By Kris Osborn, President, Warrior
US Navy F-35Cs, F/A-18 Super Hornets helicopters, drones and deck fired warship missiles such as Tomahawks are all steaming through the Philippine Sea with intensity … well within reach to defend both Taiwan and the Philippines.
While US Navy aircraft carrier forward presence is pretty routine for the Navy in recent months and years, a Carrier Strike Group presence just East of Taiwan and the Philippines takes seems to take on an extra urgency in light of recent tensions. Not only has the People’s Liberation Army – Navy and Air Force encircled Taiwan as a threatening “punishment” for a US delegation’s visit to Taiwan, but hostilities between China and the Philippines are escalating as well. There clearly seems to be a heightened sense of trepidation at the Pentagon that China may indeed move rapidly to “seize” Taiwan faster than the West could respond.
A forward-positioned Carrier Strike Group, however, such as the USS Ronald Reagan and its supporting DDG 51 destroyers and cruisers now operating in the Philippine Sea, would be in a position to decimate any Chinese amphibious attack on Taiwan for several reasons. Of course initially one is likely to think of the US 5th-generation aircraft advantage, which would seem to be significant, yet Navy destroyers and cruisers are now not only armed with ballistic missile defense interceptors such as SM-2, SM-3 and SM-6, but they also now fire Tactical Tomahawk cruise missiles. These ship-launched weapons have a range of 900 nautical miles, yet of greater significance, technological upgrades in recent years now enable the Tomahawk to track and destroy moving ship targets at sea. This technology, emerging in recent years, means that Tomahawk cruise missiles can not only be used to destroy “fixed” land targets such as infrastructure, command and control and troops and supplies, but could also destroy PLA-Navy amphibs, destroyers and carriers moving on the ocean.
“Fait Accompli”
The possibility of a sudden, rapid surprise Chinese attack on Taiwan, referred to by Pentagon China reports as a “Fait Accompli” describes a scenario wherein the PLA seeks to surround and annex the island from close proximity quickly to entrench an occupying force upon Taiwan. In this kind of scenario, the PLA thinking may be that the West may consider it too costly in terms of lives and assets to try to “extricate” an occupying Chinese force from Taiwan, even if it were possible.
Can Carriers Survive Chinese Anti-Ship Missile Attacks?
This threat scenario is exactly why the Pentagon, US Navy and US INDO-PACIFIC command are vigilant about maintaining a strong and consistent “forward presence” in the Pacific. Perhaps now more than ever, a rapid Chinese attack may seem realistic.
However, PRC strategists are likely smart enough to recognize that, should the US, Japan or other allies have 5th-generation air power within reach of the Taiwan strait … an amphibious take over of Taiwan would likely have very little chance of success. Other than a land-launched fleet of J-20s, the PLA has no credible maritime 5th-generation air threat. An amphibious attack to take over Taiwan would likely be extremely vulnerable from the air, if US Navy carriers had F-35Cs and US Navy amphibious assault ships had F-35Bs within range. Without air supremacy or least an ability to contest for the sky above the ocean, a PLA amphibious attack with surface warships would likely be obliterated quickly with precision fire from F-35s.
China is of course building several prototypes of its carrier-launched, stealthy J-31 5th-gen fighter, but the PLA is years away from being able to generate an impactful fleet of ocean-launched 5th-gen stealth fighters. This makes them extremely vulnerable and at a serious deficit when it comes to any confrontation with the US and its allies in the Pacific. This deficit is further exacerbated for the PRC due to Japan’s massive, multi-billion F-35 purchase. The Japanese Maritime Self Defense Forces are already operating, testing and training F-35Bs at sea and have a large Joint Strike Fighter fleet on the way. Parts of southern Japan, particularly the island areas, are perhaps within reach of waters around Taiwan, given that the F-35C operates with a range greater than 1,000 miles. Therefore, an operational combat radius of 500 miles or more could possibly enable some land-launched F-35As or F-22s to protect Taiwan by launching from the land. Being only 100 miles from the Chinese coastline, Taiwan is within reach of land-launched PLA – Air Force J-20s, however it is not clear how large and significant a J-20-threat would be for US and allied 5th-gen aircraft operating in the Pacific. Furthermore, the PRC is known to only operate slightly more than 100 J-20 dispersed throughout the country to include Western China. It would seem unlikely that an impactful number of J-20s could establish air superiority in support of an amphibious attack upon Taiwan should US and Japanese F-35s be within attack range of a PLA – Navy assault.
Possible Lines of PLA Thinking – Attack Taiwan now? Or in a few years?
It seems there may be two contradictory variables or narratives informing China’s thinking on the question of “timing” when it comes to Taiwan. In one sense, they may calculate that it makes sense to wait several more years before annexing Taiwan to allow their rapid shipbuilding, missile construction, fighter jet development and overall modernization efforts to further progress, something which would favor any chance of success. A PLA – Navy with more carriers, Type 055 quasi-stealthy destroyers, new Type 076 amphibs and even some ocean launched 5th-gen aircraft might massively enhance China’s prospects for success in any kind of rapid take over. All of these assets are being added at an alarming pace, given China’s well-known civil-military fusion and growing industrial base.
However, China’s hope to close a capability gap with the west may decrease over time in other respects. For example, China is likely to be challenged if not outmatched by the pace at which the US, Japan, Singapore and Australia are adding new F-35s to their forces, a scenario which might ensure that the West continues to operate with a large superiority in the realm of 5th-generation aircraft. Even with a large, rapid-fire industrial base, the PRC may not be able to catch the West when it comes to sheer numbers of advanced 5th-gen aircraft.
At the same time, there may also be an argument for an earlier annexation of Taiwan for several key reasons. At the moment, China appears to operate with an advantage in the realm of hypersonic weapons; China has already launched YJ-21 hypersonic missiles from the decks of its warships and even developed an air-launched YJ-21 hypersonic missile capable of firing from PLA – Air Force H-6K bombers. Therefore, should the PLA be able to establish a protective hypersonic attack “bubble” or circle surrounding Taiwan, US and allied forces without hypers
onic weapons or defenses against them may simply be unable to operate near Taiwan without being destroyed quickly by hypersonic weapons moving at 5-times the speed of sound. An incoming salvo of ship, ground or air-launched YJ-21s would likely be designed to “overwhelm” layered ship defenses and destroy US and allied warships at safe standoff distances. However, such an ability would rely upon the range and targeting guidance technology built into the YJ-21. Regardless, these are likely several factors why the Pentagon is massively fast-tracking development of hypersonic weapons and hypersonic defenses.
The consistent PLA training, war preparation and air violations of Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone, reinforced recently by the PLA’s “encircling” Taiwan, has Pentagon planners and strategists that the PRC could use a training exercise as a pretense to launch a rapid invasion from within close range of Taiwan. In this scenario, what might seem like routine training and war-drills in the waters and air near Taiwan could put PLA forces within rapid striking distance of launching a surprise attack.
UnderSea “X” Factor
A mysterious X-factor in all of this might pertain to the undersea realm, as the US Navy is believed to currently operate with undersea superiority; the US Navy is quickly adding upgraded Virginia-class attack submarines armed with more firepower and equipped with advanced quieting and communications technologies.
Further more, while surface ships are likely to operate within range to project air and sea attack power in defense of Taiwan, assets such as this would more easily seen by Chinese drones, satellites and radar.
PLA Ship and land-based sensors are now likely advanced to the point that it will be very difficult to position warships or even operate certain aircraft within striking distance of Taiwan which are not pretty easily seen by Chinese forces. Therefore, China might be inclined to attempt a surprise attack when U.S. carriers and other visible assets are not within range. This, however, is where submarines and undersea drones come in.
Newer quieting technologies, coupled with the rapid acquisition of undersea drones and improved torpedoes make attacks from the sea more likely to favor success. Should enough attack submarines and sub-launched undersea drones be operating in the vicinity, they would quite possibly be much less detectable and in position to attack and destroy advancing Chinese amphibious forces. Part of this equation is fortified by recent U.S. Navy advances in attack submarine technology are able to not only make them less detectable to sonar and other methods of detection, but also armed with longer-range, more precise weapons systems.
Undersea-launched maritime variant tactical Tomahawks, for example, are able to change course in flight and destroy moving targets, placing them in a position to attack surface ships on the move. The Navy is also developing its Very Lightweight Torpedo weapon which expands attack envelope possibilities. Block II Virginia-class and subsequent model attack submarines are now equipped with newer kinds of underwater antennas or communications devices, engine quieting enhancements and special kinds of coating materials intended to make them less detectable. While details regarding what these look like are unavailable for security reasons, Navy leaders talked about these advances years ago when the USS South Dakota Virginia-class Block III submarine emerged as a prototype. The South Dakota, and other submarines with similar innovations, are now operational. This might be one reason why the concepts for operation for attack submarines have evolved a little to include more undersea surveillance.
Block III Virginias also use “fly-by-wire” automated navigational controls, fiber optic cables and more advanced Large Aperture Bow sonar systems. Attack submarines, and drones they can launch from the torpedo tubes, could likely operate along high-risk island and coastal areas conducting clandestine surveillance missions while being much less detectable than a surface ship or some aerial drones. Furthermore, the U.S. Navy is making rapid progress with a growing fleet of small, mid-sized and very large, submarine sized unmanned undersea drones. These platforms have very long endurance and can dwell, or lurk beneath the sea for weeks tracking enemy surface ships, submarines and mines. In the future, it seems possible some of them could be armed with weapons, providing undersea command and control technology evolves to the point wherein humans can remain fully “in the loop” regarding the use of lethal force. While undersea drones can already find and explode mines “autonomously” while undersea, any actual lethal firing of a torpedo would naturally need to be managed by a human, per Pentagon doctrine.
As for the force itself, this may be one reason why the U.S. and Navy continue to greatly uptick, accelerate and fast-track larger amounts of new submarines. An attack submarine “deficit” concern has been on the radar for many years now, and Congress and the Navy now plan to build as many as 3 Virginia-class attack submarines per year as opposed to two. Are there enough submarines to potential rise to this challenge? Global Firepower says China operates as many as 79 submarines, compared to the U.S.’ 69. This is yet another reason why many in the U.S. continue to call for an even more accelerated pace of submarine acquisition. However, U.S. allies have submarines as well, and should attack submarines be so difficult to find, then having slightly fewer numbers would not impair mission effectiveness to a large degree. Global Firepower lists South Korea as operating 22 submarines and Japan is cited as having 20. These boats, in conjunction with U.S. Navy attack submarines, might indeed be well-positioned to stop the Chinese Navy, given their weapons ability and stealthy characteristics.
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
