New U.S. Navy Chief Wants ‘1,000-Ship’ International Navy

Adm. Mike Mullen, the U.S. Navy’s new chief of naval operations (CNO), called for expanded international naval cooperation during a speech last week at the Naval War College.

“I’m after that proverbial 1,000-ship Navy,” the CNO said Aug. 28 in Newport, R.I. “A fleet-in-being, if you will, comprised of all freedom-loving nations, standing watch over the seas, standing watch over each other.”

Mullen’s concept is to build on existing international security agreements to extend the global reach of sea power. That power, which he said has not yet been realized, includes the ability to “share and unite” nations.

“Our vision,” he said, “is to extend the peace through an interconnected community of maritime nations working together.”

While emphasizing that war-fighting capabilities remained “first and foremost,” Mullen said that “is not, and it cannot be, all we are about.”

Full article >>


Hmmm.... i wonder if that kind of co-operation is possible

Wow thats pretty crazy, all our allies would have to spend a lot more money on their Navy's for that to happen!

Actually I'm wondering what types of "ships" he wanted....

Anyway, anyone know the combine number of ships NATO have?

Well, 3500 planes vs. 1000 ships... I could see it happend...

This idea is prone to failure, what if we want to get involved in a conflict and some of the international members of that navy don’t? I think its best to have your own independent navy.

I can see it happening in the future. Not every navy has to have the might and power of the US, as each differant country brings its own differant qualities.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
This idea is prone to failure, what if we want to get involved in a conflict and some of the international members of that navy don’t? I think its best to have your own independent navy.

of course you have to have your own navy. imagine how much worse the invasion of iraq would have been if the french and germans had had a say in what ships were used.

I just cant see US Navy Ships being controlled by other Nation officers outwith NATO or maybe Japan.As has been posted before what happens when one of the constituents becomes involved in a local conflict,i can see it falling apart there.

I think it makes a lot of sense. I'd love to see Australian or British ships as part of a USN carrier battle group. They have more experience detecting a lot of the older threats that are becoming more and more common out there, like diesel submarines. The USN doesn't have any left to train with, so why not have escorts from countries that use them, and train against them.

Yep i think that would be a good idea in terms of training but what about if the US CVBG has to go into combat ? Its alright in a NATO context but unsure of areas outwith NATO legal operating areas.I suppose it just depends on how close the ally is and whether the issue affects them to allow combat operations within a US CVBG.
In terms of Japan i think this is one area where a joint US/Japan or even ROK naval force would be a great idea,especially in terms of AEGIS platforms and strengthening ties between these nations.

This is a great idea in terms of freeing up US assets.

Remember all those nations "contributing" to the Iraq conflict by sending naval assets?
Some ignorant pundits joked about how Bahrain sent out one measly frigate.

The USN does more than just fight wars nowadays, but they use warfighting assets to do it. If members of the "international navy" pick up the slack when we need to pull ships from providing medical assistance and fresh water to go shoot bad guys, we can increase our combat potential, and reduce our own overall ship count.

Maybe say France would refuse to help just to spite us, but we could probably count on some help.

news.yahoo.com...

Here's a link to a recent story letting you know what guided missile destroyers are currently doing. It'd have been just as easy to have a less capable destroyer or frigate from another country do that.

^^
Well the region the article mentions is a very sensitve one w.r.t. the US because the eastern coast of Africa is perceived to be Al Qaeda territory and I'm sure the U.S. wouldn't want ANY Navy patrolling there expect maybe the British Navy.
Also other than the Indian Navy, no other Navy can effectively patrol that area.
Now piracy in the Mallaca straits is also extensive ,but the Malaysian and Indonesian govts do not want USN or IN ships anywhere near the area because they see it as an "act of aggression"..

Well maybe if the Indonesian and Malaysian govts got their act together and did something about the problem then there would be little need for other nations ships to be patrolling there.Maybe if they formed a multinational anti-piracy naval force in the straits that could have an effect.

Originally posted by Daedalus3
^^
Well the region the article mentions is a very sensitve one w.r.t. the US because the eastern coast of Africa is perceived to be Al Qaeda territory and I'm sure the U.S. wouldn't want ANY Navy patrolling there expect maybe the British Navy.
Also other than the Indian Navy, no other Navy can effectively patrol that area.
Now piracy in the Mallaca straits is also extensive ,but the Malaysian and Indonesian govts do not want USN or IN ships anywhere near the area because they see it as an "act of aggression"..

Ah but a very little known fact is that currently there is a VERY international coalition working with the USN in the Gulf to prevent terrorist trafficking of drugs, weapons, warm bodies, and explosives.
We've got countries like the Netherlands, the UK, and Singapore helping us out.
In fact, I attended a brief by an O-6 back from there, and he mentioned that the other nation's offered unique capabilites we did not have. For example, the RN is more experienced than we are in VBSS, and they have a more "mature" ROE. As a result they can act when USN vessels are restricted by their ROE, so what some USN COs did was birddog for the RN frigates. They were also pleased with the RN Lynx helos.

And the Singaporeans, for example, are apparently a big help with port/maritime asset(oil rig) security. They have a Unmanned vessel that operates out of one of their LSTs I think.

One of the less glamorized operations over there, but definitely a big one, and very international. And pretty high stakes, dhows that we hit go off with nice big secondaries from the photos he brought back, and there was a fairly recent drug bust(in the Gulf, drug money(hash) is used to fund terrorist efforts)

"This idea is prone to failure, what if we want to get involved in a conflict and some of the international members of that navy don’t? I think its best to have your own independent navy. "
WESTPOINT said it best~

This will not be happening any time soon. Cost to much money and theres just to many possibilities that may occur.

"This idea is prone to failure, what if we want to get involved in a conflict and some of the international members of that navy don’t? I think its best to have your own independent navy. "

Then they don't come along. They're not expected to, the CNO said nothing about that. It's about keeping the peace.

So it'd be nice if we could pull some DDGs involved doing things they are WAY too expensive to be dealing with like investigating individual dhows(sailboats) in the Gulf off the line, and over to where their UNIQUE AEGIS system is required...like say another China confrontation. I mean honestly, that is frigate work at best, even corvette work. You don't need an armed to the teeth destroyer to get a dhow to pull over and spread em. In fact, it's unnecessary risk of a valuable asset.