Home >> East Asia >> China, Hong Kong & Taiwan

     Email   Print 

China's Shipbuilding Industry: An Emerging Threat to U.S. National Security?

Frederick Stakelbeck, Jr. - 2/17/2005

China is experiencing the greatest national expansion of its shipbuilding industry in the country's maritime history, with growth expected to continue well into the next decade. China's shipbuilding industry currently ranks third overall in the world behind perennial leaders South Korea and Japan, with the goal of becoming the world's leading shipbuilder by 2015. But what does this mean for the U.S.?

This dramatic increase in Chinese shipbuilding activity has raised concern among top U.S. Navy officials, Western military strategists and senior members of Congress. Their concern lies not with the existence of the Chinese maritime industry, rather, with the possible surreptitious conversion of this industry for purposes of military marine transportation and naval surface ship engagement. Many experts have argued that the new Chinese ships could be used to carry not only peacetime goods such as automobiles, electronics and textiles, but alternatively, soldiers, tanks, artillery pieces, and attack helicopters.

In a November article, William R. Hawkins of the U.S. Business and Industry Council noted that a disquieting, technological intermingling had already occurred in the Chinese aviation industry. While in China to attend the 5th Aviation and Aerospace Exhibition in Zhuhai, Hawkins observed that, "It was clear from the displays that there is no segregation of civilian from military aviation activities. The Chinese principle of Jun-min jiehe, or combine the military with the civil, was evident." Most disturbing to Hawkins was the presence of American and Western firms at the exhibition peddling sophisticated technology that could be used by China against U.S. military assets in the Pacific.

China has previously displayed a willingness to purchase tactical maritime assets and systems that it was unable to manufacture domestically on the open-market. An example of this strategy is the country's purchase of Sovremenny-class destroyers from their chief arms supplier - Russia. With a maximum displacement of 8,480 tons, they are similar to the U.S. Navy's Aegis-equipped missile cruisers. These advanced destroyers give China a sea-borne capability to strike U.S. carriers from a distance of 250 km away, using SS-N-22 radar evading, anti-ship Sunburn missiles. The Sovremenny-class destroyers are much more dangerous than anything China has been able to produce domestically. With its superior armament, propulsion system, comprehensive electronic warfare systems and radar, the Sovremenny-class destroyer is head-and-shoulders above the Chinese-made Luhai-class destroyer.

Should China become paradoxical in its public policy approach of peaceful coexistence with its neighbors, Western experts fear the country could initiate or accelerate "reverse engineering" processes to reproduce ships with Sovremenny-type offensive capabilities using newly constructed and renovated shipyards.

Coinciding with the growth of the Chinese shipbuilding industry has been a precipitous decrease in the number of available U.S. Navy surface ships. The number of U.S. Navy ships has declined from a total of 594 in 1987 to 289 in 2004 -- the smallest U.S. Navy since 1917. The 2001 Quadrennial Defense Review, which is scheduled to be conducted again in 2005, recommended a Navy of 310 ships. Conversely, others close to the debate, such as ADM. Vern Clark, Chief of Naval Operations, have suggested that an increase to 375 ships is necessary to meet present and emerging threats. This discrepancy highlights the ongoing debate within the U.S. Navy concerning the appropriate size of the U.S. Naval fleet.

Proposed budget cuts of $60 billion over a period of six years were announced by the Pentagon in late December. The cuts call for a reduction in the construction programs for the new LPD-17 Amphibious Attack Ship, the DD(X) Multi-Mission Surface Combatant Ship, and the retirement of one of the Navy's oldest aircraft carriers, the USS John F. Kennedy. The retirement of the JFK is especially perplexing, since the 30-year-old carrier recently received a $300 million updating of all of its systems and was scheduled to begin a 14-month overhaul at the Norfolk Navel Shipyard starting in June 2005.

The proposed cuts have heightened uncertainty surrounding the U.S. Navy's future configuration, mission and abilities. The retirement of the carrier JFK next year ahead of its originally scheduled 2018 decommissioning date, will reduce the Navy's carrier fleet for the first time since the mid-1990's. There has been talk in Washington of reducing the carrier fleet even further from the current total of 12 to 9 in the next decade. At $11.7 billion, discussions concerning the construction of a new generation of carrier are now in doubt, due to severe budget constraints. U.S. Sen. John W. Warner, (R-Virginia), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said recently, "I feel the Navy has to bear a part of the cuts. But carriers have been instrumental. I'm not going to desert my strong philosophy that sea power is essential to the war on terrorism."

As the debate regarding the production of ships rages, the U.S. Naval fleet continues to age. Based on a 30-year lifespan, an average of 10 ships a year should be built to maintain a surface fleet of 314 ships. The Navy's current build rate is only half this number, which means the average age of a Navy ship will gradually increase. As such, maintenance and repair costs associated with an older fleet will also increase exponentially, placing a financial burden upon the U.S. Navy.

U.S. Senator Trent Lott (R-Mississippi) commenting in September on the proposed reduction in construction from nine Navy ships surface ships to four in 2006, stated, "We're not meeting our needs and we have a tremendous bow wave ahead of us where ships are being retired twice as fast as we can replace them." U.S. Senator Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) concurred, saying, "As our nation continues to fight the global war on terror, now is clearly not the time to be under-funding our critical military infrastructure by diminishing the Navy's fleet size."

Whatever the final number of ships, both the U.S. Navy and Congress recognize that the U.S. has global forward-presence responsibilities that must be met without hesitation. Added to these responsibilities will be the ability for the U.S. to monitor a Chinese shipbuilding industry that is diversifying, expanding, and modernizing.

Commercial shipbuilding is a strategic industry capable of conversion for the purposes of war. China has embarked on a determined mission to surpass both Japan and South Korea as the world's leading shipbuilder. The Chinese can now offer state-of-the-art shipbuilding, repair and conversion services as a result of increased domestic and foreign investment in maritime modernization projects. With improved shipbuilding production methods, modern capital equipment for its shipyards and significant progress in the areas of ship design, speed, and on/offloading capabilities, China's shipbuilding industry deserves the attention of the U.S. and its Pacific allies as a possible national security threat.