Secretary of Navy Ousted, Naval Affairs Inscrutable

Trump's Palm Beach finance and donor buddy, John Phelan, was a champion of the "Golden Fleet," but apparently clashed with Hegseth over bizarre blockade of Hormuz

Naval affairs have always been a key element of great power politics and are in many respects a microcosm of global affairs during every era in history. The writer Patrick O’Brian’s understood this, and in his celebrated Aubrey & Maturin series, he recreated the world of British and European politics, warfare, trade, art, manners, music through the vehicle of the Royal Navy during the Napoleonic Wars (1803-1815).

For about five years I was so engrossed in this series of books that as soon as I finished reading the last, I started over again with the first (Master and Commander). I believe my favorite remains the third in the series, HMS Surprise.

An ongoing theme of all the novels is Captain Jack Aubrey’s difficulty in understanding the British political, commercial, and legal establishment, including some of the politicians on the Admiralty Board. His own father—a vain, greedy, and selfish man—is a mystery to Jack.

Jack’s best friend, Dr. Stephen Maturin, is far more worldly and sophisticated in every respect except in the matter of romance, in which he is a complete failure. He sees clearly that most of the men on shore who run British affairs are self-serving and avid for personal gain.

I was reminded of many funny and grotesque scenes in the novels pertaining to politics when I saw the news yesterday that Trump’s Secretary of the Navy, John Phelan abruptly departed, effective immediately, with little explanation offered by the Trump administration.

The office of the Secretary of the Navy (SECNAV) is one of the oldest civilian leadership positions in the U.S. government. Established by Congress in 1798 with the creation of the Department of the Navy, it was originally a Cabinet-level post reporting directly to the president. Following the National Security Act of 1947 and subsequent reforms, the secretary became a subordinate to the Secretary of Defense while remaining the chief executive officer of the Department of the Navy (DoN), which encompasses the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Marine Corps.

A web search for Trump’s Secretary of the Navy yielded the following:

John Cartwright Phelan served as the 79th Secretary of the Navy from March 25, 2025, until his abrupt departure on April 22, 2026—effective immediately—making him the first service secretary to leave during President Donald Trump’s second term. A civilian with no prior military experience, Phelan was a wealthy businessman, investor, and major Trump political donor whose appointment reflected the administration’s preference for outsider leadership drawn from the private sector. …

He began his career as a financial analyst at Goldman Sachs, later becoming a principal at ESL Partners, where he helped grow assets dramatically. He co-founded MSD Capital, L.P., the private investment firm for Michael Dell, serving as co-managing partner and helping generate over $20 billion in profits while growing assets under management to more than $30 billion. In 2010, he founded Rugger Management, LLC, a Palm Beach-based private investment firm, where he served as chairman.

No official reason was provided, but multiple sources cited longstanding tensions with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth over Phelan’s handling of shipbuilding reforms and his championing of costly new battleship programs—sometimes called Trump’s “Golden Fleet”—which he had advanced in part to align with the president’s priorities. Phelan’s unusually close personal access to Trump, including late-night texts and frequent Mar-a-Lago visits, reportedly exacerbated friction within the Defense Department leadership.

John Phelan was a supporter of Trump’s “Golden Fleet” vision.

It appears that Phelan may have clashed with Pete Hegseth over Trump’s inscrutable “blockade” of the Strait of Hormuz, which strikes me as one of the oddest pieces of theatrical improvising in the history of naval warfare.

Throughout history, naval blockades were used to deprive a warring power of critical supplies for maintaining its civilian and military economy. Notable blockades in history were the British blockade of Germany in World War I and the US blockade of Japan during World War II. The latter was probably the most effective in history and would have likely resulted in Japan’s capitulation in 1945 without the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

President Trump’s Strait of Hormuz blockade strategy is purportedly to starve the Iranian regime of oil revenue. This contradicts the Treasury Department’s earlier lifting of sanctions on Iranian’s oil already at sea, the rationale of which was to ease supply constraints on oil reaching Asian and European markets.

Though it seems that most Americans aren’t particularly interested in the plight of Asians and Europeans, they should nevertheless consider that both continents are now facing an energy crisis that is causing considerable suffering.

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), Europe faces a potential jet fuel crisis within approximately six weeks (as of mid-April 2026) due to the blockade, which has disrupted about 75% of its usual supplies.

The shortage threatens significant summer flight cancellations and increased costs as demand rises. Jet fuel prices in Europe have already surged, with some benchmarks rising over 100%—doubling since the start of the conflict in Iran. Prices reached over $200 per barrel in April 2026, causing significant operational challenges. As a result, carriers like Lufthansa are cutting thousands of flights and analysts warn of higher, more volatile ticket costs. Thus, the oil futures market alone does not paint an accurate picture of what is already happening in Europe and Asia airports and gas stations.

Many economic forecasters such as the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, Bob McNally, Ken Griffin are already predicting a global recession if the Strait remains closed for much longer.

The Iranian strategy for closing the Strait of Hormuz is to apply economic leverage on US and its trading partners. By blockading the Strait, President Trump is, somewhat paradoxically, reinforcing the Iranian strategy.

Though it’s not clear what exactly he’s thinking, one possibility is that he thinks that the impairment of the European and Asian economies will not affect the US economy, but this is highly unlikely.

Another aspect of naval blockading is that it is very hard on the sailors manning the ships. Blockades are characterized by dull routines and fatigue. Constant watches, potential boardings, and threat monitoring in confined waters are exhausting.

Recent reports from ships like USS Abraham Lincoln and USS Tripoli highlight food shortages/rationing (meager portions, no fresh produce, bad food), broken equipment such as coffee machines, and delayed supplies after weeks at sea. Families report sailors feeling “hungry all the time” and warning of morale hitting “all-time low.”

Navy-wide challenges with extended deployments include mental health strain, overwork, and leadership issues. The Navy has deployed psychologists, chaplains, and recreation programs to counter these problems, but one wonders how much they can do to relieve the stress, boredom, and low morale.

I wonder what Jack Aubrey and Stephan Maturin would think about Trump’s naval blockade. Dr. Maturin would doubtless regard it as an example of how ruling elites have always abused the ordinary, working men who are called upon to fight rich men’s wars.