The media have begun to hype up news of plans by China to obtain a new aircraft carrier. This kind of attention has its precedents, such as recent rumblings that China was in the process of building a nuclear-powered carrier, or that it planned to deploy two carrier groups in the Sea of Japan and the South China Sea. It is difficult to know what to make of all these developments.
A carrier group requires effective integration of fighting forces in the air, on the water and below the surface. Even if China could overcome the technological difficulties inherent to manufacturing and outfitting a large carrier, it would still have a long way to go to to put together a complete carrier group.
Although China's navy has imported many new platforms, it still lacks an integrated information management system, leaving it unable to coordinate battle plans with the other branches of its military. China's navy still relies heavily on foreign imports and technical guidance, especially on matters such as propulsion, navigation, detection and other major systems. This presents a serious challenge to force integration.
China also has many problems with its submarines. The Federation of American Scientists said that Chinese submarines have only gone out on patrol 49 times over the past 25 years, or about once every three years per submarine. Only two patrols are known to have taken place last year and none the year before. This underutilization raises the possibility that there might be some serious problem with China's submarines. If they have difficulty completing simple routine patrols, how are they supposed to accompany an aircraft carrier?
The Chinese navy also clearly lacks the aerial surveillance system required for modern air defense on a carrier, and also lacks the required data capabilities and sufficient military personnel to effectively carry out regional air defense missions. In addition, China has imported Russian Kilo-class submarines, which it could perhaps one combine with its indigenous Type-093 submarines. But without anti-submarine aircraft and surface vessels to provide advanced detection, not only will it be difficult for the submarines to repel attacks when confronted with superior enemy ships, but they might in turn be destroyed by anti-submarine forces.
Although China has been actively improving the structure of its rear logistical support, its command systems and rear support systems are completely incompatible, which makes it difficult to provide resupplies. This is a major setback for carrier groups, which are heavily dependent on effective rear support.
Although China's dream of deploying an aircraft carrier is not unfeasible, there are still many difficulties standing in the way of forming an effective fighting force.
A recent report by the Rand Corporation said that if war broke out between China and the US, China could use guided missile destroyers, bombers, anti-radiation cruise missiles, attack submarines or even land-based missiles to attack US ships. These are clearly the more immediate threats facing the US and Taiwan.
Cheng Ta-chen is an independent defense analyst.
Translated by Marc Langer
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
RSS