Yes, China's Navy Could Out Build America in a War

https://nationalinterest.org ^ | October 10, 2020 | by James Holmes

[RomanSoldier19]

Key Point: Even now, Beijing's industrial capacity and its shipyards are cranking out vessels quicker than Washington can. What would happen if America suddenly needed to replace its ships?

The United States could lose a Western Pacific naval war because Communist China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) can regenerate combat power more readily than the U.S. sea services can. Or, more precisely, China’s sprawling industrial base could replace hardware lost in action faster than could U.S. industry. That’s a message General David Berger, the commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps, will reportedly broadcast in a forthcoming directive entitled Naval Campaigning: The 2020 Marine Corps Capstone Operating Concept. Breaking Defense reported on an advance copy of Naval Campaigning last week.

This first appeared in 2020 and is being reposted due to reader interest.

Among the document’s money quotes: “Replacing ships lost in combat will be problematic, inasmuch as our industrial base has shrunk, while peer adversaries have expanded their shipbuilding capacity. In an extended conflict, the United States will be on the losing end of a production race—reversing the advantage we had in World War II when we last fought a peer competitor.” This is incontestable. In the Pacific, for instance, the U.S. economy was nine or ten times the size of Japan’s. Industry was already roaring by the time the United States entered the war. After all, the nation had commenced riveting together what amounted to a second complete U.S. Navy under the Two-Ocean Navy Act of 1940. That isn’t the case today.

[RomanSoldier19]

Mines

Antiship Ballistic Missiles

Submarines

Supersonic Antiship Missiles

Surface Combat Fleets: Obsolete?

What does the more distant future of surface warfare hold? Suppose antiship missiles come to boast transoceanic ranges — hardly a whimsical prospect if the DF-21D pans out. Sooner or later most of the world's oceans may fall under the shadow of land-based precision weaponry, much as the Allies extended air cover across the Atlantic Ocean during World War II. Bombers flying from shore airfields became potent antiship implements, helping negate the U-boat menace. If missiles fired from land can strike at surface vessels from vast distances, why send out cruisers or destroyers — basically mobile launch platforms — to accomplish the same thing at mortal risk to themselves?

Visit thediplomat

[ClearCase_guy]

I would expect any war with China to be short.
I would expect any war with China to be fought in Asia.
I would expect much of China’s shipbuilding capability to be taken out.
I would expect much of America’s shipbuilding capability to be untouched.

But, since it takes us 20 years to build a ship, none of this really matters. We fight with what we have and replacements don’t enter the picture.

[PGR88]

China is the largest shipbuilder in the world. China and Korea build almost all the world’s bulk carriers, oil and chemical tankers and container ships. So the capacity is certainly there.

[Russ]

OMG!! We either surrender now or die later!!!

[antidemoncrat]

And one nuke in the middle of their ship yards would do what?

[9YearLurker]

Why should they even need to bother? Just another, slightly worse, release of a cold virus should about do us in.

[DEPcom]

“The United States could lose a Western Pacific naval war because Communist China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) can regenerate combat power more readily than the U.S. sea services can. “

“History doesn’t repeat itself but it often rhymes” Mark Twain

Japan destroyed a good part of our Pacific Fleet in Pearl Harbor. The author of that article needs to review history.

Once America committed resources to War 2 our economy turned into a full-blown War Production Machine. The USA still has the raw material, oil, know-how, creativity, will, and manpower. China needs to beware, don’t wake the sleeping bear...

[libertylover]

But, since it takes us 20 years to build a ship, none of this really matters. We fight with what we have and replacements don’t enter the picture.

I agree.

[BJ1]

We won’t lose our submarines in a shoot war. In fact the Chinese will not be able import raw materials via the South China Sea. How will those shipyards build things without China importing the raw materials in lacks?

[Alberta's Child]

In an age of ICBMs and space technology it would seem that surface ships are becoming increasingly obsolete.

Heck — when it comes to global superpowers, COMBAT is becoming obsolete. Instead of fighting wars against each other, major powers simply buy off each other’s governments these days ... or even put their own agents into the highest reaches of their adversaries’ governments.

[central_va]

Russ,
Free Traitors™ have been gutting industry for decades. This is a real issue. Future generations will curse us.

[central_va]

Nukes will not ever be used again.

[datura]

Fear porn with Chinese accent.

[Wayne07]

"know-how, creativity, will"

All three in short supply. We couldn't even design our new navy frigates - had to buy the design from Italy. Most of our shipyards are closed and offshored. We'll get a measure of will in November.

[suthener]

“Nukes will not ever be used again.”

Well, not until a nuclear capable country is in danger of losing a war on their own soil. Then you can count on it.

[HighSierra5]

Never say “not ever”.

[GOPJ]

I think you’re right.

We’re not going to play on the ‘who can produce ships faster’ field.

Then again, if Biden’s elected, he’ll line up his friends and family to take pay-offs from China... as will the rest of the deep state.

[WKUHilltopper]

So they can manufacture stuff in burning hulks? How spiffy of them.

[gandalftb]

The Chinese are focused on carriers and shallow water surface ships.
...................
If they had an offensive war fighting posture they would concentrate on subs, they are not. Why?
.............
The Chinese want to dominate the region. Their competitors are their neighbors not the US.
...........
That’s why all the carrier emphasis. Look at a map, China has no ports in SE Asia. Carriers offer military projection in areas without ports.
..............
Look at their carriers, no catapults. That means ski ramp takeoffs by vastly smaller fighters with virtually no bomb loads.
............
Useless for attacking Taiwan but good for bullying Viet Nam, Thailand, Malaysia, India, Singapore, the Philipines, etc.
............
Unfortunately, pundits like the Diplomat are largely and oddly ignorant that foreign policy driven strategy is tipped off by tactics.

[reintarnation]

With a navy built by Harbor Freight?
Hardly.