Why the U.S. Navy Isn't Sweating China's Carrier-Killer Missiles

by Caleb Larson

Source Link

China’s spending on anti-ship ballistic missiles may be misplaced, and not quite what is needed should a conflict between the United States and China break out, according to American Vice Adm. Jeffrey Trussler.

USNI News quoted comments Trussler made during a virtual event, where the Vice Admiral stated, “I’m not going to get [into] much more detail of what we know and don’t know about it. But they’re pouring a lot of money in the ability to basically rim their coast in the South China Sea with anti-ship missile capability. It’s a destabilizing effort in the South China Sea, in the East China Sea, all those areas. When their claims of some of these contested islands – they’re militarizing those areas.”

Trussler referenced several of China’s ballistic missiles, several of which have made headlines as “carrier-killers,” essentially large, long-range anti-ship missiles that could in theory strike—and sink—large targets like American aircraft carriers.

The U.S. Navy has kept a close eye in recent years on two of the Chinese missiles in particular, the Dong Feng-21, a medium range, road-mobile ballistic missile that is nuclear capable and has a 2,000+ kilometer range, as well as the Dong Feng-26, essentially a longer range variant of the DF-21. Development of the DF-26 has been especially worrying, as it very likely has the necessary range to strike most American assets in the eastern Pacific Ocean, including far-flung places like the new Marine Corps base on Guam.

In particular, the People’s Liberation Army seeks to foster a more mature anti-ship capability that could keep enemies at bay and away from the Chinese mainland. This so-called island chain strategy sees a chain of islands roughly analogous to their Nine-dash Line and extending farther north to southern Japan as a crucial line of defense. Holding this line—and building up Chinese outposts in the South China Sea—is the crux of defending China. But, it might not be quite the right idea.

Trussel commented on the Chinese military buildup in the South China Sea and the recent spate of increasingly powerful ballistic missiles, saying, “That’s something we’re going to watch very closely. It’s something that confuses the international order and concerns the allies in the region. It’s one reason we work to keep the global commons open and the free flow of traffic.”

Trussel continued, “But when you see that – those are troubling developments. They’re probably aimed and specifically developed towards the United States Navy. So we watch them very closely. I hope they just keep pouring money into that type of thing. That may not be how we win the next war.”

Pacific War?

Whatever a hypothetical future conflict in the Pacific looks like, one branch that is quietly preparing a response is the United States Marine Corps. In recent years they’ve retooled to better fight in a maritime environment by, among other things, divesting their tank battalions and designing new classes of autonomous ship-killing platforms—even preparing to hunt enemy submarines. More recently, Marine Recon has practiced storming enemy-held islands and quickly firing off missiles at enemy shipping.

One admiral at least sees anti-ship missiles as no superweapon—and the Navy and Marines are getting ready to prove it.

Caleb Larson is a Defense Writer with The National Interest. He holds a Master of Public Policy and covers U.S. and Russian security, European defense issues, and German politics and culture.