How Are U.S. Navy Sailors Adapting to Unprecedented Naval Challenges in the Red Sea?
The U.S. Navy is navigating uncharted waters in the Red Sea, engaging in prolonged confrontations with Iran-backed Houthi rebels. Destroyers, including the Carney, Gravely, Laboon, Mason, and Thomas Hudner, have intercepted dozens of attack drones and missiles in response to regular assaults on commercial vessels and Navy warships.
The conflict escalated following the October 7 attack on Israel by Hamas and subsequent Israeli operations to clear the Gaza Strip. The Houthi attacks, a consistent threat since these events, have propelled the Navy’s surface fleet into a high-stakes battle, prompting analysts to scrutinize the Navy’s evolving strategies.
Vice Adm. Brendan McLane, the head of Naval Surface Forces, draws on his experience as the former captain of the Carney in 2010, emphasizing the ongoing transformation in tactics and munitions readiness. While specific details about recent developments remain classified, McLane highlights the Navy’s meticulous analysis of data and the involvement of warfare tactics instructors in refining strategies.
The months-long effort to counter Houthi missiles and drones poses a new and sustained challenge for the Navy, unlike routine missions in the Middle East. Jan van Tol, a retired warship captain and senior fellow, underscores the unprecedented nature of the conflict, describing it as a “new wrinkle” in naval operations.
The urgency of the mission has reportedly energized Navy sailors, with Cmdr. Jeremy Robertson of the Carney revealed that 15 reenlistment contracts were submitted just two days after the first engagement. This surge in commitment is attributed to the Navy’s investments in weapons tactics instructors and the cultivation of a robust warfighting culture.
However, the intercepts have raised concerns about the suitability of current warship weapons for countering Houthi threats. The extensive use of SM-2 missiles, each costing approximately $2.4 million, against relatively cheap Iranian-made attack drones prompts questions about the sustainability and efficiency of this approach.
While Navy leaders express confidence in the munitions stockpile’s stability, analysts such as Bryan Clark raise doubts about the long-term viability of relying on expensive assets for self-defense. Suggestions include exploring alternative defensive strategies, potentially involving shorter-range weapons, electronic warfare, and other assets.
The Navy’s decision to utilize SM-2 missiles, confirmed as the sole munition officially acknowledged for use in the Red Sea, underscores the complex dynamics of the ongoing conflict. Analysts argue that not relying heavily on SM-2s could open avenues for commanders to explore cost-effective alternatives, even though such a shift entails greater risk to Navy warships and crews.
As the Navy grapples with these challenges internally, analysts emphasize the unique nature of the Red Sea conflict. The shallow and narrow characteristics of the Red Sea, coupled with the strategic significance of the Bab-el-Mandeb strait, create a challenging battleground for the Navy. While the volume of Houthi strikes has not yet necessitated replenishing missile cells, potential interference with vital passages like the Suez Canal or Hormuz Strait could pose logistical challenges for the Navy’s Red Sea flotilla.
In conclusion, the Navy’s experiences in the Red Sea are not only reshaping naval strategies but also sparking crucial discussions about the adaptability and sustainability of current defense mechanisms in the face of evolving threats. The ongoing conflict serves as a litmus test for the Navy’s preparedness and may influence future doctrines in countering emerging challenges in dynamic geopolitical landscapes.
