Pages

Friday, January 12, 2018

China Goes to Sea

Is China really building enough large carriers to intimidate neighbors but not to fight America? That seems odd to me.

Strategypage looks at Chinese carrier developments. They are getting larger and more capable. But why?

China is building carriers but does not yet seem committed to having a lot of them to confront the U.S. but rather just a few to intimidate its neighbors.

The large carrier has a great role in projecting power ashore as long as the enemy doesn't have anti-ship and recon assets to target the expensive ships with cheap precision missile volleys.

The problem is in using them for sea control because by definition in that case your enemy has enough ship-killng power to contest control of the seas.

It's an apples and oranges argument.

Is China really building carriers to intimidate smaller powers with a power projection mission?

In part that relies on keeping America away with all of our ship-killing power. How does a small number of carriers achieve that?

And doesn't China's planned carrier fleet, if small, just encourage potential targets to build up anti-access/area denial weapons and systems along the lines China has made to keep the U.S. Navy out of the western Pacific?

Or is China just building the carriers to keep up with the Joneses because big carriers are symbols of a superpower?

I thought the Chinese excelled at long-range thinking? Are carriers really a wise investment when network-centric warfare challenges their survivability in a sea control clash?

Especially when America will retain an advantage in carrier clashes because of superior proficiency from long experience and practice.

If China is challenging America's carrier fleet, making it seem as if China will only build a small carrier armada will give the Chinese the edge before America can react if it becomes apparent that China is seeking parity or superiority in this weapon system.

Strategypage does make a good point that China's commitment to a navy (apart from the question of carriers) will endure despite a history of not having a navy because now China needs a navy.

This is different from Russia which had a Soviet heritage of building a blue water navy to contest control of the North Atlantic to keep America and Canada from reinforcing NATO in war. Russia just doesn't need a major blue water navy now, especially given their insufficient land power to defend their land borders. So their blue water navy dwindles.