By Trefor Moss
There’s been much speculation about the implications of China’s first aircraft carrier. The Diplomat answers some of the key questions.
When is an aircraft carrier not an aircraft carrier? The answer could be: when it is Chinese.
The first aircraft carrier in the history of the People’s Liberation Army Navy’s (PLAN’s), which began sea trials earlier this week and churned up no shortage of media conjecture as it got underway, has to be understood on two different levels: the symbolic and the purposive.
Symbolically, the launching of the carrier is another instalment in the narrative of China’s achievement of great-power status. It belongs in the same bracket as the Three Gorges Dam, the Qingdao-Haiwan sea bridge and high-speed rail: mega-projects that demonstrate China’s technological prowess and boundless capacity to accomplish whatever it sets its mind to (even if, before too long, the dams crack and the trains crash).
The carrier’s military symbolism is also immensely powerful. In truth, the PLA’s most successful modernisation programmes haven’t been conventional platforms like warships so much as asymmetric weapons – systems that aim to subvert the enemy’s strengths rather than counter them with like-for-like solutions. Anti-ship ballistic missiles, anti-satellite systems and cyber warfare all fit into this category. Aircraft carriers most certainly don’t. However, the general public – not to mention the mainstream media and presumably many politicians, including Chinese ones – have no idea what asymmetric weapons are; they are esoteric concepts that don’t capture the imagination. Aircraft carriers on the other hand, just like the flashy new fighter jet that China debuted in January, are part of the widely understood lexicon of hard power. People appreciate that a country with an aircraft carrier is part of an elite and powerful club – and that’s precisely the message that the Chinese government wants the carrier to convey both to its domestic and foreign audiences. It’s a comprehensible metaphor for China’s arrival, and something to keep the nationalists sweet.
The ship has great economic symbolism as well. Just as China was launching its carrier, the United States was announcing that it was trimming the size of its carrier fleet in order to save money. It was the perfect moment for the Xinhua news agency to chide has-been America for spending reckless amounts on defence so that it could ‘meddle’ internationally while ‘paying no heed to whether the economy can support this.’ The message was that only China, sitting pretty atop $2 trillion in reserves, now has the fiscal right to build these military luxuries.
However, the practical purpose of China’s aircraft carrier programme is more open to interpretation. Is the carrier a symbol, and nothing more? Or is the refurbished ex-Soviet vessel also the thin end of a wedge that will culminate in a bona fide Chinese carrier capability, with all the security implications that that entails? With many countries in the Asia-Pacific looking on with varying degrees of concern, there are important questions that need to be addressed:
What is China’s first carrier actually capable of?
China’s own declaration that the ship is ‘obsolete’ and ‘for training purposes’ is probably fairly accurate. Naval analysts Andrew Erickson and Gabriel Collins have described the ex-Varyag – widely reported to have been renamed Shi Lang – as a ‘starter carrier,’ and it’s hard to imagine it ever being used as a weapon of war. This is a ship with training wheels for a navy that has never operated a carrier before. The first major milestone, after confirming that the ship itself functions, will be equipping the carrier with its air arm of naval J-15 fighters, which are themselves unproven and still in development. Dean Cheng, a research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, estimates that the PLAN could achieve this objective within a six to 18-month timeframe. But training pilots to fly off carriers will be a long and costly exercise, he says. ‘This will inevitably involve failures, they will lose pilots,’ Cheng warns. ‘How will they handle that and what will be the political ramifications?’
Photo Credit: US Navy
View as Single Page
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
Ok
South American countries are becoming more concerned of the security threat on sea from US warships, Chinese aircraft carriers presence in this region and con joint military exercises with south American countries can make them feel safe about their security on sea. I mean, after all, should the peace of the people of south America be violated by any warmongers, not matter how powerful they are, the people of china will be obliged to fight along side with people of south America against violence without second of hesitation. I am a young Chinese, although my countrys government may not think the same as my opinion, but I am determined, as time goes, more and more Chinese who loves justice and peace will think the same as me.
Willizyoyo
China will never want to become hegemony in the Asian region. History proof better than talking. Do you guys remember when China attacked Vietnam and India incidents? China just wanted to teach them a lesson because, the first one was arrogant and naively thought they should take all the credits. But China sacrifices the most included lost many soldiers, supplied them strategies, weapons, medications and foods. India was getting carried away and stubbornly creates troublesome to China provoked the border war and lost the war badly. Undeniable, many military experts as well as Indian superior officers also believed China can storm in even further. Conversely, China didn’t do that because she does not want to conquer other land that not belongs to her. India has many times infuriated China on border disputes, such as encouraging and instigating Tibet and Xinjiang to seek for independence. I mean, what are their bad intentions? What are their motives? What benefits they will get? India tends to compete with China, in fact, India didn’t realize their positions and strengths were only being able to compare with Pakistan. India is slightly on the upper hand because they have more people, but compare to nuclear power, nuclear missiles stockpiles and deliver systems and range. Apparently, India is still way behind of Pakistan, let alone China.