Aircraft carriers primarily came into being during the Second World War, in which they were used by the US and Japan to extend their reach across the vast Pacific Ocean. These days they are used to fight wars away from one’s own shores and are used as a tool for power projection.

To counter this specific threat China has developed two kinds of tools, which are basically in the nature of area denial weapons. One is enhanced ballistic missile capability with a claimed accuracy to target aircraft carriers. China has deployed ballistic missiles like DF-21D and DF-26 (DF for Dong Feng), which are touted as ‘carrier killers’.

These missiles intend to deny free access to the US aircraft carriers near Chinese shores. Second in line are the submarines, which are our area of interest right now.

Submarines, right from the days of German U-boats, are a weapon of choice for denying your adversary free access to the seas. Lurking inside the sea and being stealthy in nature they play on the psychology of the adversary. With time, their role has evolved and specialised.

Over the years China has developed a large fleet of submarines, both nuclear and conventional. Totalling between 65 -70 submarines, the fleet comprises of ballistic missile submarines and nuclear attack submarines, and other conventional submarines.

In the realm of conventional submarines, China has improved upon its earlier diesel-electric submarines and deployed submarines with air independent propulsion (AIP), which drastically increases their range, endurance and stealth.

Open sources reveal that its latest Yuan-class submarines operate on AIP. As AIP is based on fuel cells, these submarines do not require to surface daily to run their diesel engines to recharge their batteries. Fuel cells also mean less number of moving mechanical parts, making them quieter and stealthier.

China also has worked upon and improved on its nuclear submarines. These submarines powered by nuclear fuel have theoretically infinite endurance. Their range is only limited by crew fatigue and availability of food supply.

Looking to challenge the US in Pacific and to keep more than a toe-hold in the Indian Ocean, China is rapidly deploying Type-093 Shang-class and Type-094 Jin-class nuclear submarines.

Type-095 and Type-096 are also in various stages of development and deployment.

Bigger and quieter from their earlier generation, these are both attack submarines (SSNs) and strategic ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs), popularly called as boomers.

China hopes to dominate Indian Ocean with bases in Djibouti and Gwadar through these nuclear submarines.

It is also noteworthy that recognising the vulnerability of aircraft carriers and lack of usefulness in addressing its unique threats, China operates only two aircraft carriers (Liaoning and Shandong) as of now. These two also have been acquired by it during the last decade only.

Now, let’s consider what should be our appropriate strategic response and what are we doing to counter this threat.

India has been operating at least one aircraft carrier for the last 60 years.

Currently, it has one INS Vikramaditya deployed and another one in the making. It plans to add another one after that and operate three carriers at a time in future.

In comparison, it has may be 14 diesel-electric attack submarines, one SSBN or boomer (INS Arihant) and one nuclear attack submarine (INS Chakra) taken on lease from Russia.

Of the diesel-electric attack submarines, India is in the process of acquiring six Scorpene class French submarines under Project P-75.

These submarines are known as hunter-killer, are capable of AIP and are considered one of the best in the world due to their stealth features.

They are capable of anti-submarine, anti-ship, land attack, mine laying and intelligence gathering roles. Their only limitation is their limited numbers in service as of now.

Aware of this Chinese submarine threat, India is also augmenting its anti-submarine warfare capabilities through deployment of Poseidon-8I planes and acquisition of Romeo MH-60 helicopters from the US.

These two weapon systems are also considered the best in their class and known for their formidable surveillance, detection and anti-ship and anti-submarine warfare capabilities.

So, on the face of it everything seems fine with our strategic vision. But a bit closer look may reveal a contradiction.

A report in The Print dated 21 February 2020 indicates that the Indian Navy is planning for the third aircraft carrier but the Chief of Defence Staff seems to have some reservations about it.

The issue is that India is planning for more aircraft carriers and submarines simultaneously. Given our size of economy and availability of resources, this may require a trade-off and deciding in favour of one over the other.

How do we settle the debate? Two incidents may help in throwing some light.

First incident is when at the peak of Bangladesh’s war of liberation in December 1971, the US decided to deploy its 7th fleet to the Bay of Bengal. This fleet deployment, led by the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise, was to coerce India.

This force projection was working fine till the time it was learnt that this fleet was being tracked by some attack submarines of the USSR.

It is possible that these submarines deliberately got discovered to put psychological pressure on the US. The end result was that Pakistan was disappointed while waiting for 7th fleet to arrive.

Second incident also relates to this war only. Now, a lot has been written about the sinking of Pakistani submarine PNS Ghazi near Vishakhapatnam harbour. But the threat perception of this lone Pakistani submarine required Indian Navy to remove and deeply camouflage the movement of INS Vikrant, our sole aircraft carrier.

These incidents reveal the advantage a submarine enjoys and effectiveness it has as an area-denial weapon of choice.

Since those days of 1971, submarines have evolved a lot and have only become stealthier and quieter.

Aircraft carriers on the other hand require heavy capital expenditure upfront and have high operational costs as compared to submarines.

Aircraft carriers also concentrate strategic resources at one place making them attractive targets for the enemies.

So, looking at the distance of major sea lanes and Strait of Malacca from Indian mainland and Andamans respectively, an area denial weapon like a submarine seems preferable to a force projection weapon like aircraft carriers.

What we need is a mix of more conventional but modern AIP-based submarines for relatively close ranges and few nuclear submarines for long ranges and nuclear deterrence.

We should also further augment them with our enhanced anti-submarines warfare capability. So, more of P-8Is planes and Romeo M-60 helicopters may be the need of the hour.

So, where have we reached with all these arguments?

Given the overall geostrategic environment we should prioritise allocation of resources towards acquisition of an effective submarine force and also enhance our anti-submarine warfare capability.

Two aircraft carriers and our location should give us a chance for dominance in the air.

Looking it this way, our capability to track Chinese submarines and ships in Indian Ocean and our leverage to block the Strait of Malacca may be the best guarantor of peace as compared to any pious intentions.

China has been the biggest beneficiary of this rule-based world order and has harvested rich dividend of peace.

It has become rich without fighting any serious wars.

Given the right leverage, being a rational actor that China is, it shouldn’t choose conflict. But this outcome hinges on us acquiring that capability. Because, as the cliche goes, intentions can change overnight but capabilities cannot.

Biography

Recent Posts