The United States faces multiple challenges to freedom of the seas: a growing Chinese naval threat in the South China Sea; Russian submarines in the Arctic; North Korean fast patrol boats in the Sea of Japan; and an Iranian brown-water navy that seeks control of the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz. These competitors often walk in the gray zone, balancing on the thin line between a diplomatic and a military response.
The triservice maritime strategy Advantage at Sea outlines the Sea Services’ priorities in addressing these threats. The Coast Guard’s role will depend on its assets and capabilities and its ability to employ them. To that end, Coast Guard cutters should be better armed and trained to enhance defense readiness and support the Navy in the gray zone and the littorals.
No Longer armed for the Threat
The Coast Guard could provide a unique ability to counter emerging asymmetric threats. More heavily armed cutters could conduct freedom of navigation patrols, gather intelligence, and, if necessary, conduct boardings in hostile environments.1 In addition, the service could provide capabilities the blue-water Navy historically lacks, such as versatile legal authorities and extensive experience operating in the littorals.
Existing Coast Guard national security cutters, similar in size to frigates, could help fill the void left by the decommissioning of the Oliver Hazard Perry–class frigates. The Navy needs more frigates, and the Coast Guard could quickly and relatively inexpensively provide them.
Unfortunately, as currently equipped, no cutter could long survive against today’s naval threats. Cutters have little to no defensive measures against missiles or torpedoes.2 The 57-mm Bofors naval gun on the national security cutter (NSC) provides a modest capability against small craft and limited aerial defense. The Mk 36 Super Rapid Bloom Offboard Countermeasures Chaff and Decoy Launching System and Mk 53 Decoy Launching System offer simple missile countermeasures.3 The close-in weapon system provides a last line of defense against incoming missiles, but the system is aging and cannot provide adequate defense against multiple missiles.4
Antisubmarine warfare (ASW) used to be a significant Coast Guard capability.The service helped escort shipping to defend against deadly U-boats during World Wars I and II, and it maintained the capability to detect underwater threats until 1992.5 As recently as 1990, Coast Guard high-endurance cutters were equipped with AN/SQS-38 sonar and Mk 46 torpedoes, and by 1992, several had Harpoon antiship missiles and AN/SQR-17 sonobuoy processors installed.6 However these capabilities were removed in 1995 as a result of shifting service priorities. Former Commandant Admiral Thad Allen, who served as operations officer on the ASW-capable USCGC Gallatin (WHEC-721), noted the decision to terminate the ASW mission resulted in a Coast Guard less capable and less relevant to naval missions as a part of a “national fleet.”7
A Way Forward
In Lord Nelson’s day, guns provided a ship’s main battery, but that role has been taken over today by missiles. The RIM-162 Evolved Seasparrow Missile would provide cutters far better protection than a naval gun against anti-ship cruise missiles and low-velocity air threats such as drones, helicopters, and high-speed maneuverable surface threats.8 New long-range antiship missiles such as the Naval Strike Missile currently deployed on select littoral combat ships could be fitted to Coast Guard cutters as well.9 These would make Coast Guard cutters assets in times of war.
To address underwater threats, torpedoes, sonar, and decoys could provide defense against submarines when placed on any cutter. Sonar could be hull mounted as it was on the Hamilton class or a towed array. This capability could even be expanded by drones or MH-60T Jayhawks deploying sonobuoys and torpedoes. Acoustic decoys such as the AN/SLQ-25E NIXIE could be towed to provide electro-acoustic torpedo countermeasures.10
The benefits of naval weapons are not limited to wartime operations. Equipping NSCs with ASW capabilities could provide coastal protection against underwater threats emerging from strategic competitors and rogue regimes.11 This capability also could be used in peacetime to detect drug-laden semisubmersibles.
Operating under the umbrella of these defensive capabilities, the Coast Guard could continue to do what it does best: boardings. Nothing beats “eyes on” when it comes to gaining intelligence and evaluating an enemy.
The Coast Guard has a long and distinguished history of boarding vessels, beginning with the Revenue Cutter Service.12 For example, revenue cutters boarded and took 18 of 22 prizes in the Quasi-War with France.That capability has continued to be an asset in every major U.S. naval conflict.13
As recently as Operation Iraqi Freedom, the USCGC Morgenthau (WHEC-722) and Dallas (WHEC-716) served in Navy battle forces. Had Saddam Hussein attempted to flee Syria by sea, the Dallas along with several 110-foot cutters were to board vessels departing Syria to capture the fleeing dictator.14
Various Coast Guard cutters also have been deployed to the South China Sea over the past five years, although they have been largely defenseless against conventional naval threats.15 These operations are expected to continue, but the Coast Guard needs additional Navy-type, Navy-owned armament to conduct them safely.16
In contested waters, properly equipped Coast Guard NSCs could operate and conduct boardings with the means to defend themselves and project force if necessary. The NSC could deploy an armed Coast Guard Jayhawk to help long-range interceptors board ships. The aerial assets could provide overwatch, while also providing another layer of antiair and antiship protection using Hellfire missiles. The Jayhawk could even provide ASW protection using Mk 54 lightweight torpedoes. These Coast Guard assets could complement each other with their respective capabilities, providing multiple layers of defense while operating in threatening environments.
Cost-Effective Capability
Arming Coast Guard cutters and their aerial assets would free the Navy’s multibillion-dollar guided-missile destroyers to focus on bigger conventional threats and be significantly less costly than designing and building new guided-missile fast patrol boats, corvettes, or frigates.The Navy has spent $30 billion to acquire 35 marginally capable littoral combat ships, and in 2019, requested $2.7 billion to develop 10 corvette-sized large unmanned surface vessels.17 Better arming and training existing Coast Guard assets would hardly compare to these costs and would be worth the investment. The offshore patrol cutter is currently under construction and reserves space for additional weapons. Now would be an excellent time to arm it for modern naval conflicts.
The U.S. Coast Guard has the one of the largest fleets in the world, with more ships and aircraft than the Royal Navy or French Navy.18 With China’s navy quantitatively outnumbering the U.S. Navy, this fleet could provide significant capabilities and valuable additional numbers to national security and defense.19
The Coast Guard’s decision to reject Navy funding to arm post–Fleet Rehabilitation and Modernization (FRAM) program Hamilton-class cutters limited its relevance in naval operations.20 The Coast Guard needs to maintain a healthy relationship with the Navy and renew its focus on defense readiness, and it is in the Navy’s best interest to ensure the Coast Guard is properly trained and adequately equipped. An integrated all-domain naval force that—as called for in Advantage at Sea—“multiplies the traditional influence of sea power to produce a more competitive and lethal total force” could more effectively support both that strategy and the National Defense Strategy.The Coast Guard needs to get serious about defense readiness for the safety and prosperity of the nation it serves.
1. Thomas P. Ostrom, U.S. Revenue & Coast Guard Cutters in Naval Warfare, 1790–1918 (Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, Inc., 2018).
2. Brian A. Smicklas, “Remaining Relevant: Historical Contributions, Civil-Military Challenges, and Antisubmarine Warfare Capabilities on Coast Guard Cutters” (master’s thesis, Naval Postgraduate School, March 2018).
3. BAE Systems, “Mk 36 Super Rapid Bloom Offboard Countermeasures (SRBOC) Chaff and Decoy Launching System.”
4. Robert J. Hansberry, Modal Analysis of the PHALANX M61A1 Close-in Weapons System (Monterey, CA: Naval Postgraduate School, 1994).
5. Smicklas, “Remaining Relevant”; and Stephen H. Evans, The United States Coast Guard 1790–1915: A Definitive History (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1949).
6. LT T. J. Rogers, USCG, “The FRAM 378: A Insider’s View,” The Bulletin 52, no. 4 (August-September 1990); and Tyler Rogoway, “Coast Guard Cutters Once Carried Harpoon Anti-Ship Missiles and They Could Again,” The War Zone, 1 December 2019.
7. ADM Thad Allen, interview, U.S. Coast Guard Academy, 2019.
8. CSIS Missile Defense Project, “RIM-162 Evolved Seasparrow Missile (ESSM).”
9. Raytheon Missiles & Defense, “Naval Strike Missile.”
10. “Ultra Awarded Torpedo Defense Contract Worth Potential $268M,” Ultra.group, 21 December 2020.
11. “USCG Cutter Joins North Korea Maritime Sanctions Mission,” The Maritime Executive, 25 October 2019.
12. Evans, The United States Coast Guard 1790–1915.
13. U.S. Coast Guard Historian’s Office, “Timeline 1700s–1800s,” www.history.uscg.mil/Complete-Time-Line/Time-Line-1700-1800/.
14. RADM Chris Colvin, USCG, former Dallas (WHEC-716) commanding officer, interview, 2019; and VADM James Hull, CDR Cari Thomas, and LCDR Joe DiRenzo, USCG, “What Was the Coast Guard Doing in Iraq?” U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings 129, no. 8 (August 2003).
15. Michael D. Armour, “Could the USCG Be an Asset in the South China Sea?” The Maritime Executive, 6 November 2017.
16. Gidget Fuentes, “Cutter Bertholf’s Indo-Pac Deployment Highlighted Coast Guard’s National Security Role,” USNI News, 24 July 2019.
17. David Axe, “It’s Official: The U.S. Navy’s Littoral Combat Ship Is a Complete Failure,” The National Interest, 22 May 2019; and Harry Lye, “U.S. Navy Plans Corvette-sized Unmanned Fleet,” Naval Technology, 19 August 2019.
18. Christopher Woody, “These Are the 10 Biggest Navies in the World,” BusinessInsider.com, 12 April 2018.
19. Gregory Tozzi, “Worried about the Size of the U.S. Navy? Rearm the Coast Guard,” The National Interest, 26 January 2017.
20. Allen, interview.