U.S. Maritime Action Plan Aims for Dominance and Independence
The Trump administration recently unveiled an ambitious maritime strategy designed to restore U.S. maritime dominance and lessen reliance on foreign-built and flagged vessels, which currently handle most international trade.
In a briefing with reporters, senior officials pointed out that nearly 99% of the U.S. international maritime trade is conducted on vessels that are foreign-owned and built. This reliance poses a vulnerability to national and economic security, particularly as global competition heats up.
“About half of our trade is conducted by sea, and 99% of that happens on foreign-built, foreign-owned ships,” one government official mentioned during the call, emphasizing the opportunity within that market.
The initiative, launched under President Trump’s executive order from April, is touted as the first significant federal effort in decades to revive the U.S. commercial shipbuilding sector, enhance the U.S.-flagged fleet, and fortify maritime supply chains.
Current pressures stem largely from China’s dominance, as it produces more than half of the world’s commercial shipping tonnage. Meanwhile, U.S. shipyards represent only a small fraction of the global output—a gap that has widened over the years as domestic shipbuilding has waned. It’s worth noting that the rising costs of Navy shipbuilding have been attributed to this declining capacity.
“The cost of constructing warships for the Navy is increasing at a rate much faster than inflation,” noted a senior administration representative. They argued that revitalizing commercial shipyards and trained workers could stabilize long-term defense procurement costs.
According to officials, boosting shipbuilding capacity will not only impact global trade but also enhance the industrial base that supports U.S. naval power.
Over the last few decades, as commercial shipyards dwindled, the domestic supply networks and skilled labor that support both commercial and military vessels have diminished too. This has made Navy shipyards more dependent on a limited supplier pool, often leading to escalated costs and production delays.
Interestingly, U.S. shipyards once functioned as dual-use facilities—constructing both commercial and military vessels. This approach helped maintain a larger workforce and more robust supply chains. Although the current plan primarily emphasizes commercial shipping, officials suggest that military shipbuilding could also reap benefits from a broader industrial base.
The decline in U.S. shipbuilding capacity is a long-standing issue. Post-World War II, the country maintained numerous commercial shipyards. Today, only a select few can build large ocean-going vessels.
For defense purposes, production has consolidated, primarily in a handful of major shipyards. Only two shipyards currently produce the Navy’s nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and submarines, while others contribute to surface combat ships like destroyers.
Navy leadership has increasingly raised concerns about the pressures facing America’s shipbuilding industry. Secretary of the Navy John Phelan expressed that U.S. shipyards need to adopt a wartime mentality, especially as China rapidly expands its fleet and upgrades its manufacturing capabilities.
Data from the Office of Naval Intelligence indicates that China’s shipbuilding capacity surpasses that of the U.S. by over 200 times, a disparity largely due to significant Chinese investments in automated, AI-enhanced shipyards that can produce vessels at a pace the U.S. industry struggles to match.
As these developments unfold, the Navy is simultaneously grappling with production delays in submarine construction and supply chain issues that are hindering major program implementations—challenges that officials believe must be tackled to restore U.S. maritime competitiveness.
