US Shipbuilding Lags Behind China, Navy Needs to Enhance Readiness
The United States’ shipbuilding capabilities are significantly behind those of China, highlighting the urgent need for the US Navy to bolster its preparations for a potential conflict in the Indo-Pacific region. This warning was issued by a senior State Department official during a congressional hearing today.
Kurt Campbell, Deputy Secretary of State and former National Security Council senior official, addressed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, emphasizing the critical gap in shipbuilding between the US and China. “The disparity in shipbuilding is alarming. We must improve in this area to maintain our status as a leading naval power in the 21st century,” Campbell stated.
Having played a key role in developing AUKUS during his tenure at the NSC, Campbell acknowledged the workforce challenges facing American industry and the complexities of collaborating with allies. He noted that the focus on ground forces over the past two decades, due to conflicts in the Middle East, was justified. However, he stressed that any future conflict in the Indo-Pacific would shift the emphasis back to the Navy and Air Force.
“It is now the time for the Navy and Air Force,” Campbell declared. “They must increase investment, innovate, and adopt a more daring approach. The Indo-Pacific demands the most advanced naval and long-range air capabilities the United States has ever required.”
During the same hearing, Campbell was questioned about China’s growing relationship with Russia. He echoed concerns from Pentagon officials regarding Chinese support for Russia in its ongoing war in Ukraine and assistance in accessing Arctic resources. However, Campbell urged lawmakers not to underestimate Russia’s role in this partnership, despite the perception that Moscow is becoming increasingly dependent on Beijing.
“China and Russia are vying for influence in North Korea. China is uneasy about some of Russia’s actions there,” he explained. “They are also competing in the Arctic. While this doesn’t signify a rift, it highlights the complex diplomacy at play among these nations.”
