A bizarre comment sparked speculation that India could attempt to match China’s aircraft carrier fleet.
India could build a fleet of five to six new aircraft carriers, according to a comment by the country’s defense minister that was the subject of much debate over whether it was a good strategy or if this offhand remark was even serious.
The Indian Navy operates two small aircraft carriers. Four more would give India a carrying force comparable to that of China, which is growing rapidly. And it wouldn’t be much smaller – at least in number of ships – than the US Navy’s 11 supercarriers.
But the realization of this ambitious shipbuilding project is another matter. Many Indian experts are convinced that this is a bad idea.
Exactly what the Indian government thinks is unclear. In an interview with an Indian newspaper regarding plans to build a third aircraft carrier, Defense Minister Rajnath Singh said India would build even more. “We won’t stop there (three carriers),” he said. “We’ll do five, six more.”
Some Indian experts are not sure the government is taking this issue seriously. The defense minister “apparently made an off-the-cuff remark that was picked up by the media,” Abhijit Singh, a former Indian naval officer and now an analyst at the Observer Research Foundation think tank in New Delhi, told Business Insider . “He was only trying to dispel suggestions that the government would be reluctant to a proposal for a third aircraft carrier.”
Nonetheless, there are compelling reasons why India might want to have a large carrier fleet. India’s rival China now has three aircraft carriers, including the recently launched 80,000-ton Fujian, and could aim for a fleet of six carriers by 2035. China – which has fought clashes bordering India in the Himalayas in 2020 – is beginning to project its power into the Indian Ocean, which constitutes India’s maritime backyard.
“It is planned that the Chinese will permanently station one of their CBG (carrier battle group) in the Indian Ocean, supported by its various bases in Djibouti (on the western edge of the Indian Ocean), in Ream in Cambodia (at the eastern limit of the Indian Ocean), and Gwadar in Pakistan, Hambantota in Sri Lanka and Kyaukpyu in Myanmar,” warned the Indian magazine Swarajya.
Interestingly, Swarajya magazine also suggested that the carriers could project Indian power into the South China Sea, which constitutes China’s maritime backyard. Indian warships regularly sailed through these waters.
A view from the sloping bow of the INS Vikrant which carries MiG-29K fighter jets. Imtiyaz Shaikh/Getty Images
India has two carriers of around 45,000 tonnes each: the Vikramaditya (a refurbished former Soviet ship) and the Vikrant, India’s first Indian-built carrier. Both are ski jump designs that launch the struggling Soviet-era MiG-29K under their own power, as it lacks catapults. Despite early speculation that the proposed third carrier would be a 65,000-ton ski-jump model similar to the British Queen Elizabeth class, the Indian government appears to be opting for a 45,000-ton ship similar to the Vikrant and carrying US-made Rafale French. fighters.
That means Indian carriers would continue to be less than half the size of America’s 100,000-ton nuclear-powered Nimitz and Ford-class behemoths, which are equipped with steam or electromagnetic catapults capable of launching heavier aircraft, in particularly airborne early warning aircraft. plane; China’s Fujian also uses an advanced electromagnetic catapult. They would also be cheaper, with India’s third carrier estimated to cost around $5 billion, compared to $13 billion for a Ford-class carrier.
In fact, some Indian naval experts would prefer a larger aircraft carrier equipped with catapults. “Small aircraft carriers, like those India possesses, are increasingly vulnerable and are unlikely to play a significant role in future conflicts,” said Singh, the defense analyst. “Unfortunately, the country does not have the financial means to acquire a large carrier and can only afford another small flattop. This presents a difficult situation with no easy solution.”
On the other hand, there is a reason why America builds extremely expensive aircraft carriers. Its global interests arguably require the ability to deploy and maintain floating airfields anywhere in the world, often in remote locations where air bases are not available. For India and China, which have a more regional vocation, smaller ships may be sufficient.
For India, aircraft carriers represent much more than floating airfields. They are symbols of national power. So, regardless of their military utility against a powerful adversary like China, the carriers would enable India to support other operations, such as humanitarian, peacekeeping and counter-piracy missions.
“The consensus among Indian maritime observers is that the aircraft carrier remains at the heart of maritime strategy, not only for its ability to dominate the littoral but also for its crucial role in peacetime,” Abhijit Singh said. “In situations other than war, the flattop can change the psychological balance in a way that no other naval platform can. Despite its drawbacks, the aura and impact of the aircraft carrier in peacetime operations are unrivaled.”
Michael Peck is a defense writer whose work has appeared in Forbes, Defense News, Foreign Policy magazine and other publications. He holds a master’s degree in political science from Rutgers Univ. Follow him on Twitter And LinkedIn.
businessinsider
