The global navy competition

There are many reasons why a strong navy is crucial for a country with geopolitical interest. A navy gives a country power, protection, and economic security in ways that land forces alone cannot. Most global trade moves by sea. A navy keeps shipping lanes safe from piracy, blockades, or hostile nations. Without this, a country’s economy can be disrupted quickly. Most importantly, a navy defends coastlines, deters invasions from the sea, and can strike threats far from home. It allows a nation to project power globally and respond to crises anywhere on earth. Naval forces monitor what is happening on and under the oceans, from tracking submarines to gathering intelligence about other nations’ activities. The navy is also involved in safekeeping critical infrastructure such as internet cables, energy pipelines, which runs along the ocean floor.

Some analysts claim that U.S. shipbuilding is in trouble. China builds 200 merchant ships a year for every one the U.S. builds. The gap is smaller for warships, but Beijing built more than 100 naval vessels over the past decade, while the U.S. navy got fewer than 50. President Trump wants to reverse the trend a build a “Golden Fleet”. He is trying to lead this effort, direct the navy and the shipyards and convince members of Congress that it is time to put national interest first.

China’s navy is now the world’s numerically biggest, and its ships are much newer than the U.S., three times as many are less than 15 years old. U.S. Navy ships also cost a lot more and take much longer to build. The U.S. fleet’s been stuck at just under 300 ships for nearly 15 years, with no sign that Washington knows how to add capacity. U.S. warships remain the most capable in the world with the best attack submarine (the Seawolf class), the best large surface combatant (the Flight 3 Arleigh Burke class), the best aircraft carrier (the Ford class) and the list goes on. But America needs quantity, not just quality.

The shipyards that build the Navy’s great ships, Electric Boat in Connecticut, Bath in Maine, Newport News in Virginia, Pascagoula in Mississippi are part of the reason America is falling behind. For decades, these yards have failed to modernize their physical plants and streamline their work force and work processes. The problem is not a lack of funding, the Navy has placed tens of billions of dollars in orders every year, but it is more prioritization, speed and urgency. Thanks to a focus on funding big ships in these big yards, the Navy doesn’t have the support ships it needs such as replenishment ships, refueling ships, hydrographic ships, surveillance ships, salvage ships, command ships and more.

Naval logistical support ships can be built in South Korea for 30% of the construction cost of a similar ship at a US shipyard, since the Koreans have modernized and streamlined their industry. The U.S. needs to modernize and expand the existing naval shipyards, working with Korean, Japanese or even European shipbuilders when appropriate. That will require new money, and luckily Congress has already provided some. There was an extra $29 billion for shipbuilding in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which Trump signed in July. That’s been offset by a $16 billion cut in the proposed 2026 Navy budget, but there will be enough left-over to start. The Navy should take some of the money and invest in modernizing underperforming yards. But for these yards to qualify for new funds, the Navy should require the industry to invest its own funds in modernization. The Navy will also have to accept a slowdown in new warships over the next three years and work down its backlog. Funds should be shifted by reducing the number of submarine, destroyer and amphibious ship orders for, say, two years and used to strengthen supply chains by buying long-lead items. The department should also identify three or four US commercial shipyards that can be brought more fully into the military-shipbuilding enterprise and invest billions in them.

It can also offer proven shipbuilders from Korea, Japan and Europe the opportunity to build the next two to four ships of any class of support ship, but only if they partner with one of the newly funded U.S. yards, sharing resources, expertise and trainers. In less than a decade, the Navy would have three or four new yards building the assets it needs.

At the same time as the U.S. is moving slowly, China is expanding it’s Navy rapidly and aggressively. China’s Navy (the People’s Liberation Army Navy, or PLAN) has been undergoing a very rapid and ambitious buildup. The PLAN reportedly has over 370 battle-force ships, including surface warships, submarines, amphibious ships, etc. Projections suggest its fleet could expand to around 395 ships by 2025 and 435 by 2030. According to some sources, this growth is part of a broader strategy to reach world-class naval power by 2050.

China now has three aircraft carriers: the Liaoning, Shandong, and the newly commissioned Fujian. The Fujian carrier is especially significant, it is domestically designed, has an electromagnetic catapult system (EMALS) to launch aircraft, a technology that only a few countries have, and supports heavier and more capable aircraft. There’s also work on a Type 004 carrier, which is believed to be nuclear-powered, though it’s still under development. China also has modern destroyers, such as the Type 055, very large, high-capability surface ships. Newer frigates are also in production: for example, Type 054B (Jiangkai III) frigates are being built, with at least a couple already launched. The Type 075 large amphibious assault ships with landing helicopter docks are being built, these enhance China’s ability to conduct amphibious operations.

China has a growing submarine force. Some sources estimate dozens of subs, including both conventional and potentially nuclear-powered ones. There are also many smaller vessels (e.g., Houbei-class (Type 022) fast missile boats) that may not be counted in some battle force numbers but pose capability in anti-ship roles. By building aircraft carriers, advanced surface ships, and amphibious vessels, China is positioning itself to operate far from its own shores in the Western Pacific, Indian Ocean, etc. Some of China’s capabilities (missiles, submarines, surface ships) are tailored to make it difficult for other powers (notably the U.S.) to operate freely in key regional waters. The buildup of amphibious assault ships, as well as carriers, could support operations related to Taiwan.

For neighboring countries (like Taiwan, Japan, the Philippines), China’s growing navy is a major strategic concern, especially given territorial disputes in the South China Sea and East China Sea. While the U.S. Navy still has important qualitative advantages (e.g., decades of carrier experience, global logistics), China’s sheer numbers and growing sophistication are narrowing certain gaps.

A stronger Chinese navy means Beijing has more capacity to project power globally, potentially protecting its overseas interests, sea lanes, and asserting influence. China’s navy buildup is one of its most consequential military modernization efforts. It combines rapid fleet growth, advanced new platforms, and strategic intent to shift the regional maritime balance, and potentially project power globally. This is not just about defending its coasts, it’s about asserting itself as a major naval power. It is time for the U.S. to wake up.