By Kris Osborn, President, Center for Military Modernization
The Russian and Chinese military are greatly expanding military cooperation, joint training exercises and some kinds of limited multi-domain surface-air networking, as evidenced by recent joint patrols and war preparation exercises in the Pacific.
While the Russian Navy itself may not seem particularly threatening, especially when one looks at the large and very capable Chinese Navy, the prospect of large-scale Russian-Chinese military collaboration is certain to gain attention at the Pentagon. The real question seems to be a technological one, as even if Russian and Chinese military forces were quite serious about combined maritime warfare power, an ability to accomplish that depends upon the extent of truly effective tactical joint, multi-domain, interoperable warfighting capability.
The Russian state-backed TASS News Agency published a report citing “intense” combat exercises and “joint maneuvering” between a large Russian anti-submarine ship called Admiral Tributs, several other Russian ships and several Chinese destroyers the Qiqihar and Guiyang, supported by several Chinese Frigates.
Some exercises took place in the Sea of Japan and others in different parts of the Western Pacific, in what appear to have been rather large Naval formations. The Russians and Chinese have a history of joint or collaborative military activity, so the existence of the joint maneuvers is not new persay , but the Russian TASS article does suggest the military-to-military maneuvering between the Russians and Chinese is expanding to include a more multi-domain focus. The war preparations were described as involving artillery firings, more than 30 Naval aircraft from both countries and coordinated anti-submarine missions.
“The drills involved over 30 naval aircraft from both sides, including anti-submarine warfare planes and helicopters and fighter-interceptors.”This patrol was the longest and its first stage lasted a week. It was more intense with combat exercises and joint maneuvering. Aircraft from both our side and the Chinese side carried out a large number of flights,” the TASS article writes.
The reference to over 30 naval aircraft also seems to raise a few questions, as neither the Chinese or Russian formations reportedly contained an aircraft carrier. This means Chinese-Russian efforts to project Naval air power would likely be limited to destroyer-launched helicopters, depending upon how far off shore the war preparations may be. Helicopters can be effective for submarine hunting, but the TASS article makes mention of large sub-hunting planes and even fighter-interceptor jets. Where are they coming from? With a carrier in formation, it does not seem as though they could come from the ocean, something which would limited the combined maritime-warfare capability to coastal areas within reach of land-launched aircraft.
Certainly a land-launched sub-hunting plane could prove impactful, yet it would be launched separately and not organically tied to the naval units as they would be if they were carrier launched. Essentially, without an ability to launch fighter jets from forward operating maritime locations “at sea,” there is not much a joint naval formation can do in terms of truly projecting power in the air in any kind of air-attack campaign.
The possibility of large-scale naval cooperation, particularly if supported by substantial multi-domain interoperability, would seem to present a threat to a US and allied Naval presence in the Pacific, yet only if the Russian and Chinese aircraft, helicopters and surface ships were truly able to network with one another. A large joint maneuvering formation might sound daunting, and multi-domain air-surface-sub-hunting connectivity may seem quite threatening, yet the tactical efficiency of such formation would rely almost entirely on the extent to which platforms, nodes and weapons systems from each military could truly “talk” to one another, share targeting information and respond quickly in relation to one another in a coordinated fashion.
Accomplishing this is more difficult than it may sound, as NATO has been refining an ability to fully interoperate through advanced technological adaptation for many years. Successful “networking” or coordination relies heavily upon an ability to use common technical standards, align transport layer formats such as RF frequencies or datalink signals and integrate otherwise disparate sources of incoming information. IP protocols, standards and technological configurations are needed to enable true interoperability, as it is something the US Military has been pursuing for years. Yet another critical area related to this can be referred to as gateways, or technical systems which can aggregate, organize and integrate large volumes of incoming sensor data and essentially “translate” information arriving from otherwise incompatible transport layers. The US military has been breaking through in recent years with its own gateways, and they are technically complex systems increasingly enabled by AI.
Therefore, while the TASS article did make reference to large, joint-formations, the true extent of a Russian-Chinese joint military threat remains somewhat of an open question, particularly if the two forces are at all challenged to network with one another. Without forward operating “nodes” able to relay threat information, or integrated long-range sensors, large scale Russian-Chinese naval maneuvers may do little more than offer a large, visible, attractive target in the event of conflict. Truly networked, and disaggregated forces, however, would seem to present a threat that is quite serious, should it cover large areas of the Pacific expanse.
Kris Osborn is the President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University
.
