Tom Kelly
Acting Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs
U.S. Naval War
College
Newport, Rhode
Island
March 25, 2014
Reflections on Maritime Strategy
It’s a great pleasure to be back in Newport. I’m proud to
say that my family has roots in Little Rhody. My mother grew up 20 miles from
here in Barrington, and she first met my father down the road from here on
Bellevue Avenue when they were both performing as actors in summer stock theater
here. My grandparents retired to Little Compton, so I’ve been coming up to this
area ever since I was born. I want to welcome this evening’s Little Compton
contingent, including my Uncle Chris and Aunt Suzie Burns, as well as their
friends Captain Ron and Jane Bogle. Chris and Suzie were kind enough to allow me
to officiate, as a seven year-old on the lawn of our rental house in Little
Compton, at a make-up wedding event for those who weren’t able to attend the
real thing. I’ve always considered this my first official public event.
This is my second visit to the Naval War College. Last summer, I had the
honor to attend the Joint Force Maritime Component Commander Course, or JFMCC,
to spend a week being taught by the Navy’s leadership, with many of the Navy’s
up-and-coming leaders as my fellow students. I can honestly say that I was awed
by all of the talent that surrounded me. All of these folks were experienced
warriors with cool nicknames like "Bull" and "Tree," and they also happened to
be brilliant and thoughtful. Our nation’s naval security really is in the hands
of our best and brightest. It made me even more proud that my nephew and godson
was experiencing plebe summer at the Naval Academy at the same time that I was
in JFMCC.
Now, I didn’t always know what was going on in the JFMCC. As a career
diplomat, I speak foreign languages, but I don’t speak Navy. So there were some
things that I didn’t really understand. Some of them, I could figure out. The
fifth time or so when someone commented that they were "out of Schlitz," I
wasn’t sure exactly what it meant, but I concluded that the expression meant
something bad, as in "it is lamentable that I no longer have a beverage."
So even though I am still a novice on Navy lingo, I am
very interested in the work that the Navy does, and what that work means for our
nation’s security and foreign policy.
One of the great strategic advantages of the United States
is that, as "America, the Beautiful" reminds us, our nation stretches from "sea
to shining sea." The oceans have been part of our identity – and our protection
– since the founding of the country. They have been the path through which we
became both a great commercial and a great military force. I may be a diplomat,
but I believe in naval power. It makes my job easier. I grew up on the shores of
the Pacific Ocean. My professional background is in trade. So it’s very natural
for me to see the oceans and our maritime security as essential to our continued
prosperity.
Defining Maritime Security
Ninety-percent of world trade is conducted on the oceans.
Our food, our fuel, our imports and exports all travel on these global economic
highways. Maritime trade is our nation’s life blood. Keeping the oceans free for
commerce – in two words, maritime security – is key to our national
security.
How important is maritime security? Ask the Greeks. They
faced odds of about three to one at the Battle of Artemisium, the sea side of
the Battle of Thermopylae. They survived, due partly to good luck, and lived to
fight another day at the Battle of Salamis, where they defeated the invading
Persians for good. The Greek ability to secure their maritime domain may have
saved western civilization as we know it today.
Alfred Thayer Mahan
I know that every invited speaker to this institution must
genuflect to Alfred Thayer Mahan. I thought I would take care of that early in
my speech.
Mahan, the most important American strategist of the
nineteenth century, helped an earlier generation of Americans to understand the
meaning of maritime security for the United States. His concept of sea power was
based on the idea that countries with greater naval power will have greater
worldwide impact. This concept had enormous influence in shaping strategic
thought of navies around the world. Mahan set the stage for the American Navy to
become the most powerful in the world.
He argued that naval power, control of the seas, was the
key to success in international politics: the nation that controlled the seas
held the upper hand in modern warfare. For Mahan, a strong Navy was important to
the conduct of commerce.
Broadening Our Definition of Maritime Security
Many things have changed since Mahan was teaching here.
One is our definition of maritime security. It has broadened a lot. Today, this
phrase encompasses a complex set of issues, including both public and private
activities, sometimes with diametrically opposed interests. The maritime domain
faces threats from nation states, terrorists, unregulated fishing, natural and
environmental disruption, mass migration, and organized criminal activity like
smuggling and piracy.
I would note that it is not always military might that
provides or denies security in the maritime domain.
Mother Nature reminded us that she still controls some
aspects of maritime security. Navies could not have stopped the tsunami in Japan
or the typhoon just a few months ago in the Philippines. Leaking oil from ships
and tankers that ran aground pollutes the oceans. Oil and mercury from damaged
vessels endangers the food supply chains in both fresh and salt water
bodies.
Climate change is affecting the Arctic. As the ice cap
shrinks, old shipping lanes are expanding and,
in some cases, new ones are
opening. Opening these Arctic lanes to commerce and keeping them free will be
important. As the lanes open, we’ll see more demand for access to the Arctic’s
natural resources, which in turn may raise the stakes on territorial
disputes.
Off the east coast of Africa, it is not nature but mankind
causing the biggest problems. Restoring safe transit for shipping off the coast
of Somalia has been a particularly daunting challenge, but it’s also an area
where we have had significant success. Navies have been part of the solution,
but not the whole story, which I’ll discuss in a few minutes.
It’s not just the virtuous who think about maritime
security. It’s probably on Vladimir Putin’s mind, too, as Russia acts in the
Crimean peninsula. The Crimean peninsula has been Russia’s warm water outlet to
the west since the eighteenth century. From Sevastopol, the Russian fleet has
relatively easy access to the Mediterranean, and from there, the Atlantic
Ocean.
So, Alfred Thayer Mahan was on to something.
U.S. Government Partners in Maritime Security
Today, I will talk to you about three ways that the U.S.
government is promoting security at sea. First, we teamed up with governments,
NGOs, industry, and civil society to deal a blow to pirates off the coast of
Somalia. Second, we created a common language for partners at sea to use known
as the Maritime Security Sector Reform guide. And third, we at State crossed the
Potomac River to work with our DoD colleagues to build partner capacity in the
Asia-Pacific.
Those of you who have read my bio know that I work at the
State Department in "PM," or the Bureau of Political Military Affairs. We like
to say that we’re the connective tissue between State and Defense. And indeed,
in the past five years, we are seeing more interaction, more coordinated
engagements, and more personnel exchanges than ever before.
The Contact Group on Piracy off the Coast of
Somalia
I am proud of my bureau, but I have to admit that we’re
very, very small compared to DoD. Pol Mil currently has five people working full
time on maritime security. They are a microcosm of the Pol-Mil cooperation of
which I just spoke. We have two former Navy Captains, who know the military side
of things, and two Foreign Service Officers, with expertise in political and
diplomatic issues. We also have an active duty Coast Guard Captain on detail to
us.
That small office has led U.S. efforts to eradicate piracy
and its causes. Piracy is one of the world’s oldest professions. Most of you
know that piracy was one of the key factors that led our young republic to build
the famous "six frigates" that served as the backbone of the U.S. Navy in the
early nineteenth century. And you know that some of our navy’s first engagements
were against the Barbary pirates who preyed on American shipping in the
Mediterranean.
Back in late 2008, Somali pirates were as much of a
problem as the Barbary pirates two centuries earlier. Somali pirates roamed an
area as large as the continental United States in their search for new victims.
In addition to the threat posed to innocent mariners, pirate activity was
costing the global economy an estimated 7 billion dollars a year.
The way we responded as a government is a blueprint for
how our nation should respond to tough, international challenges. The U.S.
military couldn’t have solved this problem by itself, and neither could U.S.
diplomats. But working together, we did solve it. Here’s what we did. In 2009,
the United States helped to establish the Contact Group on Piracy off the Coast
of Somalia. It now includes more than 80 nations, non-governmental and
international organizations, and industry and civil society groups working
together to take the fight to the pirates.
Through the Contact Group, the members of the
international community have coordinated multi-national naval patrols and helped
to disrupt the pirates’ illicit business model. The U.S. Navy was naturally at
the center of that effort. At the same time, we worked with industry and foreign
ports to enable on-board privately contracted armed security teams to protect
vessels in dangerous waters. No ship with a privately contracted armed security
team embarked has ever been hijacked.
Our diplomatic efforts played a critical role. For
example, we worked with partner nations to deter piracy through the prosecution
and incarceration of pirates and their networks. Today, over 1,400 pirates are
in custody in 20 countries around the world.
The results of all of these efforts is what I think is one
of the most important multilateral success stories of this young century. Thanks
in large part to the combined naval efforts in the Gulf of Aden, there has not
been a single, successful attack against major commercial vessels in the Indian
Ocean in almost two years. Pirates today do not possess a single, seaworthy,
hijacked merchant ship. A few years ago, pirates held over 600 hostages. Today,
they hold only a few dozen, and we’re doing all we can to facilitate their
release.
We should remember that piracy has flourished off the
coast of Somalia because of the inability of Somali authorities to provide
security in coastal regions and deny safe havens the pirates require to operate.
The recent histories of countries like Somalia and Afghanistan is a solemn
reminder to the U.S. of the cost of allowing failed states to develop and
fester. Knowing that our collective gains against Somali piracy are fragile and
reversible, our challenge is to maintain our concerted efforts to suppress
piracy until Somalia is able to deliver security to its citizens – and to the
world’s merchant seamen – on its own.
Maritime Security Sector Reform
The success of the Contact Group on Piracy off the Coast
of Somalia has led to closer cooperation between the United States and the
European Union when it comes to defining maritime security.
In consultation with our European partners, the United
States developed a framework to help define maritime security in the context of
security sector reform. In December 2010, the Bureau of Political Military
Affairs published the Maritime Security Sector Reform Guide, the second way we
have responded to the expanding definition of maritime security.
The MSSR Guide, as we call it, is an attempt to develop a
common lexicon for the maritime sector when we discuss security. It emphasizes
the interdependency of the Maritime, Criminal Justice, Civil Justice, and
Commercial sectors in maritime security.
The MSSR guide is the only comprehensive attempt to
establish agreed upon terms of reference relating to maritime security. The U.S.
and EU are working together to achieve internationally-accepted Terms of
Reference to facilitate our efforts to build institutional capacity in African
states so that we can eventually re-task our respective navies from the Gulf of
Aden to other areas where their capabilities are required. This isn’t going to
be easy. African nations don’t tend to invest in their navies. But we need to
help them build their capacity – helping them will help us.
We should remember that outside the domestic waters of the
United States, securing our own maritime security depends on our foreign policy.
Our security assistance programs – which are run out of my bureau – can be a
critical tool to support states trying to build their security capacity – which
feeds into larger foreign policy objectives beyond achieving peace and security
– such as promoting economic growth, democracy, and human rights. By investing
in our partners to help them take on greater security responsibilities at sea,
State and DoD are working together to build partner capacity – particularly in
the Asia-Pacific region.
The Financial Tools Available To Us and the Rebalance
to Asia
As the Departments of State and Defense develop ways to
cooperate on maritime security, we might consider the thoughts of John Maynard
Keynes: money is a link between the present and the future. The Departments have
two primary financial links.
Section 1206 Authority
The first link is Section 1206 Authority. Under this
program, State and DoD work together to create proposals to train and equip
security partners for counterterrorism missions or missions in which U.S. forces
are participating like Afghanistan. The funding for 1206 resides in DoD, but the
Secretary of State must approve any expenditure.
Global Security Contingency Fund
The second financial tool is the Global Security
Contingency Fund or GSCF, a four-year pilot project authorized by Congress in
Fiscal Year 2012 to help us carry out security, counterterrorism, and rule of
law training in hot spots around the world. GSCF is new, and it’s going through
some growing pains like any new government program. State and DoD can use GSCF
to bring the breadth of the U.S. government’s consolidated capabilities to bear
on an emerging problem. In what is perhaps the first real step toward a national
security budget, the GSCF requires State and DoD to fund, formulate, plan, and
approve all proposals in a completely joint manner.
Under the GSCF, the Departments of Defense and State pool
funds. We split it 80/20 because DoD is much bigger than us. This requires us
not only to fund and implement together, but to plan and shape engagements
together – from day one. This approach could be a model for our security
assistance going forward – recognizing we need a holistic approach to problems,
and addressing them comprehensively.
Why are funds like these important? Well, State and DoD
may have been able to prevent or at least better respond to the bombing of the
USS Cole in October 2000 had we worked more closely to enable foreign maritime
security forces to perform counterterrorism operations. As funds like these
institutionalize collaboration and cooperation between State and DoD, and the
Defense Attaché at post meets with the Political Counselor, our diligent action
officers throughout the national security establishment start to identify
opportunities for these programs. As we talk more about the security of our sea
lanes, we see bigger, broader strategic trends.
The Rebalance Toward Asia
Consider the Asia-Pacific region, home to many of the
world’s most heavily traveled trade and energy routes. Twenty-first century
capitalism cannot function unless these sea lanes remain secure. Our 555 billion
dollars in exports to the Asia-Pacific last year supported 2.8 million jobs here
in America. The security and prosperity of the United States are inextricably
linked to the peaceful development of the Asia-Pacific, including in the
maritime domain. You don’t get trade with Asia without open sea lanes.
As an example of our commitment to strengthen maritime
capacities in Southeast Asia, on December 16, Secretary of State Kerry announced
that the U.S. will provide 40 million dollars (in GSCF money by the way) to the
Philippines in new regional and bilateral assistance to advance maritime
security capacity building in the area. The GSCF money will complement a
32-and-a-half million dollar regional assistance package that will help
Southeast Asian nations protect their territorial waters.
The Secretary’s announcement builds upon the United
States’ longstanding commitment to support the efforts of Southeast Asian
nations to enhance security and prosperity in the region. Existing programs
include efforts to combat piracy in and around the Malacca Strait; to counter
transnational organized crime and terrorist threats in the tri-border region
south of the Sulu Sea between the southern Philippines, Indonesia, and Malaysia;
and to expand information sharing and professional training through the Gulf of
Thailand initiative.
In a few weeks, I’ll travel to Chittagong, Bangladesh,
where the Bangladeshi Navy will show me the Somudra Joy, formerly the U.S. Coast
Guard Cutter Jarvis, which enables the Bangladeshi Navy to promote maritime
security. This transfer has achieved real results by contributing to a seventy
percent reduction in piracy and smuggling in the Bay of Bengal.
Let me just add two things about the rebalance to Asia.
First, the provision of this security assistance doesn’t mean the U.S. has
abandoned our commitment to human rights. In Vietnam, Secretary Kerry said
recently that we want to improve our security partnership. The Secretary added
that Vietnam "needs to show continued progress on human rights and freedom,
including the freedom of religion, the freedom of expression, and the freedom of
association." In both Vietnam and Bangladesh, and with all of our emerging
security partners, we encourage governments to improve in these areas, even as
we seek closer security partnerships.
The second item I want to address is China. I know that
there are some who think our rebalance to Asia is part of a broader American
effort to contain China. Let me be clear: that’s not the case. On the contrary,
the United States wants to build a cooperative partnership with China. We
understand that China will play an important role in critical global challenges
like fighting climate change, wildlife trafficking, and countering
proliferation. We welcome that role: those problems won’t get fixed without
China’s help. And we recognize that our two economies are deeply intertwined. We
consistently seek to engage with China on all levels on a wide range of issues.
We want to do more with China in many areas, including economic relations.
National Security Advisor Susan Rice recently said that the United States
welcomes China and any other nation interested in joining and sharing the
benefits of the Trans-Pacific Partnership so long as they can commit to the high
standards of the agreement.
The United States seeks to build healthy, stable,
reliable, and continuous military-to-military relations with China. We maintain
a robust schedule of military-to-military exchanges and dialogues in pursuit of
that goal and to encourage transparency. In addition, U.S. military, diplomatic,
and defense officials participate in a range of combined civilian-military
dialogues with the Chinese in which we work to build mutual trust and
understanding. I’ve participated personally in some of them, both in Washington
and Beijing.
Conclusion
That brings us back to maritime security. My argument is
that phenomena like typhoons and tsunamis, climate change, and man-made problems
like piracy have all broadened the way we look at maritime security. The U.S.
government has attempted to take on our many new challenges at sea through
closer cooperation between the Departments of State and Defense. At the
Political Military Bureau, State-Defense cooperation is all that we do.
While we may have expanded the definition of maritime
security, let’s give old Alfred Thayer Mahan some credit. The heart of his
theories still holds true: global maritime security is an essential element of
American security and prosperity. And that’s why, after the passage of two
centuries, we’re still fighting pirates.
No doubt this year will bring new maritime challenges,
and the Departments of State and Defense stand together, ready to meet them.
Thanks for inviting me to speak here in Little Rhody. I’m
always happy to be here.
I would be happy to take questions.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
