New Theaters of War: The Awakening Dragon

WARNING! THIS POST WAS SO LONG I COULDN’T FIT ANY PRETTY PICTURES. WORDS ONLY!

What would it take to fight a war, however limited against China? Now, I am not saying we will or should go to war but rather what would the US and its allies need to engage them in military conflict.

CHINESE OBJECTIVES:

For today, we will focus on armed disputes over islands that China claims for their own that are also claimed by other nations most notably the Senkaku/Daimyo islands and those in the South China/West Philippine sea. The possibility of war over Taiwan, while requiring much the same war resources is worth a separate post to itself later due to the sheer magnitude of the conflict.

The Chinese objective here is simple: resources. No nation cares much about what are often more like outcroppings than islands but rather the resources around them. China finds itself in a situation not unlike Imperial Japan in the 1930’s, a nation in need of resources to provide power and feed its teeming population. The biggest of these being natural gas and oil, but fishing rights are also powerfully important especially to Japan.

So the Chinese objective is to seize access to the resources, the islands themselves simply provide the Exclusive Economic Zone desired to make legitimate use of those resources.

THE TRIPWIRE: How would such a war begin?

The most likely first shots will probably fall under one of the following two scenarios:

1. Battle of the Coast Guards—Chinese Coast Guard ships have been very aggressive especially in the Senkaku area. Driving away fishing boats, warning shots on merchant vessels. They are presently building a new Coast Guard vessel as large as a US cruiser with multiple guns and CIWS and are quickly building a Coast Guard larger than the USA which has much more coastline to protect. They also love to send hundreds of fishing boats swarming an area such as the disputed shoals of the Philippines to provoke reaction from their navy/CG assets  The optics here are what is important: a Chinese “coast guard” (i.e. a law enforcement and Search & Rescue organization to most nations) merely “defending” one of its islands or more likely a fleet of fishing boats, is fired upon by a Japanese/Philippine/etc. vessel—or at least will say they were fire upon first. The Chinese ship exchanges shots damaging the other vessel. Now they bring in the Navy to protect their Coast Guard Vessels and Marines to protect the islands. They want this to look as legitimate as possible in the world’s eyes. The PLA Navy will focus on destroyers, frigates, and amphibious ships leaving the carrier(s) behind as being too provocative. This doesn’t mean they won’t have air support as the artificial islands they are building are going to be air bases during any conflict. For a good rundown on this tactic of the Chinese, I will have some links listed at the end.
2. Taiwanese Feint: This would be where an invasion fleet would be readied, but all the indications would be that the victim would be Taiwan. This has the advantage of not merely distracting the military but diplomatic efforts as well. They may even agree to some peace negotiations to much fanfare.   The fleet would then “turn away” to the open sea as a supposed peace gesture. Then either an incident such as listed above or some other minor provocation has them turn to seize their real goal. Normally those defending the islands would be on high alert with such a fleet at sea, but there may be international political pressure for other countries to stand down to avoid being seen as allies for Taiwan or avoid provocative gestures. As a result, there is a quick seizure and securing of the islands with no or minimal actual fighting.
3. Pearl Harbor Redux: while least likely, if the US dealing (as it no doubt will be) with the Middle-east, or against a newly aggressive Russia, and they could conceivably be more blatant and simply take a disputed area..although it is most likely this is used as the follow up the Coast Guard incident above. It is also more likely if the amounts of natural gas/oil are proven to exist in the West Philippine/South China Sea than were previously estimated. It would consist first of submarine/ surface ship ASuM missile strikes taking out any non-US naval vessels in the area, followed by their surface fleet. The fleet would include carrier support not as ground attack but rather to create localized air supreriority. One could also expect submarines or smaller vessels to lay mines around some island chains to create choke points and thwart counter-invasion. Note that I specified “non-US”. America is growing war-weary and China will most probably avoid directly striking US assets while applying economic (one of the US’s biggest trade partners) and political pressure for the US to stay out of it. While I have doubts the US would stay out completely, again, we may be preoccupied elsewhere.

THE RESPONSE: WHAT DO WE NEED TO RESPOND OR Deter?

So here is the point of this little blog: What do we now need to deal with or perhaps even deter such a situation.

Political:

On the political side, more than anything else what is needed is a unified response from not merely whoever is attacked but from all the nations with disputed territory. China could defeat any of them singly, but if a functioning counterpart to NATO is created in Asia whose members include all the disputed parties, plus the US, and Australia and perhaps even some others support such as India, South Korea, or Thailand who don’t have a stake in the land disputes but value stability in the region. Such an alliance would create a potent military force even without the US. They could also perform other important work such as facing international terrorism and piracy.

 

Equipment and Strategy

1. The Forgotten 4^th armed service: One simple low-intensity item would be for the involved nations to beef up their coast guard branches just as china is.   Indeed cooperative exercises with a beefed up USCG sends the signal that simply declaring and island and patrolling it, does not signify ownership. This could be the one place where the woefully under-armed LCS class could actually provide some use due to its shallow water performance. Reflagged as USCG instead of USN, and crewed by a CG or mixed naval/CG crew. Unfortunately, the LCS suffers another problem which is lack of range…and this is the Pacific Ocean. The National Security Cutter has three times the range of the LCS, although not as shallow a draft The new Offshore Patrol Cutter the USCG is planning on fielding in the next few years would actually fit the bil quite nicely. The Another option is to deploy USN/USCG patrol boats or USCG Sentinel class cutters to the region using the new MLP as a mothership.   , I must emphasize that this is an interim solution for deterring their present low-intensity strategy of CG/fishing fleets in the area. As presently armed These forces would be withdrawn should the conflict start involving more heavily armed PLA Navy units. However, during the Reagan era it should be noted that the Hamilton class cutters were armed with harpoon missiles and torpedoes.   The NSC, and upcoming OPC could also be fitted with ASuMs, as could the LCS (Hellfire missiles don’t count). That and a CIWS would give these lightly armed ships a greater deterrence value.
2. Clearing the Shores: Obviously any attempt to retake the islands will require a major landing force the face of a determined A2/AD environment. But how extensive that environment will be is partly based on how long we wait for the counter-attack. Remember, we don’t have to beat every missile in the Chinese inventory, just those by the occupying fleet. We need situational dominance.   Clearing the shores of any land based defenses, or from shallow draft Chinese patrol boats and frigates anchored nearby can be accomplished if we are willing to not take half-measures.   If Two ohio class SSGN’s combined with a dozen other VLS equipped SSN’s truly unleashed hell, then as many as 500 tomahawks could be sent toward the landing area from multiple vectors. If only 10% made it then you are still talking 50 missiles. And less face it, a half-dozen Burkes couldn’t take down 90% of a salvo that large, and the Chinese cannot (yet) equal our Aegis system.   The US has never tried something that big in terms of TLAM…but that doesn’t mean we can’t do it. This is why it is vital all future Virginia class SSNs get equipped with the Virginia Payload module to replace the aging Ohio class when they retire. That is for the shore and near-shore defenses. Why isn’t this kind of mass salvo mentioned by the way? Well that salvo cost a total of roughly $500 million dollars. But considering that if 50% (a reasonable amount) got thru and we are using a mix of cluster munition warheads and heavy warheads, then we have somewhere around 50 to 100 tons of ordinance hitting the beach I find that cost cheap considering how many Marines and Sailors it may save. As a much cheaper future alternative the Army MLRS could be carried by amphibious fleet ships or even smaller vessels like a modified patrol boat/LCS. Firing a dozen MLRS missiles saturates one square kilometer with a mix of deadly munitions capable of taking out a tank. Imagine a salvo of hundreds of these deadly weapons—and the Army has a stockpile of 100,000…plenty of reloads. But to get to the beach you just cleared you first have to go past mine fields. And our MCM ships are dying if not dead. The anti-mine module of the LCS doesn’t work and the MCM mission isn’t even mentioned for the “new” SSC version of the LCS. Enough. In the interim take the existing Independence LCS and rebuild it to a dedicated MCM since it has the space to land an MH-53 MCM helicopter. If need be strip the Avenger class ships of their equipment and fit it onto this rebuild. Buy new MH-53s even without any updates if need be. We need MCM now. And while that is happening get a new MCM ship going. I am desperate enough to accept an LCS derivative if that is what it takes to sell it to Congress and the Navy.
3. Clearing the Sea. For the other Chinese ships further out to sea, we must also pound from multiple directions. Unfortunately, we have no real surface equivalent to the SSGN as presently armed. The cruisers and destroyers of the US Navy are all mostly focused on anti-air. We currently have no more than 8 harpoons per vessel. We would need nearly every single Burke in service to lay down that kind of barrage with the pitiful amount of ASuM’s presently carried, especially considering the age of the Harpoons carried. At the very least, the Navy should one for one replace all existing Harpoons with Block II and get the block III version of Harpoon greenlighted. The SM-2 anti-air missile was once touted as having limited anti-ship ability. if updated sufficiently then every Burke could triple its ASuM capability. As for the Lockheed advanced ASuM, the question is how much is it going to cost and if we are going to go the route of the F-35 with a constantly pushed back IOC. We need missiles, not promises. A functioning AASuM with a reasonable IOC of 2022 would be welcome.   Fortunately, we are not restricted to the Burkes, we have air assets that can engage a fleet as well. This is why the Chinese have protested P-8A overflights in the open sea…not for their ASW but their anti-ship abilities. Navy P-8As and USAF B-1B have the range and payload capacity to be a threat, especially in a coordinated attack with destroyer and sub launched missiles. Again, the goal is not separate strikes but an overwhelming strike for a situational dominance. Notice I haven’t mentioned the carriers. The assumption by most is that they will be making the strike. So we are going to risk sending all our planes into a potential SAM meat grinder? I doubt it. True, we will be using EA-18G’s for suppression of enemy radar and (theoretically) an F-35 (if they are functional) for stealth but then those aircraft become vulnerable to Chinese carrier focused on air-superiority. Better to use our carriers to engage their aircraft and hit their fleet with medium to long range ASuMs fired from P-8s, B-52s and B-1s supported by jamming aircraft (EA-18). Plus bomb laden Naval aircraft (F/18, F-35) are all suffering from short legs. Providing air cover makes more sense. (Unfortunately, the F-35 is a one-trick pony which relies on BVR attacks with AMRAAMs and cant dogfight its way out of paper bag. )  Unfortunately the B-1B and the incredibly elderly B-52 are in need of replacement. A good interim solution is the B-1R proposal which rebuilds existing B-1Bs to not only add to airframe lifetime but give it defensive air-to-air, super-cruising engines from the F-22 to give it supersonic speed cruising at both high and low level flight, increasing its survivability. We need a replacement for the USAF bomber force. Unfortunately everyone is talking about a horrifically expensive super-bomber that I doubt we can afford. I suggest instead we focus on better and longer range stand-off missiles which we could launch in large salvos from a relatively inexpensive commercial derivative not unlike the P-8A. it would be based on the 777 cargo variant with incredible endurance and payload, including excellent EW capability. I make no mention of B-2s since they will be the only bombers providing nuclear deterrence during a major conflict.
4. Clearing the Depths: In the “Clearing the Sea” above I left off enemy ships being stalked by our subs (except for being part of the barrage). Modern mk48 torpedoes are probably the surest ship killer in the entire USN. Which is why unlike the US, China is expanding its ASW capability with frigates, patrol planes/boats, and what will soon be a submarine force double the size of ours. And remember, ours will be spread over the world as well. We are in trouble. True, the Burkes can do ASW but they are not a dedicated ASW platform. They will be protecting the carriers or performing offensive operations. But what will some (maybe most) Chinese subs be hunting? Not our combat ships but our thousands plus mile supply chain, and our merchant fleet worldwide. Oh, and also targeting the Marine ships we have waiting for the counter invasion. So the carriers get Burkes (and no doubt more than the number that escort them in peacetime) How do we address this? The obvious solution is more subs. But the US is restricted at the moment to two yards building subs, so even if we can speed up production, it won’t be enough. The LCS was to have an ASW module…which has not worked and is entirely helicopter driven. We need ASW frigates with sonar, vertical launch ASROCs, torpedoes, and the ubiquitous helicopter as well. We need a lot of them. The new SSC version of the LCS does add a towed sonar…but has no way other than the SH-60 to engage them. As we lack any real choice in the interim, let’s take existing LCS hulls and rebuild the existing Freedom class into dedicated ASW platforms with VLA capable of launching ASROC, torpedoes and hull mounted active sonar. (The Independence class LCS will be MCM—see clearing the beach). We should also bring back the WW2 and Reagan era use of the USCG as ASW escorts for merchant/MSC vessels.   The helicopter capacity of larger cutters makes it at least as good an ASW platform as a flight 1 LCS. There were full frigate versions of the NSC offered to the Navy for the SSC and foreign buyers. Extend the NSC program for 4 more vessels—after all we have 8 NSC replacing 12 WHEC which is insufficient anyway—and have those last 4 have full ASW capability, and additional ASW ability added to the other NSCs over time. The ASW mission need not be full time. The ASW gear would be Navy Reserve operated and only fully used in times of greater threat. An NSC could actually get some real world practice going after narco-subs used to smuggle drugs as part of the USCG’s LEO mission. Future dedicated ASW ships could be purpose built full ASW (not ad hoc limited) versions of the Freedom LCS with the ridiculous 40 knot requirement dropped to 25 knots with double the range using just diesel engines and more fuel, or a stripped down Burke without AEGIS, and the second VLS and existing hanger replaced with a bigger hanger and fuel storage to carry 3-4 helicopters.

 

Okay, this post could go on forever with what I see what about you? I especially would like to hear from non-US sources.