Social media. [inaudible conversations] welcome. [applause] good evening and thank you, everyone, for coming tonight and also everyone thats online monitoring and watching this virtually from wherever in the world that you are tonight. Its a great honor and privilege to welcome today the chief Naval Operations. This is a very interesting period of time in our nations history, we are facing some unprecedented risk right now with an ongoing war in ukraine to set the context for a threat and a decade that could be very perilous, especially as you look alt whats happening the last few weeks around taiwan in the western pacific with china. This will be a very contested decade and the navy has been for generations the preeminent Deterrent Force of the United States and has maintained the peace in the world for generations, and tonight, the chief of Naval Operations, topic de jour will be the navigation plan. Now, this is a term that mariners are familiar with. The navigation plan provides the guidance and also points out the perils and also the needs of a preplanned course. In this case, the future of the navy as we move forward into this decade and so were going to focus in on that. Were going to focus in on what the navy needs and what the nation will have to supply in order to get the fleet that the country needs in this very contested decade. And without further ado. I invite the chief Naval Operations to join me on the stage. [applause] so now that im in my seat i want to give the rules of the road tonight before i hand the stage over to the admiral for a few prepared comments on the 2022 navigation plan. First, ill be moderating throughout the evening. Im the Senior Research fellow here at Heritage Foundation for the last couple of years for Naval Warfare and technologies, but the reason the event is possible is because of folks like you from the media, academia, the think tank world, active duty, retired members as well and of course, everyone online all across the world. So, you will have a chance to ask questions. Please start to think about those and please keep it, and admiral, over to you for comments. Thank you, mr. Sadler. I appreciate the opportunity to talk about where were headed as a navy. I think its best to open up what is infloo unsing influencing our decisions the path were taking, navigating. In a word, its china. In the path over the last decade, weve seen a force tripled in size and investments in Nuclear Capability both in terms of their capabilities, but also the breadth of those capabilities. We see an increase in their ability to leverage the space domain, so, their satellite constellations that allow them to find us and to target us, potentially. We see a heavy investment in weapons with long range and we also see a big investment in sensing systems and netted sensing systems terrestrial, space and the maritime. Theyre a significant potential adversary, as this audience is well aware, their behavior in the western pacific has been fairly aggressive. I think the reaction from their neighbors on a daily basis is testimony to that assertion. And so, that led the United States navy to take a look at ourselves in terms of what would how would we face this adversary not only to deter them, but if we potentially had to face them in combat. And we decided that we would have to face them in a different way than the means that weve been operating in the past 30 years, and spread out the force and mass effects across all domain, sea bed to space and also include leveraging the United States marine corps from island chains in the pacific. That led us to think about what kind of fleet wed need to actually deliver those kinds much effects in the distributed manner, and the fleet that we have today, we believe we have too much capability and that is focused on too few platforms. And so, in order to give us a distributed force, we looked at what type of attributes that force would need in order to be effective in combat. So we thought about the fact that, i talked about it needed to be it needed to be a distributed fleet. It needs to be able to come at an adversary like china across multiple vectors and all doe mains simultaneously. It needs to have the attribute of distance, so, thats weapons with range and speed that can hold an adversary at bay. We have to have sound defensive systems or possibilities, and that includes our investments in areas like hydro sonics, areas like Laser Technology and high powered microwave in the defensive role. We had to think about deception, maneuver, stealth, how to apply the technologies. We had to think about decisions advantage and we have a project ongoing that we think will put us in a position to actually move information to the tactical edge faster than we ever have before to put our commanders and our tactical action officers in a position to deliver effects and to make decisions faster than their opponent. And so, that influences us in thinking about the force of the future and it will take, as i was just talk to go mr. Sadler, 20 budget cycles to get to a hybrid fleet of 355 manned and 150 unmanned and every single study in washington or beyond, whether its done inside the pentagon or by think tanks like this, have conclude that had we need a navy of at least 355 manned vessels and about 150 unmanned. Thats not a perpetual in state, though. We continue to learn through exercises, through battle problems, through war games, and in a war college next week for a twogame war game with Senior Leaders that will influence how those numbers will change, but probably more importantly, how the composition, the mixes the navy changes with capabilities we need for the future. So, with that as a table setter, i open it up to your questions. So thank you very much, admiral. So, theres actually, i think ive got a question already from the audience, and one as a moderators discretion that i will hold for right now. Ill go to the audience. First. [inaudible question] so, we are expanding those capabilities. I think what we owe private industry, what we owe industry in the ship repair business, is a stable and predictable vision of what kind of fleet were going to have in the future. So,s a you see right now, in our budgets, were decommissioning ships at a rate thats probably higher than wed like. That adds a degree of instability in their ability to predict what size work force they need, what type of infrastructure we need in our shipyards and so, i think you know, if i if i would i think give them credit for making decisions based on the signals that were giving them, and so, where id like to get with the Service Ship Building line, with respect to fleet size, id use the submarine ship building plan that we have as an exemplar. So, out for about 20 years, were in a cadence right now to deliver two attack boats and one ballistic submarine a year and thats high degree of predictability to those. And likewise on the repair side, it gives us a high degree of fidelity on what repair requirements we are going to have during that same period. On the surface side, i would like to get to that same place with our production line for destories, for frigates for amphibious ships for smaller amphibious ships and for our supply ships so we can then have numbers that are fairly stable and predictible and give the repair yards a target to shoot at with a higher degree of confidence. So, before we go to the next question, id like to take one from the online, so, while fred bartels is getting that, i have one question, admiral, ill take moderators prerogative. The navigational plan, you mentioned the 350 manned ships and 150 unmanned and 3,000 or so aircraft, you know, arriving somewhere in the 2040s, but the danger right now, and weve had several people come and speak here at heritage, the cia director, secretary of state, to pacom commanders, say that china is making preparations for a showdown or contest this decade. How are you preparing or how is the fleet postured to address the more immediate dangers at hand . Our priorities have been readiness, modernization and capacity in that order. So, in other words, we cant have a navy bigger than we can sustain because we have to be ready to fight tonight. We need a lethal, ready, capable navy, more than we need a bigger navy thats less lethal, less capable, less ready. What does that boil down to, you need ships on point deployed in the western pacific, arabian gulf, high north, that are properly manned and those crews are properly trained for combat number one. And the second, adequate supply parts when things break down they can repair them themselves or into port, turn them around quickly and selfsustaining, and equipped today. The magazines have to be filled with ammunition, we cant be a hollow force and the fourth point of readiness is maintenance. Its imperative for us to drive down delay days out of private shipyards to zero. Were not satisfied where we are now. The industry is working closely with us to get to that point, but we have to be able to maintain the fleet that we have with a high degree of confidence. So that to answer your point, we have to be ready to fight tonight, ready for the 2027 scenario that the previous indoe pacom commander laid out a couple of years ago, but we have to be ready to fight left that have mark. At the same time modernizing the fleet. So 60 to 70 of the navy that you have today, we will have a decade from now. So, we cant ignore modernization. Thats why capacity is last. So, the force that we have cannot be a hollow force. Thats where we have to put our effort right now. And then, as ive said in my navigation plan, i do think, in order to fight and distribute the manner, we need a bigger navy as i mentioned a few moments ago, every study thats been done, said we need at least 355 manned ships. No question that we need a bigger navy. But as i said in my navigation plan, we cannot simultaneously modernize the fleet that we have, and grow to a larger fleet without 3 to 5 growth above inflation, so, that will mean at least another 9 or 10 billion in our budget a year. Short of that, im going to focus on maintaining readiness as my number one priority and the nation demands it to have a ready nation to respond to whatever comes up. Thank you, i might come back around to the key regions later, admiral, but over to you, fred, from the online audience. Its a regional question, how do you our allies contribution in the South Pacific and how that ties in the future naval plans and how do you think of the contribution of the allies in that region . So, i would say that when people ask me about asymmetric advantage, the first thing i talk about is sailors, but the second thing i talk about is the numbers of allies and partners that we have knitted together in the pacific, as a likeminded force. Last week, i was in the United Kingdom for three days and spent a day in spain as well. As you know, we recently signed an agreement about a year ago with australia and the u. K. Known as aukus. I think thats had a strategic stroke of brilliance for the United States or actually for all three countries, but that puts all three countries working in lockstep with advanced capabilities to put us in a position where were not just interoperable, but were interchangeable. So, ill give you an example with another ally, the french. So when we didnt have a carrier in the middle east, the french carrier, charles de gaulle, filled in for the u. S. Carrier under the tactical control of the fifth fleet. Think about the power of that. If you can have another ally or partner fill in for you when you have other priorities say in the western pacific or mediterranean or in the red sea . We have other allies and partners that are significant as well in the western pacific, the japanese, the south koreans. I mentioned the australians. New zealand of course, singapore is key for us in terms of access, and so, there are a number of allies and partners that we work with on a daily basis. India, ive spent more time on a trip to india than we have with any other country because i consider them to be a Strategic Partner for us in the future. The indian ocean battle space is becoming increasingly more important for us, and quite frankly, the fact that india and china currently have a bit of a skirmish along their border, i think i think its strategically important with respect to india that they now force china to not only look east toward the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait, but they have to be looking over their shoulder at india. India is a key partner for us, absolutely essential going forward, but i would tell you that the framework that we have with u. S. Fifth fleet and coalition of the willing of 34 navies that we operate on a daytoday basis and have for the last quarter century is powerful. We just finished a rim pac exercise in the pacific and the third fleet commander who ran that exercise said, you know, the construct that we have in the middle east, it wouldnt be bad if we could import that to the western pacific and hes absolutely right. So i remain bullish and allies and partners and keeping those relationships strong and leveraging daytoday. Ill finish up by saying, be is once told me armies meet in conflict and navies meet daytoday. And we do. We dont just operate in the military lane. Your United States navy has effect in both of economic and the diplomatic lanes as well and historically has been very important for our country. Thank you. If you have a question in the audience here in person, please raise your hand and then wait for the microphone. As we wait for that. I did have a followup question, admiral. In the navigation plan, you mentioned the importance of key regions, the curious as to what you see. Weve heard some of them already mention just in the last your last answer. What is your into um number one, and maybe your second, your top two key regions and you focus on the numbered fleets and assure that theyre postured and theyre equipped appropriately. When you look at that and you look at the key regions, is there a mismatch for how the numbered fleets are structured today and with this evolving global threat from china that you might be thinking that there could be some modifications the way those numbers are being distributed and admiral when he was secretary of the navy mentioned first fleet and your reaction is also on that idea would be welcome as well. Sure, well talk about regions for just a second. So, my two highest priorities would be the pacific and then the atlantic. I think the indian ocean is a close third. In terms of opportunities in the future we absolutely r to look at the artic, as the ice cap continues to recede. Think about trade routes in the next 25 years between europe and asia fundamentally changing. I recently made a trip it iceland. Iceland, as you know, a member of the n. A. T. O. Alliance, they dont have a navy, but a coast guard. Think about it in a transatlantic fashion and transpolar fashion, and we need to think about that particularly with finland and sweden joining the alliance, i see opportunities in the high north that we need to continue to operate up there with allies and partners and we need to continue to do and iceland is an example. Theyve been gracious to allow us to do rotational deployment of our aircraft controller up there. And to continue to ensure those rotational deployments. So with respect to the size and scope of the battle space that we cover. And do we have adequate coverage with our fleet headquarters right now . I think thats worthy of debate and we need to continue to have that debate and i would prefer to focus any money that i have on capabilities and more ships, rather than more headquarters. And what ive done, what we have done, our navy has done, as an example with the newly formed u. S. 2nd fleet out of norfolk, weve used expeditionary manner, light headquarters thats operated out of the iceland. Theyve traveled from norfolk to operate on our command and control ship in the mediterranean and then in the high north up by norway. They have actually gone down to north carolina, and operated with the marine corps and so, my point there, sir, is that do we have enough fleet headquarters to go around . One could argue that we dont, but one of the great things that navy brings to bear in our headquarters is global maneuverability. Thats perfect. I think we have a question here if we can bring a microphone. Yes, maam. So, prior to the well, until the ukraine war, all of the arms control publications that i was reading were focused on russia as the threat, in areas such as the hypersonic missiles and those sorts of capabilities, but you havent mentioned them at all within your scheme of planning and so, are they were they overestimated in these capabilities or are they just not . Thank you. So there is significant concern. Ill talk first about russia and china are both developing those capabilities and well be be and will be filling those shortly. I mention imperative for the future fleet, not only the future fleet, but the fleet in this decade. Thats why our investments in Laser Technology to defend against weapons against hypersonics, as far as high powered microwave continue to be high on our priority list for research and development. Weve actually deployed Laser Weapons on board some of our navy ships. Theyre on track to deliver that capability to across more ships here in this decade. So, from a defensive nature, we are from a defensive standpoint, were focused on the threat. Were not ignoring it. In terms of offensive capabilities, the navy and army are working closely in the same hypersonic missile. The army will deliver that capability. Theyll field it next year in 2023 in a mobile fashion. The navy will put it on our stealthy destroyers beginning in 2025, and 2028 on our virginia class submarines, best lethal, most stealthy submarines in the world. I hope that answers your question. Thank you, and weve got from the online audience, fred. Back to you. Sir, there have been a few questions about recruitment and retention, and how the recruitment scenario now days has been very challenging. So, what are your what are the problems that youve seen with recruitment and what are the challenges that youve been seeing on retention, and they specifically mentioned high skilled officers. Yes. So, let me talk proudly about recruiting. Were definitely focused on retention and retain the navy is a family and we serve as families. So,