[The Editors' Verdict] The Navy Must Thoroughly Establish an Aircraft Carrier Operation Plan

One of the contentious issues during this year's National Assembly National Defense Committee audit was the Navy's acquisition project for light aircraft carriers. Although the requirement was decided through the Joint Chiefs of Staff last December, controversy over the appropriateness of proceeding with the project continues.

The Navy argues that possessing an aircraft carrier is a long-cherished goal for becoming an ocean-going navy. The ocean-going navy is a concept and vision aimed at a blue-water navy capable of conducting operations on the high seas. However, acquiring an aircraft carrier, which involves astronomical public funds, must be pursued only after thoroughly reviewing the relationship between future warfare patterns and aircraft carrier operations. Due to the rapid changes in warfare execution methods, prioritizing aircraft carrier acquisition when acquiring land, sea, and air forces is not easy. There are many forces that need to be acquired more urgently.

It is difficult to gain consensus with the so-called "nice to have" logic that an aircraft carrier is needed for "war deterrence through display" or the power to show off, as is the case now. The logic of "must have unconditionally" needs to be developed and advanced. To do this, consideration of four matters is necessary.

First is the formulation of maritime military strategy. To counter threats from potential adversaries at sea, the Republic of Korea Navy’s ‘strategic concepts’ (coastal defense, near-sea defense, regional forward defense, blue-water forward defense), ‘defense range’ (sea and coastal areas from 150nm to over 1500nm), ‘strategic objectives’ (territorial protection, maritime control, maritime denial, global defense), and ‘detailed operations’ (area denial, maritime control, maritime superiority, maritime projection) must be established. Based on this, the acquisition of aircraft carriers necessary for operational execution should be discussed. For example, when the Chinese Navy pursues a strategy focused on securing sea control within the First and Second Island Chains, the question arises as to what the Korean Navy’s strategy is to respond and what means support it.

Second is deciding the purpose of the aircraft carrier. Even if the Korean Navy possesses an aircraft carrier, it is practically difficult to have the carrier strike group forces with the carrier as the flagship like the U.S. Navy. Therefore, it is extremely important to decide in advance how the aircraft carrier will be used. Clear and specific answers must be prepared regarding what threats it will counter, how long it will operate at sea, with whom it will operate, and how many and what types of carrier-based aircraft will be deployed on the deck. This will help persuade the Army, Air Force, and politicians who oppose the aircraft carrier on the grounds that it does not fit the operational concept of the Korean Peninsula battlefield.

Third is establishing a joint operational concept with the Air Force and Army. Carrier-based aircraft are operated by the Air Force. Therefore, the Navy must understand the Air Force’s negative stance on using vertical takeoff and landing aircraft like the F-35B, which require enormous operational costs. To save costs, tactics that actively utilize the mixed manned-unmanned teams (complex systems) that the Air Force is preparing as one of the future warfare methods should be considered, especially employing mothership unmanned aerial vehicles equipped with a large number of air-to-air missiles and various armaments on the aircraft carrier. Of course, this is an alternative only possible if the design is changed to a medium-sized aircraft carrier. Additionally, operational concepts that can multiply combat power during joint operations with ground forces should also be developed.

Fourth is calculating the economic and scientific-technological effects related to the aircraft carrier. Building an aircraft carrier is a long-term project taking over ten years and involves not only shipyards but numerous industries. Therefore, many jobs will be created, and the added value from new technology development will be enormous. If these economic, scientific, and technological effects are calculated in detail and presented numerically, it could greatly help in persuading the public.

Finally, possessing an aircraft carrier shows the Navy’s determination to have the most demanding and powerful capabilities to strengthen readiness at sea. However, Korea is new to operating aircraft carriers. Therefore, to minimize trial and error, thorough research on advanced countries’ cases and establishing plans for their application must be pursued.

Kim Jong-ha, Dean of the Graduate School of Management and Defense Strategy, Hannam University

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.