demonization of China and an end to the racist attitudes towards China, the PRC, and the Chinese people.

We can assume that the Democrats will fill the vacant jobs in the US government at all levels from ambassadors to department heads and again attract dedicated professionals to government service. Finally, a Biden administration might restore some order to the chaos caused by Donald Trump personally and by his ideologue cronies.

Will things return to normal? Will Joe Biden become the next president? It would be good for US-China relations, and probably good for the world. However, if we learn anything from China’s epic novel by Lo Kuan-chung, The Romance of The Three Kingdoms, it is just this: the good guys do not always win.

Photo:Marco Verch via flickr

US Election 2020 Who’s Who – Kamala Harris.

by David Parmer / Tokyo

On December 3, 2019 Senator Kamala Harris dropped out of the US 2020 presidential race. Funding and low polling and organizational problems were the reasons given for this. Harris had put up a good showing, and 2020 was over for her. Or was it? Or is it?

Kamala Harris, senator from California seems to be back in the 2020 presidential mix, this time not as a possible president, but as a possible vice president.

The race for the 2020 Democratic nomination saw the fortunes of former Vice President Joe Biden take a nosedive in the early days, and then come back strong after South Carolina. From former frontrunner to frontrunner again, Biden was back! And his momentum has been carrying him forward ever since.

Biden’s rivals, like Kamala herself in December, have been dropping out of the race lately. Mayor Pete Buttigieg, Senator Elizabeth Warren, Senator Amy Klobuchar are all gone, and soon it looks like Bernie Sanders will see the handwriting on the wall. Where does this leave Senator Kamala Harris? It leaves her as a top contender for Biden’s running mate as vice presidential candidate.

Harris as a prime choice for VP makes an awful lot of sense. She is smart and talented and has real government experience. Before she was a senator from California she was the state’s attorney general, i.e. the head of the state’s legal system. Before that she was a tough prosecutor.

Candidate Harris had a healthcare reform plan in place, had a record of being tough on crime was for sensible immigration but against Trump’s wall and wanted to lower middle class taxes. Nothing radical here. And that is just one thing to recommend her: her agenda was Democratic, but nothing radical.

What VP Biden brings to the 2020 race is “electability” and that is something the Senator Bernie Sanders lacks. The mainstream US media seems determined by sheer force of will to deprive Biden of the concept of “electability.” However the Democratic voters by choosing Biden over Sanders are joining the Biden camp and not the Sanders camp. It is as if the American people, if not the media, realize the absolute importance of electing a Democrat and ending the disastrous presidency of Donald Trump.

And that is why Biden is leading. Now, how does Kamala Harris figure in to all this?

Vice President Biden has two “musts.” He must show himself to be the embodiment of electability and he must unite the Democratic Party. Biden could easily do this with Kamala Harris as his running mate. While there is much excitement among the older generation over Biden, Harris would bring in women, young people, blacks and Latinos, and former Berni and Elizabeth and Pete supporters.

Will this come to pass? The odds are heavily in favor of Harris, but nothing is decided yet. Whether VP Biden has made his decision or not we don’t know. We will just have to wait and see, but one way or another Kamala Harris will be playing on the bigger stage for a long time to come.

Photo: Kamala Harris by Lorie Shaull via flickr

What Does “Impeachment” Mean?

The President, Vice President and all Civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
— U.S. Constitution, Article II, section 4

Impeachment is a fairly straightforward process in the United States.The US House of Representatives brings charges against the president and the US Senate holds a trial. Nothing complicated. In the history of the United States there have only been two impeachments of the president, and both were unsuccessful.

The US House of Representatives in now taking the preliminary steps in the impeachment of President Donald Trump. Trump is accused of setting up a “quid-pro-quo” (something for something) with the president of Ukraine.

Mr. Trump allegedly asked for an investigation by Ukraine into his politicalrival, Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter. It is alleged that Trump told Ukraine that the US would withhold military aid until such an investigation took place.

Evidence supporting these charges is now being taken by the House. The issue is pretty much split on party lines, with Republicans defending Trump and Democrats accusing him. Many people believe that Trump may be impeached, but will not be removed from office because the Republicans control the Senate, and there will not be enough votes to convict Mr. Trump.

People around the world are watching this. What do you think? Is Mr. Trump guilty of “high crimes and misdemeanors,” or is he the victim of his political enemies?

Please let us know your opinion.

Photo: US Constitution wikimedia

506 Days Till US Presidental Election.

by David Parmer / Tokyo

In just over 500 days the United States will hold the most important presidential election in its 238-year history. On the surface, the election will be about whether Donald Trump gets another 4 years in the White House. But more fundamentally, it can be seen as a battle for the soul of America.

Donald J. Trump, real-estate tycoon, dealmaker, and 45th President of the United States has brought his own brand of populism to Washington. Polls consistently show his approval rating hovering around 35% and sometimes a bit higher. Many of those who voted for Trump did so in a belief that he would “shake things up.” And that he has done. It seems that this mandate has no limits and he can virtually do what he wants. He is famously quoted as saying that he could shoot someone on New York’s Fifth Avenue, and that there would be no backlash. It looks like he is right. Scandal after scandal just do not affect him, and the phrase “like water off a duck’s back” comes to mind.

More important than Trump’s personal style, about which much has been written, is his America First ideology. Trump’s philosophy boils down to: “If it ain’t broke, break it!” Trump has embraced foreign dictators like Kim Jong-un and Vladimir Putin and dismissed the advice of Washington professionals (including his own intelligence agencies) in the American government. Trump has also picked fights with America’s traditional allies and disparaged NATO. The most insidious part about Trump and his cohorts is the re-shaping of traditional American values. Trump claims to return to real-American values, but his policies speak otherwise. And now, Donald Trump wants another 4 years. Will he get those 4 years?

Trump will be voted out of office in November 2020 if the Democrats have their way. As of June 2019, their best candidate for doing this is former Vice President Joe Biden. Biden won’t get the Democratic nomination without a fight, and a tough one at that, but he has one magic quality: elect-ability. This means that if anyone can beat Trump he is seen as the one to do it.

There are 24 Democrats including Biden vying for the job of president. Biden’s strategy, from the beginning, is to target Trump and not his fellow Democrats. True, he will have to “mix it up” with them in several debates over the next 506 days, but he might just let them sort themselves out, and the last man/woman standing will get to be his running mate.

Democrats need to put up a centrist as a presidential candidate in order to challenge Trump in his 35% base areas, and Biden fits the bill perfectly. Probably to appease the Democratic Party’s leftists, however, Biden’s running mate will either be an “ethnic” or a woman. Senator Kamala Harris fits both bills and is a likely choice. Senator Corey Booker, a black liberal with impressive credentials, might also be chosen. Another possibility for Biden’s running mate is former Congressman Beto O’Rourke. Will the Democratic Party put forward two “white guys” in the age of diversity? That remains to be seen.

These are dangerous times in and of themselves and also by virtue of the climate that Donald Trump has created. The world is a much more dangerous place because of the policies the Trump administration has put in place vis-a-vis NATO, Iran, Russia and China to name just a few. With this in mind, it is no stretch to see this as the most important election in American history. Not only the US, but countries around the world wait with bated breath for the results of the 2020 presidential election.

Photo: Bastin Grenshake Tzovaras via flickr

Please let us know your thoughts on this.

Joe Biden Lays Out Tough US Policy at Annapolis

by David Parmer

The U.S. Vice President’s speech at the U.S. Naval Academy graduation on May 22 was pure Biden. The Vice President engaged his audience as only a seasoned politician can do. In just over 25 minutes he made remarks appropriate to the occasion, acknowledged dignitaries and treated all to samples of the Biden wit and humor. That’s not to say that the speech lacked gravitas; he praised the hard work of the graduates and wished them well in their chosen careers in the U.S. Navy or U.S. Marine Corps, and explained how much the country needs them. It was a fine commencement speech indeed.

However, what could easily be overlooked with the emphasis on humor and ceremony was the tough policy speech that was wrapped in that framework. Mr. Biden laid out U.S. foreign policy clearly and bluntly. He explained that the U.S. was not only a world power, but a Pacific power, and that the U.S. had been active in the Pacific for the past 60 years and would continue to be so. He pointed the finger at China for its actions in the South China Sea, and criticized China’s unilateral policy in the area. And in a strong statement, after enumerating U.S. naval power, he said “…woe betide the foe who decides to challenge the United States of America or our Navy.” And to further make his point he said: “America’s command of the oceans is the measure and the symbol of our diplomatic and military primacy in the world.”

In 1900, U.S. President Teddy Roosevelt wrote: “Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far.” Roosevelt’s America had a strong navy and was not afraid to use it. It seems as if on May 22, Vice President Biden was channeling the spirit of Teddy Roosevelt to a receptive audience of sailors and marines.

Just down the road is the U.S. presidential election in 2016. Mr. Biden has not ruled out seeking the nomination. And, Mr. Biden’s speech at the U.S. Naval Academy did not seem Vice Presidential, but rather more Presidential. He laid out a bold vision of American power in this century and beyond. Perhaps Joe Biden is not ready to sail off into the sunset just yet. Judged by his Annapolis speech, it would seem that that is the case.

Excerpts from Vice President Biden’s Speech at Annapolis on May 22, 2015

U.S. foreign policy is rebalancing toward the vast potential of the Asia Pacific region. But we can’t succeed if you don’t show up. That’s why 60 percent of the United States Naval forces will be stationed in the Asia Pacific by 2020 — P-8s, Zumwalt-class destroyers, littoral combat ships, forward-deployed forces, Marines in Darwin — all and many more are headed to the Pacific, and so are many of you. And it matters — because Pacific peace and prosperity, to a great extent, has depended on and will continue to depend on U.S. Naval power, just as it has for the past 60 years.

In the disputed waters of the South China Sea, the United States does not privilege the claims of one nation over another. But we do — unapologetically — stand up for the equitable and peaceful resolution of disputes and for the freedom of navigation.

And today, these principles are being tested by Chinese activities in the South China Sea. They’re building airstrips –the placing of oil rigs, the imposition of unilateral bans on fishing in disputed territories, the declaration of air-defense zones, the reclamation of land, which other countries are doing, but not nearly on the massive scale the Chinese are doing.

We will look to you to guarantee our strategic nuclear deterrence serving in Navy ballistic missile submarines, the most secure and survivable element of our nuclear triad. From the offensive firepower of the Marine Expeditionary Force to our Carrier strike forces to our multi-nation ballistic missile defense capable ships [sic], woe betide the foe who decides to challenge the United States of America or our Navy.

America’s command of the oceans is the measure and the symbol of our diplomatic and military primacy in the world. As George Washington remarked during the Revolutionary War, “It follows then as certain as that night succeeds day that without a decisive naval force we can do nothing definitive. And with it, everything honorable and glorious.” That hasn’t changed one single bit.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/05/22/commencement-address-vice-president-united-states-naval-academy

Photo: U.S. Naval Academy (public domain) via flickr