China's first domestically-built carrier is launched, 26 April 2017 (Credit Image: Xinhua/SIPA USA/PA Images)
America’s domination of the Pacific Ocean has been a given since the end of the Second World War. Under the protection of the United States’ nuclear umbrella and its Seventh Fleet, countries such as Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and the Philippines could develop peacefully and without fear of invasion.
China, however, is steadily aiming to undermine the status quo. Its continuing development of what naval experts call a “blue water navy” threatens to disrupt American dominance of the Pacific, and with that the democratic status of nations that have heretofore depended on American naval power.
Maritime trading nations throughout history have depended upon control of the seas for their wealth and power. Ancient Athens, for example, gained its empire and held off Sparta for over 20 years in the Peloponnesian War because of its naval dominance. It finally lost its power, and the war, when Sparta (with Persian money) created its own navy and defeated the Athenians at the battle of Aegospotami. Britain’s empire was also founded upon its naval power, as any school child who has ever learned about the Armada or gazed upon Nelson’s Column in Trafalgar Square knows.
China is no different. Its wealth depends upon trade, and that trade sails upon ships. It also depends upon the importation of oil and raw materials that also sail on ships. The ability to control those shipping lanes in case of conflict, therefore, is essential to any serious Chinese foreign policy.
That, in turn, requires a “blue water navy”. Naval experts classify naval forces according to the types of waters a country’s force can exert power over. A “brown water navy” can operate within a country’s coastal zones while a “green water navy” can exert power over regional seas close to the coast. A “blue water navy” is one that can successfully project power far from a country’s coast, often thousands of miles from its closest port. Only such fleets can contest the control of open seas and far-away shipping lanes.
China has been openly pursuing this capability for decades. It has steadily built up its navy to the point that its submarines and surface fleet can contest control of the waters between it and Taiwan, making American support of the tiny island in the event of conflict with China more hazardous. But only aircraft carriers can control large ocean spaces. That makes China’s pursuit of such boats extremely important.
China recently launched its second carrier, the first built entirely within the country. Its first, the Liaoning, was launched in 2012, but it was a refitted ship purchased from the Ukraine. Building a carrier domestically allows China to expand its capabilities as quickly as it can learn how to do so.
The People’s Liberation Navy is aggressively pursuing that goal. A senior researcher associated with the Chinese navy, Yin Zhuo, says, “In order to protect China’s territories and overseas interests, China needs two carrier strike groups in the West Pacific Ocean and two in the Indian Ocean. So we need at least five to six aircraft carriers.” To put that in perspective, currently only the United States operates more than two. China’s third carrier, currently under construction, is expected to be much larger and more advanced – and closer to American-quality – than either current ship.
China’s naval buildup extends well beyond aircraft carriers. Last autumn it introduced small ships built with stealth technology. Pictures emerged last month of a new warship that could be outfitted with electromagnetic pulse weaponry, a technology that even the US Navy does not have. It has also launched a new type of modern destroyer that arguably is the most advanced in the world outside of the most modern American designs. The Chinese navy is rapidly expanding its capabilities far beyond those necessary to protect its coastline from invasion.
These trends have not gone unnoticed among China’s regional neighbours. Australia, Japan, India, and the US are exploring joint naval exercises in the South China Sea, a flash point for tensions with China. Japan currently operates two medium-sized “helicopter destroyers” that have many of the capabilities of traditional aircraft carriers. Japanese news media reported last December that discussions with the US are underway that would allow for these ships to carry and launch American-made jet fighters such as the state-of-the-art F-35.
If this is true, Japan would quickly acquire the ability to contest sea lanes independently of the US, giving it greater flexibility in the event of a clash. India launched its first domestically-designed and built aircraft carrier in 2016, with a second, nuclear-powered ship in the planning stages. Even Vietnam is getting into the action, building up its navy with purchases from Russia and hosting a visit from a US carrier group this March.
None of these developments means war is coming soon. But it does show that the backbone of Western defense in the Pacific, the American navy, will come under increasing pressure in the coming years. This in turn can influence other countries which may rethink their alignment with the West.
The Philippines is the great prize in this quiet conflict, as its strategic position astride the north-south sea routes of East Asia means whomever it aligns with has the upper hand in the region. America has long relied on its relationship with the Philippines1 for its naval strategy in the region, but Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte is moving the country away from its American orientation. The American media often criticises Trump for praising the mercurial and crude Philippine leader, but perhaps the President has been made aware of the nation’s central importance in containing Chinese ambitions and decided that Manila is worth courting.
The world is focused on President Trump’s tweets, but it would be advised to spend a bit more time paying attention to the naval arms race underway in Asia. Capability always precedes conflict, and China’s blue-water naval ambitions will create the possibility for many such conflicts in the years ahead.
FOOTNOTES
- America governed the Philippines from the conclusion of the Spanish-American War in 1898 until Philippine independence in 1947. Its forces liberated the country from Japanese occupation during the Second World War, and the US maintained air and naval forces in the country for decades until their closure in the early 1990s. Even today the US plans to use Philippine military bases for its operations in the event of confrontation with China.
Henry Olsen is Editor of UnHerd.com’s Flyover Country theme and a Senior Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, DC. He is the author of ‘The Working Class Republican: Ronald Reagan and the Return of Blue-Collar Conservatism’.
henryolsenEPPC 
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThe people who are keen to police the way others dress or do their hair would probably be quite comfortable living in Iran or Saudi Arabla, and even more comfortable if they had actual powers to beat, imprison or fine women for not dressing ‘appropriately’. Maybe they should reflect on their own latent authoritarianism instead of turning their angry glare outwards.
Or find some gainful employment that doesn’t involve abusing others.
What they’re doing is feathering their own nests within the victim industry..
Wow! That was bad. He said nothing and everything. So nothing. Everyone behaves according to their incentives. Who is paying him and why. I am so tired of these no risk to their income dudes telling you g kids to suck it up when they are living in luxury.
Another highly readable&informative article from Douglas Murray.
It seems like we are living under Government by Diktat, started by Blair. Pronouncement followed by no interest in implementation. Even worse to public confidence in “government” is where government has no interest whatsoever in abiding by the law. Why follow the law when the government has no respect for it?
One example here is the law on wearing face coverings on public transport. Quite simply the law states that it is compulsory (for those who are not exempted) for people who are on a train, or boarding a train or in a “any transport hub, or any part of a transport hub, which is indoors.” Yet, announcements every 10 minutes on trains, on platforms now state that it is compulsory to wear face coverings on trains and in stations (blanket statement). A ticket office is indoors, a station like Kings Cross is indoors, but an open platform is not. I hear on good authority that the train operating companies have been forced by the Department for Transport to be far stricter than the law permits.
What is worse, these are all statutory instruments, which means they’ve been passed by government without the usual parliamentary control – yet the wheels of government cannot even abide by the letter of these.
After Brexit I assume people will soon realise that it wasn’t really Brussels that restricted freedoms and created all the heavy-handed bureaucracy but London – so long live Lexit.
Surely ‘cultural appropriation’ is the sincerest form of flattery.
The overbearing, directionless, silly efforts to control is not confined to the British government. It is evident in many Western countries. I wonder to what extent they are pressurized to ‘take action’ by the hysteria of the mass media.
Thanks Niall for a beautiful and evocative essay. There was so much that brought memories flooding back into my mind:
– bonfire night in the garden with sparklers and fireworks
– birthday party in November
– a balmy October in Virginia surrounded by amazing autumnal colours
– the opening weeks at University
– the beginning of a lifetime ministry at a Michaelmas ordination
– and many more
Thankyou
A silly article. Media has caused endless panic and ignorance. In Canada more of the same. Only 2,000 people have died of covid-19 outside care homes in a population of 37 million. Far more have died of cancer and heart disease yet the so called medical experts ( a clueless lot) and politicians behave like fascists. Also mental illnesses have increased. Serious questions need to be asked about the poor behaviour of the medical profession.
Midsommer Murders director was forced to add characters of all ethnicities into his programmes because the series was deemed too white. Are these ‘culture warriors’ saying we should now remove all those culturally inappropriate people from UK TV and film series set in earlier times when only local whites inhabited the villages? And are we saying that other ethnicities cannot perform Shakespeare, etc.? So, coloured actors could be without many parts from now on. Talk about unintended consequences!
“the preparedness of citizens to help each other” I and others like me call this ‘Socialism’ but, whatever you call it is not relevant. Nonetheless, if you continue to vote for parties who are led by privileged racist buffoons with the emotional intelligence of a 13-year old, what do you expect will happen? Certainly nothing rational or values based. One thing we all can do is exempt ourselves from mask use. Just go to the gov.uk website and do it. Accordng to Carl Heneghan, Oxford Professor of Evidence-based Medicine, the only study relating to respiratory disease says masks harbour moisture, mucus and germs. Exempt yourself now on the grounds that mask-wearing is potentially dangerous and “causes you severe distress”.
I’ve already commented – where is it?
Time travel is certainly a valid metaphor. We do it all the time reading history and science fiction, generally with a view to clarifying “who done what”, and “what is waiting for us”. These quests are thence mystery plots. And the hero is everyman.
Commercial writing, mass market stuff, is pitched to adolescent males and females. The former’s libido wallows in power fantasies, the latter, romance. Children, by definition, are unfinished beings, with unformed critical faculties, for whom the preternatural, the inchoate and magical are for them plausible templates for the world they inhabit.
It has been a habit in movies for a long time to have the most vital bits of dialogue spoken very quietly – This theme has been taken up by a lot of YouTubers whose post production teams play background music louder than the commentary making quite interesting stuff have to be abandoned!
The unintended consequences of the pointless Lockdown (see the Sweden model) and enforcing masks after 3 months of saying they were also pointless are starting to emerge. It has been such a c**k up that a conspiracy would at least give it all some purpose. Here is something that is so 2020 AND looks like a conspiracy AND looks like a Bond villain’s evil plan BUT is actually real – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xO...
Impressive. An intelligent, open response to the Covid situation.
I enjoyed reading this so much that I went on to read Sonnet 18 “Shall I compare thee to a summer’s day.” Then back to re-read your essay, this time slowly and thinking about my own feelings and memories about the seasons. Maybe I inhabit the seasons without thinking about what I’m experiencing. I resolve to do better.
We now are forced to watch movies on TV with the text on.
I’m surprised that anyone still thinks what Govt claims to be trying to do is what it’s knowingly actually doing. I see the former as “we’ll get through this” while the latter appears to be as stupid a series of pointless threats then restrictions as it’s possible to contrive.
In other words, it’s way too prolonged & damaging to have been a series of errors. There is a subtext we’re not being told.
The explanation for cherry picking historical slavery, is that those hoping to effortlessly enrich themselves by enslaving others, must target for reparations those who have enough money to pay them.