‘Honey badger' admiral emerges as top contender for Navy chief
The likely selection of Caudle, a four-star admiral who heads the command that trains and equips the Navy's sailors, comes just two months after President Donald Trump fired Adm. Lisa Franchetti, the first female in that role. He terminated her in an abrupt purge of top military leaders, including Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair Gen. C.Q. Brown.
A three-decade Navy officer who has commanded submarine fleets, Caudle could prove a fairly safe choice. Unlike Navy Secretary John Phelan, he has significant Pentagon experience. Democrats, who are angry about Franchetti's sudden dismissal, may find it harder to oppose a well-regarded career officer.
'He's a no-nonsense guy, you can't bullshit him,' said one former Navy colleague, who like others was granted anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. 'He goes and finds problems, he turns over the rock, and whatever's underneath it, he chews it up, spits it out and comes back.'
Caudle, if selected, would inherit a fleet that has struggled with embarrassing and costly shipbuilding delays and which is now 14 times smaller than China's. He would join as Phelan is examining what to cut in the service's contracts and as Elon Musk's so-called Department of Government Efficiency investigates the Navy's shipbuilding efforts.
The admiral traveled with Phelan in late March off the southeastern coast and to the Connecticut shipyard where the Virginia-class submarine is built. He also has spent the past two weeks visiting senators, two people familiar with the conversations said.
He would replace acting Navy chief of staff Adm. James Kilby, who has been on the job since Franchetti was dismissed.
U.S. Fleet Forces Command declined to comment. The Pentagon did not respond to requests for comment.
POLITICO previously reported that a number of top military officials were in the running for the post. This included Indo-Pacific Command chief Adm. Samuel Paparo and his predecessor, retired Adm. John Aquilino; Vice Adm. Brad Skillman, who runs the Navy's Office of Operations for Integration of Capabilities and Resources; and retired Rear Adm. Keith Davids, who served as the director of the White House military office during the first Trump administration.
Paparo, who was a leading contender for Navy chief during the Biden administration, took himself out of consideration, according to a person close to the White House. He and Caudle interviewed for the Navy's top military post in July 2023 but lost out to Franchetti.
U.S. Indo-Pacific Command did not respond to a request for comment.
Caudle has been unusually blunt in calling out failures in the defense industrial base. 'I am not forgiving of the fact they're not delivering the ordnance we need,' Caudle said in 2023 when defense contractors were slow to restock the Navy's depleted weapons arsenal. He has also criticized the service's lack of public shipyards to maintain warships and said the Navy should be 'embarrassed' that it can't develop lasers to provide air defense aboard ships.
He joined the Navy more than three decades ago and commanded nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines before taking over the service's submarine fleet in the Atlantic and serving as a vice director on the Joint Staff. He earned the call sign 'honey badger' due to his tenacity and ability to solve hard problems, the former Navy colleague said. He has led the U.S. Fleet Forces Command since 2021.
Caudle has taken on an even more public profile in recent months, praising the Navy's efforts to patrol U.S. territorial waters after the Trump administration ordered more military assets to the southern border.
He appeared in a Navy video in March that touted the deployment of guided missile destroyers to waters off the U.S. coast for the border mission. The longtime admiral referred to the location as the Gulf of America, which Trump renamed from the Gulf of Mexico in an executive order.
'Our Navy is answering the call to safeguard America's southern border,' Caudle said after the USS Gravely left Norfolk, Virginia, in a campaign-style video that featured soaring music and stock footage of U.S. warships.
'He's really astute and he's aware of all of those problems,' the former Navy colleague said. 'He's spread his talent across the entire fleet."
Caudle has had to deal with everything from the high rate of suicide aboard the aircraft carrier USS George Washington to the condition of barracks, barges and parking at the old shipyard.
'The solutions are out there, we've just got to have open and honest conversations about the problems,' Caudle said at the Sea Air Space conference this month. We need to 'find ways to unite our collective energies behind solving those problems without a Pearl Harbor or a 9/11 event being required to motivate us.'
Paul McLeary and Connor O'Brien contributed to this report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
25 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump's 50-day Ukraine ultimatum is doomed to fail
President Trump campaigned on a promise to end the Ukraine war within 2 4 hours of returning to the White House. Now back in the White House, he finds himself hemmed in by the realities of great-power politics. Trump's self-confidence has collided with the entrenched dynamics of a grinding conflict. Frustrated, he has turned to familiar tools of coercion: threats, pressure tactics and a new flow of advanced weapons to Kyiv. Trump's latest initiative gives Moscow a 50-day deadline to end its war in Ukraine. He has threatened secondary sanctions on Russia's key trading partners and opened a fresh weapons pipeline to Kyiv, hoping this twin-pronged approach will force Russian President Vladimir Putin's hand. But like Trump's earlier attempts to employ brute pressure as a substitute for diplomacy, this initiative reflects impatience more than strategic clarity. Trump once believed that his personal rapport with Putin, coupled with a dealmaker's instinct, could bring about a ceasefire. But six months into his new term, his peace push lies in tatters. Russia continues to press its territorial ambitions, while Ukraine, bolstered by Western military support, shows little interest in making major concessions. Instead of a breakthrough, Trump faces a deepening quagmire. The irony is unmistakable — the president who pledged to end America's entanglements in ' forever wars ' is now escalating U.S. involvement in one that is deflecting American attention away from more-pressing strategic challenges, including from China, which is seeking to supplant the U.S. as the world's foremost power. Trump's new Ukraine strategy bears an eerie resemblance to his Iran policy, when he tried to bomb Tehran into submission, only to end up entrenching animosities further and weakening U.S. leverage. There is no doubt that ending the war in Ukraine is in America's strategic interest. The conflict has absorbed vast U.S. resources, diverted diplomatic bandwidth and strained transatlantic cohesion. More importantly, the war has delayed Washington's ability to focus on the key Indo-Pacific region — the world's emerging economic and geopolitical nerve center. The pivot to the Indo-Pacific is not merely aspirational. A leaked memorandum titled 'Interim National Defense Strategic Guidance,' signed by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, identifies China as the Pentagon's 'sole pacing threat.' The Trump administration is seeking to reorient the U.S. military posture to prepare for a potential showdown in Asia over Chinese aggression against democratic Taiwan. The war in Ukraine, by draining American attention, resources and capabilities, undermines this rebalancing. Seen from this angle, Trump is right to seek an end to the conflict. But his approach — escalating arms transfers while threatening punitive sanctions on countries that do business with Russia — is unlikely to yield peace. If anything, it risks prolonging the war by reinforcing the belief in Kyiv that Washington remains committed to a military solution. In fact, Trump's threat to impose harsh penalties on Russia's trading partners lacks credibility. Such sanctions would trigger a U.S. showdown with China, which trades nearly $250 billion annually with Russia, including major oil and gas imports. Sanctioning India could upend America's Indo-Pacific strategy aimed at maintaining a stable balance of power. History offers little support for the notion that coercion alone can deliver durable peace. Military pressure may bring parties to the table, but diplomacy is what cements outcomes. The Dayton Accords, which ended the Bosnian war, and the Camp David Accords, which brought peace between Egypt and Israel, were both products of tough negotiations rather than deadlines and threats. Trump's maximalist tactics risk backfiring on multiple fronts. Sanctioning Russia's trading partners could alienate crucial 'swing' nations in the global contest with China. These states are already wary of U.S. unilateralism, and some of them could be pushed into Beijing's orbit. Moreover, punitive economic measures often fail to change state behavior, especially when national security interests are at stake, as is the case for Russia in Ukraine. Meanwhile, a flood of advanced new U.S. weapons to Ukraine may boost short-term battlefield performance but will do little to bridge the wider diplomatic impasse. Putin, faced with increased Western backing for Kyiv, is unlikely to scale back his goals. Instead, he may double down, calculating that time and attrition are on his side. The real path to peace in Ukraine lies not in deadlines or ultimatums, but in a forward-looking diplomatic initiative that recognizes the legitimate interests of all parties while seeking to uphold Ukraine's sovereignty. The Biden administration made limited overtures in this direction, but Trump, who claims to be a great dealmaker, has an opportunity to go further. Instead of trying to impose peace through pressure alone, he must find ways to bring both sides to the table — with credible inducements and face-saving compromises. This will require working with international partners — not just NATO allies, but also influential neutral states like India and the United Arab Emirates that can serve as mediators. It will also require a nuanced understanding of Russia's domestic political constraints and Ukraine's security concerns. None of this is easy, but it is more likely to succeed than a strategy built on coercion and deadlines. Despite promising to end the war quickly, Trump now finds himself caught in the same bind as his predecessor. His failure to secure a ceasefire has deepened America's involvement in the war — the very entanglement he vowed to end. Unless he pivots toward a more diplomatic course, his 50-day ultimatum to Moscow will go the way of his 24-hour pledge: unmet and quietly shelved. Deadlines don't make peace. Diplomacy does.
The Hill
25 minutes ago
- The Hill
House GOP campaign arm launches ad campaign tying NY, NJ Democrats to Mamdani
The National Republican Congressional Campaign is tying lawmakers in New York and New Jersey facing competitive reelection bids to Democratic New York City mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani in a new paid digital advertising campaign unveiled Friday. The campaign targets New York Reps. Laura Gillen (D), Tom Suozzi (D) and Josh Riley (D), along with New Jersey Rep. Nellie Pou (D). The 30-second spots feature a picture of Mamdani and the lawmakers with the caption: 'Together we can raise taxes, defund the police, and build a socialist New York.' The NRCC did not specify the amount of money behind the effort, but described the buy as 'modest.' 'If Democrats had their way, Mamdani's pro-criminal, open-borders, anti-law enforcement, and antisemitic agenda would be the law of the land,' said the committee's spokeswoman Maureen O'Toole. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) hit back in their own statement on Friday. 'Laura Gillen, Tom Suozzi, and Josh Riley are laser focused on delivering real solutions for their constituents, and voters in their districts aren't buying these baseless and desperate attacks,' said DCCC spokesperson Riya Vashi. 'It's clear Republicans would rather talk about who the Mayor of New York City may be than answer for their own toxic agenda because they know that slashing health care and raising costs on working families to give tax breaks to billionaires isn't exactly a winning message.' The effort comes as Mamdani is set to meet with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) on Friday in Brooklyn. Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) have not yet endorsed Mamdani. The Democratic nominee was in Washington on Wednesday for a closed-door breakfast hosted by progressive Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.). A number of House Democrats in attendance praised Mamdani following the event including Reps. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) and Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.). This is not the first time House Republicans have sought to tie their Democratic counterparts to New York City politics. Last year, Republicans worked to tie Democrats to corruption allegations against Mayor Eric Adams, who is running for reelection as an Independent. Democrats note they flipped three New York seats and reelected Ryan in the face of those attacks last year.
The Hill
25 minutes ago
- The Hill
Most think GOP tax bill will help wealthy, harm the poor: Survey
Most Americans think that President Trump's 'big, beautiful bill,' which he signed into law earlier this month, will help those who are wealthy and harm those who are poor, according to a new survey that was released Friday morning. The new Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that 64 percent of U.S. adults said the Republican-led tax and spending bill, which Trump signed into law on July 4, will do 'more to help' wealthy people. On the flip side, 7 percent said it would do more to hurt them, while 27 percent said it would not make a difference. Just over a quarter, 26 percent, said the bill would benefit middle-class people. Just over half, 51 percent, said it would hurt them, while 22 percent said it would not make a difference, according to the survey. Similarly, 24 percent of respondents argued the legislation would do more to help 'people like you,' while 51 percent argued it would do more to hurt them, according to the poll. Some 23 percent stated the bill would not make a difference. Just 1-in-5 said the tax and spending law would do more to help low-income people. The majority, 61 percent, said the legislation would do more to hurt those people, while 17 percent argued it would not make a difference, the survey showed. Democratic Party voters are more likely to say the legislation would assist the wealthy and hurt the middle-class and the poor, compared to Republicans. GOP voters are more likely to state the 'big, beautiful bill' will aid rather than harm the middle-class, according to the poll. When it comes to the impact on low-income Americans, the sides are divided. Around four-in-10 Republicans think the bill would do more to help low-income people, while just three percent of Democrats said the same. Some 17 percent of independents argued the legislation would do more to help those who are low-income. Trump's massive spending bill would bring new tax breaks for older adults and overtime workers. The legislation includes funding to help hire border patrol agents and officers. The package also reduces green energy tax credits and cuts Medicaid and food assistance programs. A CNN poll released Wednesday found that 61 percent of Americans oppose the GOP's massive package. Only 11 percent said they 'strongly support' the bill, along with 27 percent who said they 'somewhat support' it. A Harvard CAPS/Harris poll, which was published on Monday, found that Americans were split, with 44 percent saying they supported the 'big, beautiful bill.' Another 44 percent said they did not support it. Some 12 percent were unsure. The poll was conducted from July 10-14 among 1,437 adults. It had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.6 percentage points.
