05:34 GMT +325 June 2019
Listen Live
    In this April 26, 2012 file photo released by China's Xinhua News Agency, Chinese navy's missile destroyer DDG-112 Harbin fires a shell during the China-Russia joint naval exercise in the Yellow Sea

    Beijing’s ‘Sphere of Influence’ to Expand if US Navy Fails to Grow

    © AP Photo / Xinhua, Wu Dengfeng, File
    Military & Intelligence
    Get short URL
    7126

    If the US Navy’s 275-ship fleet does not reach the Pentagon’s goal of 355 vessels, Washington is "more or less incentivizing the [Chinese Navy] into thinking they could achieve a sphere of influence," Senator Roger Wicker of Mississippi said Tuesday.

    US President Donald Trump vowed on the campaign trail to grow the US fleet to 350 ships—a target in line with the Congressional Research Service’s 2016 conclusion that 355 ships are required to meet national security strategy goals.

    But financing fleet growth and doing so in a timely manner constitute major obstacles to achieving that aim. At current construction rates, the Navy will not possess a 350-ship force until at least 2035, the Congressional Budget Office’s Eric Labs told the US Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Seapower on Tuesday.

    Naval expert Jerry Hendrix from the Center for a New American Security League stressed to the Senate panel that major investments in the US shipbuilding industry would be essential for sending a message to other global powers not to mess with the US at sea.

    Failure to do so encourages fellow world powers to tell other countries the US Navy cannot be relied on to ensure their maritime safety, according to the delegation of seapower specialists.  

    Washington’s "adversaries look at our budget process and exploit it," the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments’ Bryan Clark told lawmakers.

    Deterring potentially hostile navies from their own fleet proliferation plans requires "a larger fleet," Clark explained, especially as "regions such as Northern Europe, the Eastern Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean become hotspots for great power competition and confrontation."

    There’s also the argument that US fleet proliferation encourages others to accelerate shipbuilding to keep up the pace, leading to more seapower overall. The Chinese navy is "moving toward an ambition of 500 warships, including air nuclear submarines, amphibious ships and a burgeoning frigate and destroyer force," according to the Royal United Services Institute.

    A spokesperson for the think tank contended that since "it is hard to recall growth at a similar pace in any navy across history … Beijing is slowly pulling ahead."

    "The cost to build and operate a 355-ship fleet would average $102 billion per year (in 2017 dollars) through 2047," the CBO estimates. This figure is "more than one-third greater than the amount appropriated for fiscal year 2016 for today’s 275-ship fleet."

    Simply throwing money at shipbuilders won’t magically create the 355-ship navy. The Defense Industrial Base (DIB) “is more important than any individual weapons program" and a "critical component of our national security," Hendrix wrote in a July 26 commentary for Breaking Defense. Among other factors, "waves of industrial mergers and defense contractor consolidations and naïve strategic assumptions regarding the ‘end of history’ have left America’s DIB fragile and lacking in redundant capability."

    Related:

    Beijing Outmaneuvering US Navy in South China Sea
    Beijing's Navy Launches Large-Scale Military Drills in East China Sea
    Head of Russian Navy Starts Official Visit to China
    Russia, China Vessels Train Assistance Amid Joint Sea Drills – Baltic Navy
    Indian Navy Increases Vigil as China Deploys Nuclear Submarine in Pak Waters
    Tags:
    defense industrial base, Royal United Services Institute, US Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, Center for a New American Security, Congressional Budget Office (CBO), Congressional Research Service, US Navy, Jerry Hendrix, Donald Trump, Washington, Beijing
    Community standardsDiscussion
    Comment via FacebookComment via Sputnik