Relocation of Nuclear Carrier Strike Group

In order for the United States Navy to rapidly respond to a crisis in North Korea or elsewhere in the Asia-Pacific region, it is considering moving the home port for a nuclear aircraft carrier strike group from the West Coast to either Hawaii or Guam. Already underway is a $1.8 million study to assess the feasibility of Pearl Harbor as a home port. At the same time, efforts are ongoing to consider Guam for the relocation. There are advantages and disadvantages to both locations, however, the decision may turn out to be primarily political.

Spearheading the contention of Hawaii as the best choice is Democratic Sen. Daniel Inouye, a powerful member of the Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. On the other side and with somewhat less political clout is Guam Delegate Madeleine Bordallo.

From a strategic perspective, Guam is clearly advantageous due to its proximity to the Asia-Pacific Rim. It also has Andersen Air Force Base and is preparing to base three nuclear attack submarines in Apra Harbor. However, there are concerns about whether Guam has pier space, maintenance facilities, housing, schools, stores and medical facilities sufficient to support a carrier strike group.

Alternatively, Hawaii has all necessary support services and facilities for the carrier and crew, but lacks Guam's capabilities in accommodating military flight and live-fire training.

My take is that the prudent choice has to be Guam due to its strategic location. It would require a long-term presence and the commitment should be made to protect American interests in East Asia.