HALIFAX FORUM NEWS: China's New Rockets Called Asymmetric Threat to U.S. Navy
Wikipedia via IceUnshattered
The Chinese military has been boosting its capability dramatically since Chairman Xi Jinping came into power in 2012 and is notably expanding its rocket forces, said the commander of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command.
“They're creating very advanced platforms — and weapons systems to go with those platforms — in the naval or maritime sphere, with their air forces [and] with their rocket forces,” said Adm. Philip Davidson. “China will test more missiles — conventional and nuclear associated missiles — this year than every other nation added together on the planet.”
There is an “incredible asymmetry” in the region due to the People's Liberation Army Rocket Force and what it’s capable of doing both in terms of capability and quantity, he said during a pre-recorded interview at the Halifax International Security Forum, which this year is being hosted both in person in Halifax, Nova Scotia, and virtually due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.
“That presents a threat not only to its key security concerns along the border, but certainly along the whole First Island chain,” he said, referring to major archipelagoes out from the East Asian continental mainland coast. “It's one of the reasons that I've been a key advocate for integrated air-and-missile defense.”
Both Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands need to have such a capability to be protected, he said.
“It's an important statement for the United States … to have an integrated air-and-missile defense capability station right there in Guam,” he said.
Davidson noted that China earlier this year tested two new anti-ship ballistic missiles — the DF-26 and DF-21D — against a moving vessel. The missiles have been called “carrier-killers” by some, but Davidson pushed back on the term.
“We've known for years that they were in pursuit of a capability that could attack moving targets,” he said. “I don't use the term 'carrier-killer,' and I don't think others should because it indicates that the Chinese are targeting a specific asset. Trust me, they're targeting everything.”
However, the United States can counter that threat, he said.
“I'm quite confident that the tactics, techniques, procedures and the counters that our forces out here — not just the maritime forces — but all of our forces, including cyberspace forces, are pursuing will help counter such threats and be able to deliver the offensive fires that we need to be able to deliver ... to prevent Chinese objectives and impose costs where necessary,” he said.
Besides capability development, Beijing is increasing its military modernization in three other crucial areas including training, joint structure and combat support, Davidson said.
Since the summer, Beijing has been involved in what Davidson called a “deep multi-theater exercise” which is expected to continue for a few more weeks.
During these “exercises they're getting after the third thing that they're advancing, which is a joint structure, and we're seeing a much deeper joint integration across all those domain forces, cyberspace and the terrestrial ones — air, maritime and land forces and rocket forces as well,” he said.
The fourth area of modernization is combat support which includes logistics, munitions, sustainment and command and control, he noted.
“It is a severe challenge with not only one of those areas, but absolutely in all four of those areas for our allies and partners in the region, as well as the United States,” he said.
Secretary of the Navy Kenneth Braithwaite, who also spoke at the Halifax Forum, said China has over the past decade pivoted to the seas and has had what he calls “an awakening.”
The People’s Republic of China “has seen that all great powers of the world have always been maritime nations,” he said. “Prior to that they had been pretty much a land-centric military. Well, they no longer are land centric. As we speak today, they have more ships than any nation in the world.”
The Chinese military has 355 ships, he noted. Meanwhile, the United States has fewer than 300 battle force ships in its inventory, though former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper said in October that the nation needs a fleet of more than 500 manned and unmanned ships by 2045, including 355 manned ships prior to 2035. Esper dubbed his vision for the future fleet “Battle Force 2045.”
“Quality matters, but sometimes quantity has a quality all of its own,” Braithwaite said. “Our ships are the most technologically advanced in the world, but you can't hang your hat on that and … say, 'OK, well, we've got this problem solved.' You know, we need to continue to be vigilant. We need to continue to be oriented towards the sea. We are a maritime nation.”
To counter China, Braithwaite has recently called for the creation of a new numbered fleet closer to the border of the Indian and Pacific Oceans called 1st Fleet.
“The Indo-Pacific region is very vast and today we maintain a presence out of Japan under the auspices of the 7th Fleet,” he said. “As I think to the future and I look at what the potential threats are — as well as to reassure our allies and partners — I think it would be very wise to position a new numbered fleet somewhere towards the western southern borders of the Pacific Ocean, where we could also pivot to the Indian Ocean.”
Braithwaite said he envisions it as being an expeditionary numbered fleet.
“Historically, the United States Navy has operated its numbered fleets at sea under the command of a seagoing flag officer,” he said. “We still maintain some of that capability. We have a command ship in Japan that is actually the flagship of the 7th fleet. And I think to be relevant in that part of the world, ... having that kind of mobility would be very important.”
The Navy is examining several different options as to how it could position itself in that part of the world, he said.
The move is absolutely being considered because of China’s aggressive behavior, Braithwaite said.
“There's no ifs, ands or buts about it,” he said. “The United States is not looking for any type of confrontation. We are freedom loving people. But we want to make sure that those nations that align with our beliefs recognize that we are willing to protect their interests as well as our own, and that is through a freedom of navigation.”
— Additional reporting by Jon Harper
Topics: Missile Defense
As aircraft rapidly brought an end to the BB capital ship. Is the time fast approaching for the CV's to be at first re-tasked and eventually retired? Memory tells me that Aircraft ended the deployment of BB's in fleet combat environments well defended by such. Let us remember the fate of HMS Prince of Whales and HMS Repulse off the coast of Malaya. Late December 1941, I believe we in the free world learned a harsh lesson. New weapon systems deployed against older tradition bound "impregnable" assets. Also of note in my mind we can take some advice from Guadalcanal and the Naval operations in and around the Solomon Islands circa 1942. The US navy encountered extensive use of type 93/95 torpedoes. Having been first used in 1936, they were not fully understood until 1943. The capabilities of this weapon system were not well documented and in some situations it caused extensive damage, confusion, and loss of life. Having a range of some 40 kilometers and a 1000lb. plus warhead the Type 93 often struck important warships completely by surprise. The resulting reports of mines, submarines and "mysterious" weapons were detrimental to combat operations. Am I to understand that the threat of a massive retaliation by combined US forces is the rational defensive "tactic" to insure the survival of these multibillion dollar floating cities. I beg to offer a different opinion. Aircraft carriers cannot defend themselves from long range autonomous supersonic heavy rockets. US military planners need to forget about forward deployment of such vessels against technologically advanced adversaries. Their time has past. Future funding needs to go towards much smaller agile vessels. Perhaps in the FF and DD classes. The use of combined joint military assets will make these smaller lightly crewed very capable vessels highly effective over vast expanses of the earths surface. From far in the rear can come autonomous un-manned aerial assets to provide air support loitering overhead for days without pilots. Soon humans will prove incapable of the direct airborne combat.Robert Higbee at 1:23 PM
The PLA and Chinese might believe that to damage or sink a USN carrier with long-range missiles will not bring out swift retribution from the US Navy on a threat-axis that the Chinese deem predictable. Note that many believe that the US Navy's response would be the firing of Tomahawk cruise missiles at key Chinese installations and the TELs (thus predictable). The oversight misses the fact that the US Navy is just a branch of a combined arms of joint forces and that the USA has installations throughout the world.Trisaw at 11:47 PM
Note that many articles are devoted to promoting the Chinese DF-26 and DF-21D Anti-Ship missiles and hardly any articles are devoted to what after-action plans the USA decides to implement against China if an American or NATO carrier is hit or sunk. Surely those U.S. Navy retribution plans are Top Secret.