Just when you thought the naming of naval vessels couldn’t get any more politically charged, the Biden Administration, in its final days, has decided to name two future Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carriers as the USS William J. Clinton (CVN 82) and USS George W. Bush (CVN 83). Announced today, with less than a week before a potential change in administration, this decision by the
@USNavy
feels somewhat rushed and superficial, more about making a political statement than honoring legacy or service.
This announcement today leaves a bit of a bitter taste. Naming these carriers after former presidents Clinton and Bush at such a late stage seems to prioritize political optics over the deep respect such a naming should convey. These ships, each costing around $13 billion and representing the pinnacle of naval technology, are meant to be symbols of our national security. Yet, the timing of this decision, so close to a political transition, suggests a lack of the solemnity these choices typically require.
The Navy’s rationale is that the USS William J. Clinton and USS George W. Bush should serve as reminders of our history and inspire service to our nation. However, the controversial legacies of both presidents might not be the most inspiring choices. It feels like an attempt to appease different political factions or perhaps shift focus from more pressing naval concerns, such as the delays in shipbuilding or the ballooning costs associated with these carriers.
Naming these carriers, which are set to join a fleet where the average ship age exceeds 20 years, should be a moment of national pride and reflection. Instead, it seems like a hurried decision, possibly lacking the public engagement or consideration of operational performance that such a significant naming deserves. These carriers are not just names; they are long-term investments in our defense, expected to serve for half a century or more.
This move distracts from the real issues at hand. With defense budgets under the microscope and the Navy grappling with fleet modernization challenges, the focus on naming feels misplaced. The emphasis should be on ensuring these carriers are not only built but are also operational and effective, not just on their names making headlines.
Looking ahead, these carriers, like their namesakes, will bear the responsibility of our national security. Yet, the manner in which this naming was executed suggests a preference for symbolism over substance, at a time when depth in decision-making is crucial.
Sources:
https://x.com/SecDef/status/1878930858523988104
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/5083227-biden-names-navy-aircraft-carriers-clinton-bush/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/01/14/biden-aircraft-carriers-bush-clinton/77691178007/
https://kstp.com/world/biden-is-still-considering-pardons-for-people-who-have-been-criticized-or-threatened-by-trump/
https://news.usni.org/2025/01/13/white-house-next-two-aircraft-carriers-named-for-bill-clinton-george-w-bush
h/t Stephen Green
39 views