Asian powers should be united, not divided, by oceanambitions
|
Illustration: Liu Rui/GT |
After a delay of nearly five years, India's first indigenous aircraft carrier, the INS Vikrant,was finally launched on August 12 from the Cochin Shipyard, making India the fifthcountry in the world capable of launching an indigenous carrier. There are plans for twomore Indian carriers in the next few years.
Tasked with securing a long coastline and providing security for the Indian Ocean region,India requires at least three aircraft carriers to fulfill this role.
One carrier needs to be positioned on the western seaboard, the second one on the easternside, with the last being kept as reserve or deployed in the south.
However, it must be understood that carriers, even though they are potent instruments ofmaritime power projection and forward command platforms equipped with air power, arevulnerable individually and too precious to be operating alone.
They normally are surrounded and protected by "screening units" comprising differenttypes of ships and submarines moving as a composite unit called a Carrier Battle Group(CBG).Thus it is not enough to acquire the glamorous carriers: getting other units tocomprise a robust CBG is equally important.
Unfortunately, at no point of time since independence has the Indian navy ever had threecarriers, even though four fleet carriers and two light carriers were envisaged. There havebeen large gaps in India's maritime security calculus and between aspirations and reality.
In the initial years, India purchased the INS Vikrant (formerly the HMS Hercules), aMajestic class carrier, from the UK in 1957. Commissioned on March 4, 1961, the originalVikrant was finally decommissioned in 1997.
The second acquisition, INS Viraat, a Centaur class 28,700 tons aircraft carrier, waspurchased in April 1986 after many offers were considered, and it is still in operationalusage.
Bean-counting comparisons by the media between the PLA Navy carrier Liaoning and thenew Vikrant or the scheduled Vikramaditya (formerly the Gorshkov) have been rising.
Although the fact that the two navies have been cooperating on anti-piracy issues off theHorn of Africa and face common maritime challenges, the media is intent on unfairly pittingone against the other.
Until recently, China was the only permanent member of the UN Security Council withoutan aircraft carrier. It must be realized that both navies, Indian and Chinese, have evolvedfrom different traditions, and share a different heritage and national priorities.
Both have suffered due to "sea blindness" at the hands of continentally inclinedpolicymakers, but have undergone a paradigm shift recently and are modernizingthemselves.
It is futile to make mere technical comparisons between the two carriers.
The comparison lies more in the mindsets, training, tactics, and the likely roles that theyare expected to play.
To prepare for carrier operations, the PLA Navy had been readying itself in many waysincluding training its pilots on the decommissioned Melbourne. In addition, it hadreportedly used a concrete mock-up of a carrier flight deck near Wuhan for training carrierpilots.
The Brazilian navy has reportedly been willing to cooperate with the Chinese navy formutual benefit.
Yet it must be realized that India has been using carriers since the early 1960s, and has,after considerable trial and error, mastered the operating procedures and complexassociated tactics. This requires time and effort for which there are no quick fixes.
After overcoming initial teething equipment issues, the PLA Navy will have to slowlymaster the tactics and train accordingly for optimal utilization, which would require years.
Designing a carrier is a herculean task. The Indians have launched their first carrier andare working on a second, while the Chinese have yet to launch an indigenous carrier. TheChinese are still way behind.
India and China should focus on maritime commonalities and challenges rather thanincongruence.
After all, the sea unites while the land divides.
(Editor:YaoChun、Zhang Qian)
|