Text taken from the Live Journal account of Dmitry Kochegurov
Commentary by Russian military journalist Boris Rozhin is in italics.
[ColonelCassad] On May 1, 2026, leading global bank JPMorgan Chase published a report on the revival of the US shipbuilding industry. The main conclusion: after years of decline, the industry is needed for fundamental changes, especially in light of growing national security threats related to conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, as well as tensions with China. JPMorgan notes that the United States, despite being a global trading power with an annual trade turnover of $5.6 trillion, controls less than 1% of the world fleet.
Today, the United States has 190 merchant vessels (for comparison, China has about 7,000), many of which are built abroad. The report emphasizes that shipbuilding is gaining strategic importance as geopolitical tensions increase, especially given the fact that large merchant vessels can serve dual-use functions in emergency situations. The need to rebuild the maritime industrial base is recognized.
JPMorgan supports a number of White House initiatives and, for its part, recommends more active implementation of automation and modular construction; Develop autonomous shipping technologies; strengthen partnerships with allied shipbuilders capable of bringing capital and know-how to American shipyards; and stimulate domestic production. If successful, the United States will be able to build a resilient maritime industrial base, address strategic vulnerabilities, and regain a competitive position globally.
Banking capital is thus prioritizing shipbuilding as a national priority—a long-term trend, as evidenced by the ten-year, $1.5 trillion "Security and Resilience Initiative" of critical investments, which JPMorgan unveiled in October 2025. Shipbuilding is among the 27 sub-industries listed.
A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE STATE OF AMERICAN SHIPBUILDING
The revival of American shipbuilding is an urgent issue for the Trump administration. According to Congressional data, the Navy's fleet has declined sharply since the end of the Cold War. As of October 1, 2025, it stood at 293 warships—approximately half of the 1987 peak (568 ships). The industry's problems stem from a wide range of factors.
On the government side, this includes a lack of stable demand and constantly changing ship design requirements, which puts contractors at a disadvantage. On the industry side, this includes labor shortages, deteriorating infrastructure, vulnerable supply chains, poor adoption of advanced manufacturing methods, and industrial consolidation. Currently, only seven private companies build warships in the United States; as a result, nearly all Navy programs suffer from delays and cost overruns.
In recent years, the government has taken a number of measures to strengthen the shipbuilding base. During his address to Congress on March 4, 2025, Donald Trump promised to revive American shipbuilding, including commercial and military, and announced the creation of a White House Office of Shipbuilding.
On April 9, he signed an executive order, "Restoring America's Maritime Dominance," aimed at reviving the industry and reducing dependence on China. On April 30, two bills were introduced in the Senate: the SHIPS for America Act (increasing the American commercial fleet to 250 ships) and the Building Ships in America Act (tax incentives).
The "One Big Beautiful Bill" allocates approximately $29 billion for shipbuilding modernization, which is enshrined in the 2026 military budget with the passage of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). On February 13, 2026, the administration released the "Maritime Action Plan," a roadmap for reviving the industry.
THE "GOLDEN FLEET" AS TRUMP'S POLITICAL MANIFESTO
In late 2025, Donald Trump announced plans to create the "Golden Fleet" (a large-scale naval modernization program) and a "completely new class" of battleship, reviving a type of warship the United States abandoned generations ago.
Battleships have always held symbolic significance far beyond their combat capabilities, shaping perceptions of naval power, national prestige, and global influence. It is no coincidence that the American president invoked Theodore Roosevelt's "Great White Fleet" as a symbol of the A.C. Mahan era. However, the Navy has not commissioned a single battleship since the decommissioning of the last of the four Iowa-class ships, the USS Missouri, in 1992. The Zumwalt-class destroyers were developed as a replacement, but the program was canceled after three ships were built. Some hopes were pinned on the DDG(X) program as a successor to the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.
As early as September 2015, speaking on the deck of the battleship USS Iowa, then-presidential candidate Donald Trump raised the possibility of returning the ship to service. On September 30, 2025, speaking at the Marine Corps base in Quantico, Virginia, he first mentioned the possibility of reviving the battleship class, making it clear that he did not consider their guns "obsolete technology" and, as a "very aesthetic person," found modern Navy ships "ugly." The Wall Street Journal was the first to report on October 24 that Trump intended to build a "Golden Fleet" capable of countering threats from China. On December 6, US Navy Secretary John Phelan confirmed plans to create a "Golden Fleet" with a "big, beautiful ship" at the Ronald Reagan National Defense Forum.
On December 22, 2025, at his Mar-a-Lago residence, Donald Trump unveiled a large-scale naval modernization program, announcing the start of construction of the "Golden Fleet," whose flagship is to be a new generation of battleships. The president declared, "They will help maintain American military superiority, revive the American shipbuilding industry, and strike fear into America's enemies around the world."
The plan is to build two battleships, then increase their number to 10, and eventually to 20-25. The first lead ship of the Trump-class battleship, designated BBG(X) in documents, will be USS Defiant, scheduled for construction in 2028 and delivery to the Navy in 2036.
According to the technical description, USS Defiant will be the largest US surface warship since World War II, with a displacement of 35,000 tons, more than double the size of the Zumwalt-class destroyer (15,000 tons). Her combat armament includes SLCM-N nuclear cruise missiles, a 12-cell vertical launch system (VPS) for hypersonic missiles, a 128-cell Mk 41 vertical launch system, a 32-megajoule electromagnetic railgun, two 5-inch Mk 45 guns, and two combat lasers with a power of 300 kW and 600 kW.
Many experts argue that the USS Defiant is more of a battlecruiser, similar to the Russian Admiral Nakhimov. Firstly, despite integrating a full range of advanced weapons, its artillery is underpowered for its size, placing it closer to the Ticonderoga-class cruisers. Secondly, unlike classic battleships, it is not heavily armored—the idea is not to withstand a blow, but to avoid one by organizing a forward defense.
At Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump announced that, in addition to battleships, the Navy plans to build three new aircraft carriers and 12 to 15 "brand-new submarines." Frigates will be an important component of the "Golden Fleet." On December 19, 2025, J. Phelan announced the development of a new FF(X) frigate design by 2028, based on the Legend-class patrol vessels for the U.S. Coast Guard. The announcement followed the cancellation of the Constellation-class frigate program on November 25. The FF(X) is expected to serve as the "mothership" for unmanned surface vessels (USVs) and facilitate the combat missions of the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.
Further details of the Gold Fleet and Trump-class battleship concept were revealed at the Surface Naval Association (SNA) Symposium in January 2026, the WEST 2026 conference in February in San Diego, and the Sea-Air-Space (SAS) 2026 exhibition in April in Washington, D.C. During the announcement of the U.S. Navy's Battle Instructions at WEST, Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Daryl Caudle presented four fleet structure options: an option consistent with the Navy's current plans (381 ships and 134 USVs); a "hybrid fleet" (350 ships and 150 USVs), as discussed by Admiral Michael Gilday at WEST 2022; a "hedge fleet" with an emphasis on forward-deployed forces (autonomous and crewed ships); and, finally, the Gold Fleet (battleships in tandem with frigates and USVs). USVs are becoming a crucial element of the combat force: the ships are expensive to build and operate, and the Navy is confident that unmanned systems have reached a stage of maturity where they are ready for serial production.
Speaking at the SAS, D. Caudle outlined a new approach to shaping the Navy's structure, based not on simply expanding the fleet and modernizing ships, but on creating an integrated combat system, with the "Golden Fleet" at its core. Concepts such as "hedging strategy," "adapted forces," "tailored forces," and "fleet integration system" should be considered within this framework.
REACTION TO THE "GOLDEN FLEET" AND THE TRUMP-CLASS BATTLESHIPS:
D. Trump's initiative has sparked considerable debate in the expert community. Brent Sadler of the Heritage Foundation acknowledged the long-overdue need for new types of warships, primarily battlecruisers. He believes the creation of the "Golden Fleet" will signal demand to shipbuilders, encouraging them to participate in the reindustrialization of the United States. B. Sadler noted that the situation is beginning to improve, but an industrial strategic plan is lacking.
According to Hudson Institute expert Brian Clark, the administration's vision is consistent with "a concept emerging from recent wargames and other analyses," which have shown that the DDG(X) destroyers currently in development lack sufficient firepower, fueling calls for larger ships.
However, most experts reacted skeptically, primarily because of the battleships. Expert Mark Cancian concluded that the discussions were pointless, as the next administration would cancel the program before the first battleship ever sailed. Experts at TWZ also didn't rule out the possibility that not a single battleship would be launched.
According to retired Rear Admiral Mark Montgomery, the Navy would be better off investing in other types of platforms, while the battleship concept is flawed on many levels. Stimson Center expert Dan Grazer warned that such a futuristic ship would follow the same fate as the Zumwalt, Littoral Combat Ship, and Constellation programs, which failed due to their designers' infatuation with excessive pretentiousness.
19FortyFive columnist Jack Buckbee predicted the fate of the BBG(X)—the unfinished Montana-class battleships—and that construction could be canceled if Democrats win the 2028 elections. Naval expert Ronald O'Rourke stated on WEST that the Navy cannot afford another drastic change in shipbuilding direction. American defense industry expert Mark Thompson stated that the battleship would be a disaster for the Navy if Congress appropriates funds for it, and the costs are shouldered by taxpayers, increasing the national debt, and pushing the United States closer to bankruptcy.
Thus, most experts agree that the idea of ​​building battleships may not be bad, but implementation as presented by Donald Trump is unlikely. It is worth joining the general consensus that the ambitious project in its current form is difficult to implement.
The main obstacle is the high cost. The initial cost estimate for the lead battleship was $15.1 billion, according to Congressional Budget Office analyst Eric Labs. Industrial base issues could push the cost to $22 billion, which is several times higher than the cost of an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer and, according to Bloomberg, would make it perhaps the most expensive warship in US history. According to more recent Navy budget documents, the battleship will cost more than $17 billion, already exceeding the budget for an aircraft carrier. Although Congress increased Navy funding in the 2026 budget, it is doubtful that it will allocate funds for the first battleship anytime soon.
Experts critical of the BBG(X) program argue that the parties risk investing too much capital in large, unwieldy platforms that will limit the fleet's flexibility and combat power. Vulnerable to missiles and drones, battleships would be a throwback to the days of World War II. They allegedly merely duplicate the Navy's strike capabilities and offer no strategic benefit. In this regard, the new Shipbuilding Plan outlines a ready-made operational concept: as a flexible command and control platform, a battleship can lead a surface strike group, cooperate with a carrier strike group, or operate autonomously. Battleships will become the core around which combat forces are built, bridging the gap between the "high" and "low" levels of fleet structure.
There is a risk that the unique design will make development expensive and slow. According to Navy leadership, they will strive to avoid the problems that plagued previous programs. As Caudle admitted at SAS, one of the Navy's biggest mistakes in the past was starting construction without a finalized design—a process known as "concurrent production," which led to changes and, consequently, delays and cost overruns beyond initial estimates. According to Caudle, the Navy intends to achieve at least 80 percent design completion on the BBG(X) before the first weld, echoing statements by other officials, such as Shelby Oakley of the Government Accountability Office at a hearing before the House Armed Services Committee.
A number of technologies are still in the testing phase and are not ready for routine use. Progress has been made in developing railguns and lasers, but their integration into a ship of this scale remains unclear. In February 2025, the Navy successfully tested a railgun at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico, and in July 2025, the Japanese Ministry of Defense conducted its own tests, and Japan will undoubtedly share the technology with its ally.
General Atomics has expressed interest in arming battleships with railguns. According to its vice president, Nick Bucci, the proposed product is being considered for use against surface targets and as part of an air/missile defense system. Regarding lasers, as of early 2026, the destroyer USS Preble is the only Navy ship equipped with the HELIOS laser for countering UAVs. The destroyers USS Dewey and USS Stockdale are equipped with less powerful ODIN lasers. At WEST, Vice Admiral Brendan McLane suggested that the Zumwalt-class destroyers, capable of generating sufficient electrical power for lasers, could serve as a testbed. A major step forward was the testing of the LOCUST laser from the aircraft carrier George Bush in April 2026.
Battleship construction will place additional strain on shipyards already stretched to their limits. Potential contractors—Ingalls Shipbuilding (HII), Newport News Shipbuilding (HII), and Bath Iron Works (General Dynamics)—are under enormous pressure, falling behind schedule on submarines. The new Shipbuilding Plan states that the Navy plans to address this through "distributed shipbuilding," increasing the share of new sites located away from main shipyards from 10% to 50%. A third option being considered is the South Korean company Hanwha. Competition will lead to higher efficiency and increased production volumes. The Navy is also considering outsourcing the production of some components to foreign shipyards in exchange for direct investment, while American shipyards focus on final assembly and integration.
The idea of ​​equipping the battleship with a nuclear reactor generated considerable controversy, something the Navy initially opposed, having not purchased nuclear-powered surface ships since the Cold War. At the SNA, David Caudle stated that the battleship would not be equipped with a nuclear reactor (as did James Phelan, who called the option "unlikely"). The Navy subsequently concluded that nuclear power was essential for powering such highly energy-intensive platforms as the Trump-class battleships. Testifying before the House Armed Services Committee on May 12, 2026, David Caudle acknowledged that abandoning nuclear-powered surface ships was one of the Navy's biggest mistakes and announced that the battleship would use the A1B reactor from BWX Technologies. James Phelan subsequently resigned, and the battleships were redesignated BBG(X) to BBGN in the new Shipbuilding Plan.
According to The New York Times, Phelan's dismissal was influenced by disagreements over the reactor issue and the president's reaction to his statement at the SAS regarding the construction of battleships abroad, which cast doubt on D. Trump's words about reviving the naval industrial base. The resignation of Phelan, who oversaw the "Golden Fleet," marked the climax of a brewing conflict within the White House.
In general, in recent years, Japanese security policy has been characterized as militaristic, for example, the operationalization of the Self-Defense Forces' right to counterattack with the updating of several strategic documents in December 2022. Prime Minister S. Takaichi in November 2025 did not explicitly confirm her commitment to the three "non-nuclear principles," which gave rise to speculation about the possibility of Tokyo revising the foundations of its nuclear policy. Together with the lifting of restrictions on the export of lethal weapons in April 2026, these trends mark a fundamental shift in Japanese strategy.
FIRST STEPS
The 2027 Navy budget and the associated Shipbuilding Plan reveal further details of what Donald Trump is calling the "Golden Fleet." On April 21, the White House requested approximately $65.8 billion for naval shipbuilding in the 2027 budget—more than $20 billion more than in 2026. Adjusted for inflation, this would be the largest U.S. financial investment in shipbuilding since the 1962 "41 for Freedom" program, funding the construction of 34 ships (18 warships and 16 support ships) as part of the 381-ship "Golden Fleet." The fact sheet states that the order for 41 ships represents the largest demand signal for the maritime industrial base since the Roosevelt administration. The budget request calls for the creation of a "Golden Fleet," including funding for the BBG(X) and FF(X), as well as increasing the capacity of state-owned shipyards and raising overall production levels.
On May 11, the Navy released its annual Shipbuilding Plan for 2027–2031. Acting Secretary of the Navy Hang Kao stated that the plan represents a "roadmap" for the "Golden Fleet." It calls for the construction of 122 ships (including 75 warships and submarines) and 63 unmanned vehicles over five years, with the goal of increasing the fleet's size to 450 units by 2031. Total funding will amount to $305.7 billion, with the peak expected in 2027, when $65.8 billion is planned for the purchase of 34 ships and five unmanned vehicles.
Over five years, $77.8 billion will be allocated for 14 surface warships: seven Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, three battleships, and four frigates. Of this, $43.5 billion will go toward the construction of three battleships. The largest amount of funds will be allocated for submarines – $124.9 billion ($62 billion for five Columbia-class submarines and $62.9 billion for ten Virginia-class submarines).
The Navy wants to receive at least three nuclear submarines annually, doubling the rate of construction. The allocation of $22.3 billion under the Aircraft Carrier Replacement Program indicates that the carrier fleet will remain the Navy's primary strike force. $29.3 billion will be allocated for five San Antonio-class amphibious transport docks, two America-class amphibious assault ships, and 23 medium-class landing ships, demonstrating a commitment to ensuring the presence of amphibious groups and Marine expeditionary units in the littoral zone.
$15 billion will be allocated for the expansion and modernization of the auxiliary fleet, and $2.3 billion will be allocated for five CONSOL tankers. $3.11 billion will be allocated for 47 medium unmanned surface vessels (MUSVs) and $1.13 billion for 16 very large unmanned undersea vehicles (XLUUVs), making unmanned systems a key element of the Navy's combat power.
$124.8 billion will be allocated for ship maintenance and modernization. $6.2 billion will be invested in the submarine industrial base, and $6.7 billion in the shipbuilding base. $7.2 billion will be spent on developing shipyards working with the nuclear fleet, and another $13.7 billion will go to support state-owned shipyards under the Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program (SIOP).
The proposed reforms in the plan are noteworthy: stricter oversight of change requirements, portfolio acquisition executives (PAEs) with broad authority, the Vessel Construction Manager (VCM), a new AI-powered shipbuilding platform, ShipOS, and others. For the first time, the Navy is demonstrating a combination of warships, support ships, and unmanned vehicles. However, as experts point out, the Navy has not presented a concept explaining how exactly it intends to use unmanned systems. Some argue that the plan is compromised by a political agenda that conflicts with its own operational concept, creating a gap between the Navy's hedging strategy and the administration's capital ship ambitions. Another key aspect of the plan concerns outsourcing: battleship construction will require modules to be manufactured abroad—a significant concession by the administration, given its stance on reviving American shipbuilding.
RELYING ON ALLIES TO BUILD A "GOLDEN FLEET"
The United States is seriously considering building Navy ships in foreign shipyards to expand its capabilities—a move long considered unacceptable. If this happens, it will be the first time the Navy has outsourced warship construction. The executive order "Restoring America's Maritime Dominance" explicitly mentions attracting foreign investment to American shipyards. At the presentation of the "Golden Fleet," Donald Trump mentioned collaboration with other countries. According to a press release from the Navy command, it is planned to involve not only American but also foreign shipbuilders in the construction of the battleships.
The 2027 budget allocates $1.85 billion for a feasibility study to determine whether South Korean and Japanese shipyards can meet the Navy's needs for two projects—frigates and destroyers. "If we can't get the ships we need from traditional sources on time and at a reasonable price, we'll source them from other shipyards," stated Russell Vought, Director of the US Office of Management and Budget, at SAS, putting pressure on American shipyards. That the Navy is exploring the possibility of acquiring foreign ships was confirmed at SAS by John Phelan. In an interview with USNI News, he admitted that the Navy is considering building not only auxiliary ships but also warships at South Korean and Japanese shipyards. Testifying before the House Armed Services Committee, David Caudle also stated that foreign shipyards will be needed to create a "Golden Fleet."
The new Shipbuilding Plan, like the Maritime Action Plan, notes that the current state of shipbuilding prevents the Navy from achieving the required fleet size due to a shortage of production capacity and labor. In the 2027 budget, the Navy requested authorization to build up to two auxiliary ships and to manufacture modules overseas. The plan makes it clear that, in encouraging foreign investment, the Navy is seeking legislative approval for prime contractors to subcontract module manufacturing to foreign shipyards, while American shipyards handle final assembly and integration.
Potential partners include the Republic of Korea and Japan, which have proven capabilities in advanced naval construction. During his first overseas trip in April 2025, John Phelan proposed cooperation with Tokyo on the construction of dual-capable vessels and urged investment in American shipyards. Former Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba stated his government's readiness to support the US shipbuilding industry, including the construction of icebreakers. On October 28, during Donald Trump's visit to Japan, a memorandum of understanding was signed targeting investment in the US shipbuilding industry as part of the July trade deal, which aligns with Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi's plans to double shipbuilding output by 2035.
Companies from South Korea and Canada have already followed the example of Italy's Fincantieri and Australia's Austal by establishing subsidiaries in the US. In December 2024, a $100 million deal was completed for the acquisition of Philly Shipyard in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, by South Korea's Hanwha, becoming the first South Korean company to enter the US shipbuilding industry. Hanwha announced a $5 billion investment in 2025, targeting commercial and possibly military orders.
On July 31, a trade agreement was signed, under which the Republic of Korea committed to investing $150 billion in the US shipbuilding sector as part of the "Make American Shipbuilding Great Again" (MASGA) strategy. During his Asian tour, Donald Trump announced that Hanwha would build its first nuclear submarine at the Hanwha Philly Shipyard, which will play a key role in implementing the agreement. Another South Korean company, Hyundai Heavy Industries (HHI), is strengthening its position in the US. In April 2025, HHI formed a shipbuilding alliance with Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII), signing a memorandum of understanding, and in September, it was announced that HHI was in talks to purchase an American shipyard.
During the 2027 budget debate, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Budget, Rear Admiral Ben Reynolds, pointed to Hanwha's investment in Philly Shipyard as a model for expanding shipbuilding capacity in the United States. Robert Vaught, in turn, noted the "Finnish model." On October 9, 2025, the United States ordered 11 icebreakers from Finland for the Coast Guard for $6.1 billion: four will be built at Finnish shipyards, and the rest will be built in the United States at Bollinger Shipyards and Davie Shipyards after their parent companies invest in infrastructure modernization. In December 2025, the acquisition of Texas-based Gulf Copper by Canada's Davie closed, and on June 1, 2026, the company announced a $1 billion investment.
THE CONGRESSIONAL FACTOR:
Building ships at foreign shipyards will require congressional support and appropriate authorization during the 2027 NDAA. By law, the Navy is prohibited from spending money on purchasing foreign ships or building ships abroad for safety and security reasons and protecting domestic manufacturers. The provision for foreign construction of frigates and destroyers in the 2027 budget, as well as the Department of Defense's request to Congress for permission to contract for the production of certain surface warships and support vessels abroad, were predictably met with criticism from Democrats and the Council of Shipbuilders of America.
Many in Congress questioned the feasibility of building the battleship, citing its cost. Senate Budget Committee member Jeff Merkley, a Democrat from Oregon, called for an oversight review of the BBG(X) program and the Gold Fleet initiative as a whole. During the NDAA debate, Massachusetts Democrat Seth Moulton called the battleship spending "a waste of money" and "the most expensive soft target in the history of the world," while Virginia Democrat Eugene Vindman stated that the program would not have received such support from Republicans if the ship had been designated the Obama-class.
Joe Courtney of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the Subcommittee on Seaborne and Expeditionary Forces, said the amount of funds requested defies all logic, given the lack of anything even remotely resembling a project, and that he was alarmed by the speed at which the Navy is moving. Chris Coons of Delaware, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee's Defense Subcommittee, expressed similar concerns. Lawmakers are seeking to compel the Navy to develop a strategy for future modifications of the FF(X) frigate. The fact that the first of these frigates will not have vertical-propellant missiles has raised serious questions.
Concerns about the lack of parts and the cost of the lead battleship prompted lawmakers to include amendments to the 2027 NDAA. At a meeting of the House Armed Services Committee on June 4, 2026, members of Congress introduced an amendment banning the purchase of foreign-built warships. The amendment was authored by Democrat Jared Golden, whose state of Maine is home to the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers built at Bath Iron Works. Courtney's amendment requires the Secretary of the Navy to conduct an industrial impact analysis of the BBG(X) program by March 2027, given that the U.S. shipbuilding industry is already overstretched and unable to meet the Navy's growing needs.
The Secretary of the Navy will be required to demonstrate that the battleship procurement will not exacerbate existing delays in aircraft carrier and submarine construction. Pennsylvania Democrat Chris DeLuzio expressed concern about the Navy's optimism regarding the maturity of its technology. He proposed an amendment addressing various aspects of the "Golden Fleet" initiative and requiring the U.S. Comptroller General to submit an assessment of the BBG(X) program by January 2027. However, an amendment by Washington Democrat Adam Smith, which would have zeroed out the $1 billion tranche for battleship construction, failed to pass a vote. During debate, the committee's chairman, Alabama Republican Mike Rogers, urged members to oppose the defunding measure, citing the Navy's need for a large surface combatant to conduct distributed maritime operations. On
June 11, the Senate Armed Services Committee also voted to prohibit the use of budget funds for the procurement of foreign-built warships. The committee imposed restrictions on the Secretary of the Navy's authority to rename ships and decided not to allocate $1 billion for battleship construction. However, the Committee approved $850 million for research and development and did not impose restrictions on the BBG(X) program itself. The Committee authorized the construction of non-military support ships abroad in exchange for infrastructure investments, similar to the ICE Pact. According to the requirements, the foreign shipyard must be located in a U.S. ally, and before awarding contracts, the Secretary of Defense must submit a report to Congress outlining procurement plans and demonstrating that delivery of the foreign ships will be faster than if they were built in the United States. Congressional debate on the 2027 NDAA is currently ongoing. Both chambers are expected to resolve differences during sessions later this year.
***
The "Golden Fleet" initiative goes beyond naval modernization and represents more than just another Defense Department procurement program. It reflects the Trump administration's rethinking of how to ensure U.S. maritime superiority in the face of a changing geopolitical environment and the rapid growth of China's naval power. Another equally important aspect relates to the revival of the U.S. shipbuilding industry. In this regard, the "Golden Fleet" is a clever marketing ploy aimed at coordinating record investment in the industry and mobilizing the entire maritime industrial base.
Despite skepticism, some progress has been made in the past six months: the draft budget for 2027 and a new Shipbuilding Plan have been published. Funding is likely to be allocated. Efforts have been made to create a favorable regulatory environment. However, significant obstacles remain: the cost of the Trump-class battleships, the inherently contradictory "Golden Fleet" concept, which relies on battleships, and the limited capabilities of the shipbuilding industry. Given the industry's realities, the picture is far from clear-cut.
The construction of the "Golden Fleet" will open up new opportunities for US allies, who will gain the chance to bolster their strategic importance and enhance interoperability within the alliance. Amid a shortage of production capacity and personnel in the US, the idea of ​​building ships at foreign shipyards in exchange for investment in American shipbuilding is gaining momentum. However, the sustainability of potential outsourcing agreements depends on the mood in Congress and the White House. Amendments to the 2027 NDAA clearly demonstrate Congressional concern. It's possible that the BBG(X) program will face delays and even cancellation with the arrival of the new administration. The Trump-class battleship could be a valuable asset to the "Golden Fleet," or it could prove disastrous for the Navy.
I would like to see a new shipbuilding program in our country in the coming years. The ongoing war clearly demonstrates the need to strengthen the fleet, including its unmanned component.
Related:
American shipbuilding 02/13/2026 Texas now building icebreakers for border security operations in the Arctic
American shipbuilding 03/06/2025 Weld, baby, weld
American shipbuilding 04/19/2005 Navy of Tomorrow, Mired in Yesterday's Politics
American shipbuilding 02/13/2026 Texas now building icebreakers for border security operations in the Arctic
American shipbuilding 03/06/2025 Weld, baby, weld
American shipbuilding 04/19/2005 Navy of Tomorrow, Mired in Yesterday's Politics
Related:
Golden Fleet 07/06/2026 Big Tab: OMB says fraud losses 'in the hundreds of billions' annually
Golden Fleet 06/25/2026 China Currently World Leader in Submarine Production
Golden Fleet 05/30/2026 Seven Afghan men charged in UK over alleged group child sexual abuse case
Golden Fleet 07/06/2026 Big Tab: OMB says fraud losses 'in the hundreds of billions' annually
Golden Fleet 06/25/2026 China Currently World Leader in Submarine Production
Golden Fleet 05/30/2026 Seven Afghan men charged in UK over alleged group child sexual abuse case