U.S. Navy Aircraft Carriers Could Soon Have a New Enemy (Not Russia or China)

We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

Key Points and Summary: Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) aims to cut wasteful spending in defense, raising speculation about targeting expensive programs like aircraft carriers.

-While Musk’s critiques of the F-35 have gained attention, carriers like the Gerald R. Ford, at $13 billion each, remain symbolic of U.S. military power.

-Critics argue carriers are obsolete due to modern missile and submarine threats, but bipartisan consensus sees them as vital to countering China’s naval expansion.

-Though DOGE lacks statutory power, its influence could disrupt lesser defense projects. However, with Donald Trump and his defense team supportive of carriers, their future remains secure for now.

Could Elon Musk’s DOGE Scrap U.S. Aircraft Carriers?

Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy are not known for their military expertise, but they have a new form of power with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). This is a cost-cutting effort to trim the bureaucracy, “drain the swamp,” and reduce waste, fraud, and abuse in government spending. 

In November, Musk made waves in defense circles when he spouted off about the F-35 Lightning II. He believes the stealth fighter is obsolete and the military would be better served by canceling the program and replacing the warbird with drones.

Musk Goes on the Warpath Against the F-35

The fighter, he wrote on X, is a “jack of all trades, master of none” because it was “required to be too many things to too many people” and was the result of a “broken” requirements system. In a separate post, he said the jet is the “worst military value for money in history.”

“Success was never in the set of possible outcomes” for the fighter, he wrote, adding that “manned fighter jets are obsolete in the age of drones anyway. Will just get pilots killed.”

As a result of Musk’s comments and fears about the future of the F-35, Lockheed Martin’s stock fell nearly four percent the next day, showing how much clout the mercurial billionaire has on public sentiment.

If Musk wants to trim the fat at the Department of Defense with DOGE, how far is he willing to go? 

After all, many acquisition programs are too expensive, wasteful, and ripe for cancellation.

Are Aircraft Carriers in DOGE’s Crosshairs?

What if DOGE were to go after aircraft carriers, for example? 

The new Gerald R. Ford carrier cost more than $13 billion, and some defense analysts have called for no more carriers. 

The Navy could invest the saved funds into more surface vessels and submarines that are badly needed.

Carriers Are a Relic of a Bygone Era

These critics believe aircraft carriers are obsolete due to new anti-ship ballistic missiles that could easily send such a large warship to the bottom of the ocean. 

Plus, quieter and more modern nuclear-powered and diesel-electric subs could sneak into a carrier strike group and take out the flagship easier than they could 20 years ago.  

DOGE May Not Have Statutory Power

To eliminate the Ford-class carrier program, DOGE would need more Congressional authority. There is a small “DOGE caucus” on Capitol Hill, but caucuses are not standing committees; and they are more like clubs for legislators who agree on issues.

DOGE and Musk would have to convince the majority of members on the House and Senate Armed Services Committees to cut the carrier program and this is not likely.

However, there are always winds blowing in Washington to reduce defense budgets. 

Socialists such as Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, plus libertarians like Senator Rand Paul and House member Thomas Massie, never met an expensive defense program they liked.

However, a bipartisan agreement exists that China is the number one threat facing the United States. Most Congressional lawmakers believe eliminating aircraft carriers would hurt America’s chances of competing with the Middle Kingdom. 

China has three carriers and a fourth on the way. So, now is not the time to quit building the floating air bases.

That leaves the incoming Donald Trump administration. The Secretary of Defense nominee, Pete Hegseth, is a former Army officer and is not known for wanting to cut defense programs. He yearns to take away DEI efforts instead and remove left-wing political wokeness that he believes hurts the lethality of the military. 

Trump Is a Fan of Aircraft Carriers

Trump himself supported aircraft carriers during his first term. In 2017, the president appeared on the Gerald R. Ford and extolled the virtues of flat-tops.

“Our carriers are the centerpiece of American military might overseas,” Trump said. 

“We are standing today on 4.5 acres of combat power and sovereign U.S. territory, the likes of which there is nothing to compete. There is no competition to this ship. It is a monument to American might that will provide the strength necessary to ensure peace. This ship will carry 4,500 personnel and 70 aircraft and will be a vital component of our defense. This carrier and the new ships in the Ford class will expand the ability of our nation to carry out vital missions on the oceans to project American power in distant lands,” the president explained.

This is not a Commander-in-Chief who is out to eliminate the U.S. aircraft carrier program. Carriers are a symbol of American might and national prestige. Trump is not likely to go back on these words. 

Meanwhile, DOGE has many other dragons to slay. But that doesn’t mean Musk and Ramaswamy, plus like-minded senators and representatives, will be hands-off regarding the Department of Defense. 

Look for some arms systems to be canceled or retired in the next four years; it is just not likely to be the aircraft carrier.

About the Author

Brent M. Eastwood, PhD, is the author of Don’t Turn Your Back On the World: a Conservative Foreign Policy and Humans, Machines, and Data: Future Trends in Warfare, plus two other books. Brent was the founder and CEO of a tech firm that predicted world events using artificial intelligence. He served as a legislative fellow for U.S. Senator Tim Scott and advised the senator on defense and foreign policy issues. He has taught at American University, George Washington University, and George Mason University. Brent is a former U.S. Army Infantry officer. He can be followed on X @BMEastwood.