How New York City Got Its Juicy Nickname “The Big Apple” — And What It Means To The World

 

China’s state-backed shipbuilding industry, bolstered by foreign contracts, dual-use infrastructure, and aggressive industrial policies, is rapidly outpacing the United States, threatening America’s naval supremacy in the Asia-Pacific and beyond. 

A recent report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) highlights how China has become the global leader in shipbuilding, leveraging its dominance to fuel the expansion of its People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) while the U.S. Navy grapples with aging shipyards and strategic challenges.

China’s shipbuilding juggernaut, led by the China State Shipbuilding Corporation (CSSC), has blurred the lines between civilian and military production through its military-civil fusion (MCF) strategy. Over 75% of ships produced by CSSC-owned yards are sold to foreign buyers, including major firms like Taiwan’s Evergreen Marine, effectively subsidizing China’s naval buildup with international capital. Western companies have also contributed by supplying critical technologies, such as marine engines and liquefied natural gas (LNG) carrier designs, enabling China to overcome key military-industrial hurdles.

The scale of China’s shipbuilding capacity is staggering. According to a 2024 U.S. Congressional Research Service (CRS) report, China’s shipbuilding capacity is 230 times that of the United States. The PLAN currently boasts a battle force of 370 ships and submarines, including more than 140 major combatants, as noted in the 2024 U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) China Military Power report. By contrast, the U.S. Navy’s fleet stands at 295 ships, a number that falls short of meeting the demands of U.S. combat commanders and national defense strategy, as highlighted by U.S. Senator Roger Wicker in a May 2024 Senate Armed Forces Committee hearing.

The gap is expected to widen. U.S. Senator Dan Sullivan warned that the PLAN could grow to 395 ships by 2025 and 435 by 2030—141 more than the U.S. Navy. This disparity places the U.S. in a precarious strategic position. Historical analysis by Sam Tangredi, published in a January 2023 article in Proceedings, underscores the importance of fleet size, noting that in 25 out of 28 naval conflicts, the larger fleet emerged victorious. Tangredi argues that numerical superiority enhances scouting, flexibility, and striking power, as demonstrated in conflicts like the Napoleonic Wars and World War II.

The decline of U.S. naval shipbuilding is a decades-long issue. Peter Lee, in a 2024 report for the Asan Institute for Policy Studies, attributes the problem to chronic delays in major programs like the Ford-class aircraft carrier and Virginia-class submarines, a dwindling labor force, and inconsistent government demand. The U.S. commercial shipbuilding industry has also collapsed, accounting for less than 1% of global output, crippled by the Jones Act, which inflates domestic shipping costs and stifles competitiveness.

To counter China’s rise, the U.S. has explored several options: revamping its shipbuilding industry, investing in unmanned platforms, or leveraging allied shipyards in Japan and South Korea. The Trump administration’s February 2025 “Make Shipbuilding Great Again” initiative aims to rejuvenate the industry through tax incentives, a Maritime Security Trust Fund, and maritime opportunity zones. However, Senator Wicker has expressed skepticism, noting that the U.S. lacks the industrial base to support a rapid expansion of shipbuilding.

Unmanned Surface Vehicles (USVs) offer a cost-effective alternative for fleet expansion, but they come with limitations. While USVs can enhance distributed lethality and resilience, they lack the endurance, firepower, and versatility of crewed warships and are vulnerable to electronic warfare.

The U.S. has also turned to allies for support. In March 2024, U.S. Secretary of the Navy Carlos Del Toro visited shipyards in South Korea and Japan, the world’s second- and third-largest shipbuilders, to explore partnerships. However, critics like Matthew Paxton argue that outsourcing shipbuilding would further weaken the U.S. industrial base and undermine national sovereignty.

As China’s shipbuilding dominance continues to grow, the U.S. faces a critical choice: revitalize its shipbuilding industry or risk ceding naval supremacy to a rising power whose relentless expansion shows no signs of slowing. The stakes are high, and the window for action is narrowing.