This is a surprise to me. Usually Skylar leans pretty hard towards the pentagon side of things, rather than the think tanks, when discussing the prospects of the US in a hypothetical war. So her endorsement of a maritime energy blockade is strange.
Honestly I don't understand what she could be thinking in saying that a maritime blockade would be feasible. This is the same woman who has been sounding the alarm on Chinese long range precision strike capabilities for years. Is there something new to the strategy that I haven't heard of? They could do it in the Indian ocean instead of Westpac, but that would require diverting substantial (and for the US, basically irreplaceable) surface combat power far away from the actual war, making a Chinese victory more likely, and even then they still wouldn't be fully safe from Chinese missiles.
The further a target is from China, the less likely it is to score a hit. You also don't necessarily need to "form a ring" around China to form a blockade. An energy blockade would involve gathering a coalition of partners to essentially embargo China's energy imports, rather than blocking China's energy imports through interdiction of trade vessels.
I do think a protracted war would be a problem energy wise, but that is simply because having a high intensity war going on would naturally disrupt cargo transit, rather than because of any deliberate blockade action by the US.
I would appreciate others' input if there is anything significant I am missing here, or if Skylar really has just gone off the think tank deep end.
I know this is an emotionally charged topic but please refrain from knee-jerk replies or quips, or unnecessary political commentary.
I think a lot of writers, pundits, policy advisors, and officials are still convinced that we can easily gather a global coalition to isolate China.
In my opinion, I think that many Washington analysts view the Ukrainian War as a success. That it is living, breathing proof that Washington can easily isolate a major power through its international influence.
Following that thinking, I can see why Skylar's analysis sees a long-term contest as favorable to Washington, with the only real threat being a US defeat in a physical confrontation (hence her fear of PLA's rocket arsenal).