A Tomahawk missile immediately after it was launched from an American warship towards Houthi targets in Yemen (Reuters)

Naval wars are witnessing a continuous revolution whose pace is accelerating excessively in the era of lethal drones and guided missiles, all of which are cheap weapons and available in abundant quantities, according to an article in the American “National Interest” magazine.

The author of the article, James Holmes, head of maritime strategy at the Naval War College and a non-resident fellow at the University of Georgia's School of Public and International Affairs, explained that the cost of armament is a pivotal factor in wars, because threatening ocean fleets and naval ships has become inexpensive these days, but defending them is expensive. Expensive, not to mention dangerous.

He said that last week, the Houthis launched an anti-ship missile towards the Red Sea, which came within a distance of no more than one mile from the US destroyer "Gravly" before it was shot down by a ship-borne weapons system designed to detect and destroy missiles - known by the abbreviation "CIWS" ( CIWS - a weapon capable of firing 4,500 projectiles per minute from a radar-guided Gatling gun.

The writer added that the sequence of events on board the destroyer remains a mystery, and we may not know exactly what happened. He acknowledged that Navy leaders would keep the details of the events secret for fear of drawing the attention of current or potential enemies to the weaknesses of the US Navy.

The radars and missile defense systems on board the destroyer were unable to detect the Houthi missile, except when it approached the CIWS system.

It's worrying

CNN quoted Tom Karako, director of the Missile Defense Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies on its website, as saying that “what is worrying” is that the Houthi missile came very close to the destroyer Gravely.

In turn, analyst Karl Schuster - a former US Navy commander - said that the Houthi missile, traveling at a speed of about 965 kilometers per hour, was likely about 4 seconds away from hitting the American warship before it was destroyed.

The preferred weapon in the Red Sea so far is the latest model of the SM-2 missile, the price of one shot of which is about $2.4 million, while the cost of one copy of the SM-6 surface-to-surface and surface-to-air missile is $4.3 million. The SM-3 interceptor ballistic missile system costs a whopping $36 million.

The writer pointed out in his article that - with the development that occurred in military aviation - the Coast Guard possessed the means of strength that made them capable of striking fleets moving at a long distance from the shores, and large areas of the seas were now within the reach of their weapons.

He added that firearm ammunition was cheap in the past, and is now expensive. The military industry struggles to manufacture precision-guided munitions in large quantities and at rapid rates due to their complexity and intermittent demand from naval forces in times of peace.

The National Interest article stated that the preferred weapon in the Red Sea so far is the newer model of the SM-2 missile, the price of one shot of which is about $2.4 million, while the cost of one version of the SM-6 ground-to-surface missile is Land and air, $4.3 million. The SM-3 interceptor ballistic missile system costs a whopping $36 million.

The article goes on to point out that the US Navy is consuming limited quantity missiles at a pace faster than the defense budgets that fund new versions, and the ability of weapons manufacturers to produce alternatives to them.

The writer believes that American military operations against the Houthis, although they are necessary to secure freedom of navigation because they are a priceless public interest, exhaust limited stocks of weapons that may be needed in more important theaters of operations, such as the western Pacific Ocean, where China is located, which represents a “challenge.” The largest” for the US Department of Defense (the Pentagon) or around the waters of Europe, where China poses a “lesser” challenge but is still a source of concern for Washington.

The US Navy is consuming limited missiles at a pace faster than defense budgets that fund new versions, and the ability of weapons manufacturers to produce replacements for them.

In other words, the more war materiel is depleted in the Middle East, which Holmes argues in his article is of secondary importance to American national interests, the less it will be available to the region of East and West Eurasia that is of paramount importance to the United States.

How can the Pentagon and Navy avoid the high costs of firearms ammunition, constrained industrial capacity, and the consequences of declining naval weapons stocks?

4 basic ideas

The writer, an expert in the field of maritime defenses, answers by saying that there are four basic ideas that help in solving this dilemma. The first and second are of a humanitarian nature and are applicable in a short time, at least in theory.

  • The first idea:

    It lies in giving strategic thought priority within the American national security apparatus. In the writer’s view, no country is able to give top priority to every place on the world map, as this requires it to consume the largest possible amount of its resources for an indefinite period.

  • The second idea:

     for the United States to push its allies and partners to assume some of the responsibility, because ensuring freedom of navigation is a shared responsibility of all countries that benefit from and are guardians of maritime navigation.

  • The third idea

    : rebuilding the American defense industrial base, and repeating the experience of manufacturing the necessary military equipment in large quantities, as happened in the two world wars and the Cold War.

  • Fourth idea:

    Correcting the unequal exchange cost ratio between inexpensive threats and expensive defense systems.

Source: National Interest