Ship Named for Reagan Dedicated

President Bush and former First Lady Nancy Reagan presided Sunday over the christening of the aircraft carrier Ronald Reagan, even though the Bush administration is studying whether the huge ships represent yesterday’s answer to tomorrow’s military threats.

The $4-billion ship, the latest in a growing list of monuments to the ailing 40th president, is still two years away from becoming the nation’s ninth nuclear-powered carrier. When it enters active service in 2003, it will be the first addition since the Harry S. Truman was commissioned here in 1996.

But already, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has commissioned a study of how to restructure the nation’s military forces in a world in which small nations can launch missiles carrying chemical and biological weapons and terrorists can transport nuclear weapons in suitcases. The carriers’ role will be a central part of that study.

The christening ceremony took place in a steady rain on the Reagans’ 49th wedding anniversary. Champagne appeared to spray both Bush and Nancy Reagan as she smashed a bottle against a steel bar at the ship’s bow. The 90-year-old former president, who is battling Alzheimer’s disease and recovering from a broken hip suffered in January, was not present.

In a speech at the christening, Bush said the new carrier “will revolutionize the Navy’s ability to project American power over land and at sea.” He pointed out that he ordered the Harry S. Truman, which was in the Persian Gulf last month, to participate in an attack on Iraq.

At the same time, Bush said the threats the nation faces have changed in the 20 years since Reagan was inaugurated president.

“Our present dangers are less concentrated and more varied,” the president said. “They come from rogue nations, from terrorists, from missiles. Our times call for new thinking, but the values Ronald Reagan brought America . . . and to the world will not change.”

Twenty years ago, when Reagan set out to build a 600-ship Navy, aircraft carriers were central to the Pentagon’s strategy. They would take on the Soviet fleet, support antisubmarine warfare and serve as platforms for launching aircraft to intercept Soviet warplanes and attack enemy positions.

But putting a carrier to sea involves far more than one ship and its approximately 100 airplanes. An aircraft carrier battle group may operate with as many as four cruisers, five destroyers, other support ships and, perhaps, a submarine--all with the mission of protecting it, fueling it and feeding its crew.

It’s a very expensive floating airfield, operating close to enemy territory. But now, some say, destroyers and submarines can deliver weapons more cheaply and less dangerously than the planes on carriers.

Bush’s Defense Department is reviewing a range of high-cost weapon systems, not just the carriers but also the V-22 Osprey designed to replace Vietnam-era helicopters, a joint strike fighter, a new fleet of destroyers and the F-22 Raptor ground-attack fighter designed to replace the F-15 Strike Eagle.

Thomas A. Keaney, a former professor of military strategy at the National War College, said it was growing difficult to justify carriers’ huge costs now that the Cold War is over.

“In an age of precise weapons,” said Keaney, now affiliated with the School for Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University, “it’s much more difficult to assume a carrier can’t be hit.”

Besides, he said, many of the weapons carried by its aircraft can be launched from destroyers or submarines, at lower cost and without risk to pilots.

The Bush administration is taking a broad look at which weapon systems it should emphasize in coming years. The study is directed by Andrew Marshall, head of the Pentagon’s office of net assessment, who for 50 years has worked behind the scenes on military studies. Marshall has grown increasingly skeptical of the role that carriers might play in 21st century warfare.

The Ronald Reagan, the first carrier named for a living president, is the latest in a string of monuments and other facilities being named or renamed for the former president. Also, there is talk of building a monument to Reagan on the National Mall, somewhere between the Capitol and the Lincoln Memorial.

Nancy Reagan, speaking at the christening ceremony, said: “I want to thank the Navy for giving us such a wonderful [anniversary] present. Such a little thing. Very impressive. . . . I wish Ronnie were here, but somehow I think he is.”