Member Login Become a Member
Advertisement

What Happens When a Navy Officer Gets Real on China?

  |  
02.25.2014 at 04:02am

What Happens When a Navy Officer Gets Real on China? By Erik Slavin, Stars and Stripes

The Navy’s Pacific Fleet chief of intelligence recently cemented his reputation for blunt assessments of China about as well as the Washington establishment cemented its reputation for sticking to China talking points.

Capt. James Fanell made waves during his 2013 appearance at the U.S. Naval Institute’s West conference, during which he stated that the Chinese PLA Navy’s expansion was focused on sinking an opposing fleet and largely about countering the U.S. Navy.

At this year’s USNI conference, Fanell’s assessment that China is gathering the capability to fight Japan made it to Fox News, The New York Times and several international news outlets.

“[We] concluded that the PLA has been given the new task to be able to conduct a short, sharp war to destroy Japanese forces in the East China Sea, following with what can only be expected a seizure of the Senkakus or even a southern Ryukyu [island] — as some of their academics say,” Fanell said on Feb. 13, according to USNI’s coverage of their event

Read on.

About The Author

Article Discussion:

0 0 votes
Article Rating
20 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Move Forward

I don’t know much about naval warfare nor does much of anyone outside the Navy because there have been so few major naval battles since WWII and most of the shorter U.S. skirmishes occurred primarily in Tom Clancy novels. In addition, much of AirSea Battle remains classified. We are asked to take the word of Think Tank analysts and others that the Chinese threat is so serious that we should divert additional assets to air and sea services. Of course as we just learned, that means shelving our active Army until the next time they are required repeating the cycle of past conflicts where ground combatants suffer long, deadly, austere tours in future wars until ground forces are built-up, trained, and well-armed again.

In the article cited, one looks at the Coast Guard vessel depicted and reads elsewhere that its strongest weapons are 37mm anti-aircraft guns and smaller 14.5mm machine guns. One looks at the map depicted and quickly estimates that the islands involved are anywhere from 200-400+ nautical miles from the Chinese mainland. Perhaps I’m grossly misinformed yet most casual observers would note that no amphibious ship will sneak up or rapidly close on those islands undetected. Neither would it appear likely that any major sea or air battle group would either.

One also notes that the Japanese self-defense forces are not some weak sister like the Philippine Navy and Air Force in the South China Sea. China would not have an easy time either salami-slicing, seizing, let alone holding any distant island against Japan alone let alone with U.S. assistance. Just because an informed Navy Captain assesses that China may desire to fight a sharp, short war does not mean the short part would work out for the PLAN aggressor. It reminds one of the old saying about dogs chasing cars and what happens if it catches one.

Maybe I’m naive, but then perhaps someone can explain to me how a single PLAN carrier, surface, amphibious, or resupply naval vessel would survive attacks by Japanese subs and our Virginia class subs and JSOW-C1 equipped F/A-18Fs before F-35B/C enter the picture. What PLA air assets would take out our F-22s and soon to field F-35s? Who wants to be the PLA troops left behind on that island with no supplies (because we take suppliers out, hence our A2/AD) and lots of bombing occurring BEFORE the Japanese and U.S. Marine amphibious and MV-22 assault to retake said islands.

This reminds me of the old days where everyone decried how serious a threat the MiG-25 was until we actually got a hold of one and found out how lousy it was. We know Chinese aircraft have short-lived engines and their pilots have little combat bombing experience, training flying hours, or air-to-air combat skills. We know their competent aircraft also have large radar and IR signatures and any future “stealth” versions will be fewer in number and less advanced than our own. We know a Chinese nuclear sub with some of their best submariners sunk shortly after leaving port a few years back. We hear about the DF-21D without any explanation of how satellites, UAS, and over-the-horizon radars would survive to find our distant ships. We also know we have immense aerial refueling assets that could support greater stand-off until JSOWs and subs take out the entire surface PLAN and Virginia class takes out their subs. Who is zooming who about the relative strengths of Naval and USAF assets in this region.

And again, who is the dumbie in China that wants to risk nuclear war and nuclear effects on their economy by going to war with their closest trading partners. Lets get real about where true threats lie to actual servicemembers. Ask why the most technically exquisite, strongest, and most funded services with the most costly ships and aircraft require even greater funding while over one hundred thousand real Soldiers/Marines died over the past 64 years. What was that word used at the Bastogne when the Germans asked the 101st General to surrender?