577 
needs sea control. To meet foreign commitments, the U.S. Navy also 
has to make it possible to apply military power overseas. This need 
is called projection. * 
The Soviet Union, which is not so heavily dependent on trade 
and with no major allies overseas, planned a concept and built the 
fleet that would deal most effectively with its most powerful potential 
Opponent, the United States. Thus, the Soviet Navy is designed to 
disrupt or prevent U.S. sea control, as widely as possible, and thereby 
to make it impossible for the U.S. Navy to fulfill its projection mission. 
In most cases it is easier to deny sea control than it is to maintain 
it. Thus, the Soviets have the easier task in general. Specifically, 
cutting communication lines requires fewer ships, less sophisticated 
equipment, and smaller risks than protecting such lines. A line of 
communication needs protection throughout its length, but it can be 
cut at any one point.'® During the Second World War, Germany 
almost won the naval war by attacking seaborne commerce to Great 
Britain. The German Navy did it with a vastly inferior surface fleet 
and a marginally less numerous submarine force. The Soviet Navy 
today is far better equipped in relative numbers and quality to perform 
such a sea-denial mission than was Germany during the Second World 
War. 
It is clear that different missions mean different numbers, composi- 
tion, and capabilities for U.S. and Soviet navies. The U.S. Navy should 
never be a carbon-copy of the Soviet Navy and vice versa. There 
is little disagreement about the need for a strong and balanced Navy, 
but there is growing controversy about the current ability of the 
Navy to control the seas and project U.S. power, and on the size, 
composition, propulsion, sonar, and missile systems required for these 
purposes. 
The outcome of these debates will affect the defense budget substan- 
tially, and the Navy budget in particular. It could determine the Na- 
tion’s future as a maritime power and, because of the importance 
of the oceans, the survival of the United States as a major economic 
entity. 
There are two contrasting points of view on the current ability 
of the U.S. Navy to carry out its missions, the official view, and 
others. The official view, represented here by quotations from a speech 
by Navy Secretary J. William Middendorf and testimony by Adm. 
James L. Holloway III, the Chief of Naval Operations, holds that 
our Navy still has a slight edge over the Soviet Navy and can carry 
out its current missions with available combatants. This view is shared 
by some key members of the Senate Armed Services Committee and 
by congressional defense critics such as Representative Les Aspin. 
The Members of Congress for Peace through Law, a congressional 
group chaired by Senator Dick Clark of Iowa is even more optimistic; 
it maintains that the U.S. Navy has a large lead over the Soviet 
Navy. Serious critics of these views, such as former Secretary of 
Defense James R. Schlesinger and former CNO Adm. Elmo Zumwalt, 
maintain that the Navy is in a serious state of decline and cannot 
fulfill its missions properly with available combatants. 
14 Adm. Elmo R. Zumwalt, Jr., High-low, U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings, vol. No. 102, April 
1976. Reprinted in Current News, May 11, 1976, p. 2. 
16 Tbid., p. 2. 
