US Naval War College professor and interim Press Editor in Chief. Opinions are mine.
Joined March 2010
- Tweets 3,299
- Following 1,951
- Followers 3,774
- Likes 1,523
60 Photos and videos
Pinned Tweet
2 Dec 2025
In @SurvivalEditors w/ Ethan Kapstein: Europe’s rearming & US shift to other theaters allow a better #NATO division of labor—EU industry/land power US R&D/strategic enablers—to meet members’ regional AND global goals. Pace Kagan, we’re all Martians now! tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.…
1
5
904
May 10
RT @mikercarpenter: I personally believe it would have made an enormous difference, as I argued in the piece below. Ukraine needed modern w…
91
Jonathan Caverley retweeted
Feb 12
Sounds familiar
Feb 12
A way i’ve seen charterers get around jones act recently is by discharging & reloading in the Bahamas mid route
I’ve seen this happen with vessels loading in the US Gulf, stopping in Freeport, then going to the East/West Coast
At $90k /day people will find alternative solutions
2
1
5
1,279
29 Dec 2025
This @WSJ article’s maps undercut its claim that Taiwan's conquest will allow China to “dominate the region’s strategic waterways, project military power widely into the Pacific and more aggressively pursue its contested maritime and territorial claims." wsj.com/world/asia/china-tai…
1
2
4
2,127
29 Dec 2025
As @tshugart3 notes, the just-released China Military Power Report assesses that current mainland PLAN capability could "seriously challenge and disrupt" U.S. forces out to 1500-2000 nm. Taiwan bumps out these range rings by a vanishingly small margin.
x.com/tshugart3/status/20053…
28 Dec 2025
The new report also states that China has been practicing components of all of its options to force Taiwan unification, including strikes on U.S. forces in the Pacific that could "seriously challenge and disrupt" them out to 1500-2000 nm.
1
3
1,282
29 Dec 2025
Dominating the water- and airspace far into the Pacific is a prerequisite for a successful PLA invasion, not vice versa. In the @TXNatSecReview, I argue that Taiwan does not change the military balance either way. tnsr.org/2025/06/so-what-rea…
1
1
5
16,604
23 Dec 2025
On the "Golden Fleet" and the new "battleship" class, @samlagrone and @MalShelbourne do great work detailing the proposed specs from @NAVSEA in @USNINews. Given the numbers it's hard to see how US Navy's "distributed maritime operations" is feasible.
news.usni.org/2025/12/22/tru…
2
1
2
2,054
23 Dec 2025
Distributed Maritime Operations is not possible with these future crewed classes alone. It will require a new concept of operations or *lots* of fast, robustly networked, uncrewed vessels loaded w/ missiles. That was probably always the case to an extent, but this burns bridges.
1
154
23 Dec 2025
Elsewhere I've argued that the fleet is a nation's grand strategy manifest in steel, because it endures for decades. The late Cold War's carrier-centric Navy defined unipolar power projection. Procurement decisions like these are thus very consequential. journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs…
2
150
Diverging defence priorities, coupled with European rearmament, are reducing the free-rider problem that has long strained the relationship between the United States and European NATO | Analysis by @jcaverley and Ethan B. Kapstein | FREE TO READ | go.iiss.org/4poJitA
2
7
20
1,953
Diverging defence priorities, coupled with European rearmament, are reducing the free-rider problem that has long strained the relationship between the United States and European NATO | Analysis by @jcaverley and Ethan B. Kapstein | FREE TO READ | go.iiss.org/4poJitA
6
15
1,722
Diverging defence priorities, coupled with European rearmament, are reducing the free-rider problem that has long strained the relationship between the United States and European NATO | Analysis by @jcaverley and Ethan B. Kapstein | FREE TO READ | go.iiss.org/4poJitA
20
29
4,657
30 Oct 2025
Two thoughts on this news, besides🤷♂️. First, the expense of ROK nuclear-powered submarines only makes operational sense to me for a South Korean nuclear deterrent. While understandable at some level, proliferation is never a happy development.
30 Oct 2025
Trump said the US will share tech with South Korea to build a nuclear-powered sub.
Trump said it will be built at the Philly Shipyard, owned by South Korea’s Hanwha. The yard isn’t currently equipped to handle nuclear material or build military ships. politico.com/news/2025/10/29…
2
1
429
30 Oct 2025
Second, if (a big if) South Korea helping to fund an additional U.S. shipyard that can produce submarines would be an *enormous* development in the (very) long-term Indo-Pacific balance. I'm not sure it is worth the price in terms of proliferation, but...
2
1
248
30 Oct 2025
If (a big if) South Korea has decided it needs nukes, for deterrence & strategic stability, it's better they be in a survivable, second-strike nuclear submarine. Improved conventional deterrence via a larger US submarine industrial base could be a secondary, stabilizing effect.
1
1
182
Jonathan Caverley retweeted
28 Oct 2025
Come join the @CatoInstitute on November 6th at 11:00 am for a forum discussion on the Indo-Pacific!
Panelists will include @evanbmontgomery and @jcaverley, with @CatoFP's Evan Sankey serving as the event's moderator.
Register below:
cato.org/events/military-bal…
2
5
1,162
Jonathan Caverley retweeted
15 Sep 2025
Honestly never seen anything like this- a campaign advertisement for Gen. Thomas Bussiere to be Chief of Staff of the Air FOrce.
2
9
16
15,505