The United States is sending its most advanced aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald R. Ford, to the Middle East in a major show of force aimed at increasing pressure on Iran. The move comes as President Donald Trump accelerates a sweeping military buildup across the region, signaling that Washington is prepared to escalate if diplomatic efforts with Tehran fail.
The Ford Carrier Strike Group (CSG) will become the second American carrier formation operating in or near the Persian Gulf. The USS Abraham Lincoln is already deployed in the Gulf, accompanied by nine other US warships, including five Arleigh Burke-class destroyer vessels. In addition, an unspecified number of US submarines are believed to be operating in regional waters, while nearly 30,000 American troops are stationed across 18 military bases in the Middle East.
The crew of the USS Gerald R. Ford was informed on February 12 that their deployment would be extended and redirected toward the Middle East. The carrier is expected to arrive in the Persian Gulf by the end of the month.
When asked on February 13 about the rationale for deploying a second carrier strike group, President Trump made clear the strategic logic.
“We’ll need it if we don’t make a deal,” Trump told reporters, referring to ongoing tensions and indirect negotiations with Iran.
The statement underscores Washington’s dual-track approach: diplomacy backed by overwhelming military power. By deploying two carrier strike groups simultaneously, the United States is dramatically increasing its ability to conduct sustained air operations, launch precision strikes, and project force across the Gulf, the Arabian Sea, and beyond.
In many ways, the selection of the USS Gerald R. Ford was predictable. Commissioned in 2017, it is the lead ship of the Ford-class and represents the most technologically advanced aircraft carrier ever built by the US Navy. Displacing roughly 100,000 tons, the Ford is equipped with cutting-edge systems designed to increase sortie generation rates and reduce crew workload.
Most notably, it is the only US carrier equipped with the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS), replacing the traditional steam catapults used on earlier Nimitz-class carriers. EMALS allows for smoother launches, reduced stress on aircraft, and potentially higher sortie rates during combat operations.
Adm. Daryl Caudle, Chief of Naval Operations (CNO), recently described the Ford as an “invaluable option” for any military contingency the president might consider. Speaking at the Surface Navy Association’s annual symposium last month, he emphasized the ship’s unmatched capabilities.
However, Caudle also signaled caution, warning that extending the ship’s deployment would draw resistance from Navy leadership. “If it requires an extension, it’s going to get some pushback from the CNO,” he said, indicating concern about crew fatigue and maintenance requirements.
The deployment to the Middle East marks the second extension for the USS Gerald R. Ford. The carrier has been underway since June of last year, when it departed its homeport in Norfolk, Virginia, for a Mediterranean cruise.
In October, President Trump redirected the Ford to the Caribbean as part of a military buildup near Venezuela. During that mission, the carrier participated in Operation Absolute Resolve alongside the USS Iwo Jima. The operation culminated in January with the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.
The Ford’s original deployment was scheduled to conclude by the last week of December. The Caribbean diversion extended that timeline, and sailors were initially told they could expect to return home by early March. Now, with the Middle East redeployment, the crew may not see home until early April at the earliest — and potentially much later if operations against Iran become prolonged.
Although nine-month deployments were common during the post-9/11 wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, peacetime cruises generally last no more than six months. The repeated extensions have placed significant strain on the ship’s nearly 4,500 sailors and aviators.
The operational tempo is also creating logistical and financial challenges. The USS Gerald R. Ford was scheduled for a major dry-docking period at the Newport News Naval Shipyard in Virginia earlier this year. The maintenance period was intended to incorporate critical upgrades and address issues identified during years of post-commissioning testing.
Among the planned modifications are updates to the advanced arresting gear system used to land aircraft on the flight deck. According to service officials cited in December, these changes have been in planning for nearly eight years. They can only be completed in an industrial repair facility.
The next two Ford-class carriers — the USS John F. Kennedy and the USS Enterprise — are being built with many of these corrections integrated from the outset.
Delaying Ford’s maintenance could lengthen the eventual shipyard period to four to six months, according to Vice Adm. Mike Franken, who retired in 2017 after nearly four decades in the Navy. Prolonged deployment without scheduled repairs, he warned, risks escalating costs and reducing operational reliability.
“You plan better for this,” Franken said, suggesting that repeated extensions could reflect reactive decision-making rather than deliberate force management.
Extended deployments also raise safety concerns. The flight deck of an aircraft carrier is among the most dangerous workplaces in the world. After six months at sea, the nonskid surface coating begins to degrade, requiring resurfacing to prevent aircraft from sliding.
Senator Mark Kelly, a retired naval aviator, has warned that continuous deployments create mounting stress for both personnel and equipment.
“It kind of wears on you,” Kelly said in a recent interview. “And you start to see accidents start to happen — not just pilots crashing planes, necessarily, but accidents on the flight deck.”
Fatigue increases the likelihood of mishaps, from personnel straying too close to jet intakes to mechanical failures in critical systems such as aircraft elevators. If key systems fail during combat operations, the consequences could be severe.
Recent history offers a cautionary example. The USS Harry S. Truman Carrier Strike Group experienced a series of incidents during its deployment to the Middle East from September 2024 through May 2025 while conducting operations against Yemen-based Houthi forces.
Over that period, the strike group suffered a friendly-fire incident in December, when a Navy destroyer mistakenly launched missiles at two F/A-18 fighters. In February, the carrier collided with a merchant vessel. Two additional F/A-18s were lost in separate incidents in April and May.
A subsequent Navy investigation cited the “significantly stressful deployment” as a contributing factor to the mishaps.
Iran presents a far more formidable adversary than the Houthis. Tehran possesses advanced ballistic missiles, anti-ship cruise missiles, armed drones, and a network of regional proxy forces. The stakes of any confrontation would be considerably higher.
By deploying two carrier strike groups, Washington is sending a clear message: it is prepared to escalate rapidly if negotiations collapse or if Iran undertakes aggressive actions in the Gulf.
Carrier strike groups provide flexible options ranging from deterrent patrols and air defense to large-scale strike campaigns. Each carrier can launch dozens of sorties per day, enabling sustained operations against fixed and mobile targets.
The presence of submarines adds another layer of deterrence, given their ability to launch Tomahawk cruise missiles and conduct covert surveillance.
At the same time, the buildup risks provoking countermeasures from Tehran. Iran has historically responded to US pressure with asymmetric tactics, including harassment of shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and drone or missile attacks by proxy groups.
The USS Gerald R. Ford represents the pinnacle of American naval engineering, but its technological sophistication also demands careful maintenance and crew readiness. The tension between strategic urgency and operational sustainability now defines the debate within defense circles.
Adm. Caudle’s earlier warning that he would “push back” against further extensions suggests unease at the highest levels of Navy leadership. Yet the president’s decision to proceed reflects a calculation that the immediate strategic benefits outweigh the long-term risks.
For the 4,500 sailors aboard the Ford, the deployment underscores the unpredictable nature of modern naval service. For policymakers in Washington and Tehran, it marks a critical juncture in a standoff that could shape the security architecture of the Middle East for years to come.
As the Ford steams toward the Persian Gulf, the world will be watching closely — not only for signs of diplomatic progress, but also for indications of whether the strain of extended deployments could undermine the very power projection the United States seeks to demonstrate.
