Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • Iran
    • Western Hemisphere
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
  • Analysis
    • Research
    • Q&A
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / Grand strategy / The U.S. Navy can’t build ships
Grand strategy

May 17, 2024

The U.S. Navy can’t build ships

By Gil Barndollar and Matthew Mai

After decades of strategic drift and costly acquisition failures, the U.S. Navy is sailing straight into a storm it can’t avoid. Despite the Defense Department’s lip service about China being the “pacing challenge,” decades of deindustrialization and policymakers’ failure to prioritize among services and threats have left the Navy ill-equipped to endure a sustained high-intensity conflict in the Pacific. The United States is unable to keep pace with Chinese shipbuilding and will fall even further behind in the coming years. Where does that leave the U.S. Navy and the most critical U.S. foreign-policy imperative: deterring a war in the Pacific?

As evidenced by the Biden administration’s latest budget request, fiscal constraints are forcing the Navy to cut procurement requests, delay modernization programs, and retire ships early. The Navy’s budget for the 2025 fiscal year calls for decommissioning 19 ships—including three nuclear-powered attack submarines and four guided-missile cruisers—while procuring only six new vessels. The full scope of what military analysts have long warned would be the “Terrible ’20s” is now evident: The expensive upgrading of the U.S. nuclear triad, simultaneous modernization efforts across the services, and the constraint of rising government debt are compelling the Pentagon to make tough choices about what it can and cannot pay for.

Read at Foreign Policy

Authors

Photo of Gil Barndollar

Gil
Barndollar

Non-Resident Fellow

Defense Priorities

Matthew
Mai

Contributing Fellow

Defense Priorities

The Latest

op-edChina, Asia

China is the bright spot in Trump’s foreign policy

By Lyle Goldstein

February 12, 2026

op-edU.S.‑Iran, Iran, Middle East

Trump’s maximalism could derail Iran negotiations

By Daniel DePetris

February 12, 2026

op-edIran, Middle East

Provoking a war with Iran could be a deadly miscalculation for Trump

By Rosemary Kelanic

February 12, 2026

Press ReleaseSyria, Middle East

Drawdown from Syria a success worth scaling

By Rosemary Kelanic

February 12, 2026

op-edUkraine‑Russia, Europe and Eurasia, Russia, Ukraine

Ukraine and Russia are both suffering as the war enters its fifth year

By Daniel DePetris

February 10, 2026

op-edSyria, Middle East

What the latest ceasefire and unification deal means for Syria

By Alexander Langlois

February 9, 2026

Events on Grand strategy

See All Events
virtualGlobal posture, Grand strategy, Military analysis

Assessing the 2026 NDS: What comes next?

February 9, 2026
virtualEurope and Eurasia, Asia, Grand strategy

Assessing the 2026 NDS: Alignment with restraint?

February 9, 2026
virtualNATO, Alliances, Burden sharing, Europe and Eurasia, Grand strategy

Assessing the 2026 NDS: Will it usher in burden shifting?

February 9, 2026

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • Research
  • Experts
  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2026 Defense Priorities All Right Reserved