The Cold War is an increasingly distant memory in American military minds, except in the minds of the arms control community, and in particular those who seek the elimination of nuclear weapons. Alas, our president is a member in good standing of this community—indeed, an organizer.So, too, it...

Either the Navy is retiring these ships too early or its lifecycle estimates are hopelessly optimistic. But service leaders cannot have it both ways. Similarly, the administration cannot realistically “pivot” to Asia—a region defined by the “tyranny of distance”—and cut the fleet at the same time.

AEI defense expert Mackenzie Eaglen testifies before the oversight subcomittee of the House Armed Services Committee about how the US Navy's shipbuilding plan will critically downsize the size of the Navy at the same time that the demands on it are growing.

AEI resident scholar Mackenzie Eaglen was testifying Wednesday to the U.S. House Armed Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, in which she explained that the 2013 long-term shipbuilding plan "does not accurately portray the forces or funding necessary to execute the administration’s strategy."

When President Obama unveiled his new strategic guidance in January, highlighted by a pivot to Asia, many assumed (incorrectly) that the Navy and Air Force would reap the benefits. But if the president's own 2013 defense budget request did not make it clear to policymakers already, the release of the Navy's 30-year shipbuilding plan confirms this is a pivot in name only.

Why are Western powers shrinking their armed forces when they need them most?

America is nearing a decisive moment.  Unless Congress acts to change current law, automatic sequestration cuts will slash future spending on national defense across-the-board by over $500 billion beginning early next year.

If the administration is serious about properly resourcing an American military emphasis in the Pacific while not taking our eye off the ball everywhere else, the president must send over a budget that proposes to reverse the decline of the Navy’s size, fleet, and readiness. Anything less should be called out for what it really is: a strategy that says one thing and a budget that does another.