Why a light aircraft carrier is a good idea

Moon Geun-sik
The author, a Ret. navy captain, is a professor at Kyonggi University Graduate School of Politics.

In 1996, when Japan claimed sovereignty over the Dokdo islets, President Kim Young-sam pushed for a plan to build a light aircraft carrier. “I will fix Japan’s rudeness,” he said. But a year later, military leaders put the brakes on the scheme with the reasoning that “North Korea’s threats should be addressed first.” Since then, the Moon Jae-in administration resumed the project and allocated the budget. But the Yoon Suk-yeol administration is reconsidering the project yet again.

The Moon administration based its decision to build a light aircraft carrier on the need to respond to the North Korean threat as well as maritime security threats from China and Japan. But I think the project is being reconsidered because of a lack of justification for a light aircraft carrier. The role of such a carrier should be better explained, and the navy should inform the public of all possible situations that can occur at sea.

We vividly remember the intrusion of Japanese patrol boats in 2006 into the territorial waters of Dokdo, a Korean territory. The situation actually escalated into a state of emergency. At that time, Korea prepared for a push-out operation by mobilizing warships, but the plan failed because Korea’s naval strength was inferior to that of Japan in terms of the number and size of warships. As a result, active responses such as warning shots could not be made. Our navy had to overcome the crisis with mental strength and combat capabilities.

Just as the warships of the two countries were on the verge of a clash, emergency mediation by the United States barely ended the crisis. It is dizzying to imagine what would have happened without the help of the U.S. I missed the decisive vision of President Kim Young-sam, who ordered a light aircraft carrier 10 years before the incident, as if he predicted such an aggression. While there has not been a direct threat posed in Korean territorial waters, Japan still claims its sovereignty over Dokdo by augmenting naval forces, including aircraft carriers.

The bigger problem is China. China recently posed direct and indirect threats in Korea’s southwestern waters. According to data submitted by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) under the Ministry of National Defense to the National Assembly, over 260 Chinese warships entered South Korean waters last year while the number of Chinese aircraft violations of the Korean Air Defense Identification Zone (Kadiz) increases rapidly each year.

The activities that China engages to turn the South China Sea into an inland sea are now in progress in our southwestern sea. China is arbitrarily building artificial islands on seven reefs in the Spratly Islands to make the South China Sea its inland sea. In March, three artificial islands became China’s military bases as missiles and fighter jets were deployed. After ignoring its agreements with Asean member countries, China is poised to turn the South China Sea into an inland sea and declare it as Chinese territorial waters and an air defense identification zone.

Once China completes the mission of transforming the South China Sea into an inland sea, it will likely turn to the East China Sea, which includes Korea’s West Sea (or the Yellow Sea) and Ieo Island. Some moves are already underway. China has installed nine fixed buoys in the middle waters of the West Sea and demonstrated mobilization of an aircraft carrier fleet near the 124-degrees East longitude. China frequently violates the Kadiz, explores the Ieo Island to the south of Jeju Island, marks it on the Chinese map, and expands maritime and air patrols over the rock islet.

Our navy must inform the public of the grim situation as it is, and prepare weapons for defense. Our Second and Third Fleets are guarding the southwestern seas, but the size of naval vessels are dwarfed by Chinese warships. China is trying to dominate Korean waters with a fleet of 60,000- to 70,000-ton carriers in the Yellow Sea, while Korea is responding with only 3,000- to 7,000-ton destroyers.

It is realistically impossible to have naval power on par with China, the world’s second largest economy. Yet, we need at least one light aircraft carrier in the Yellow Sea to keep Chinese aircraft carriers from crossing the sea arbitrarily. Some say that it would be more cost-efficient to arm our forces with missiles rather than a light aircraft carrier to respond to Chinese aircraft carriers. But I want to ask them: Could Korea make a preemptive missile attack on a Chinese vessel that invaded Korean territorial waters without permission? If not, should we have reefs taken by China like the Philippines and bring the case to the International Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA)?

Our navy should be reminded that Korea would have been helpless without the help from the U.S. when Japan invaded Dokdo’s territorial waters in 2006. The naval leaders must remember that China’s moves to turn Korea’s southwest sea into an inland sea could be a second Dokdo incident. The plan to build a light aircraft carrier should be promoted as it is the optimal response strategy for our navy.

Translation by the Korea JoongAng Daily staff.