Trump's pushing for naval supremacy over China. Here's what his maritime order misses

Home > Business > Industry

Trump's pushing for naval supremacy over China. Here's what his maritime order misses

Published: 17 Apr. 2025, 07:00 Updated: 17 Apr. 2025, 14:40

LEE JAE-LIM
[email protected]

Audio report: written by reporters, read by AI

Hanwha Ocean carried out maintenance, repair and overhaul services on the USNS Wally Schirra, owned by the U.S. Navy. The U.S. Navy vessel, after undergoing maintenance, heads out to the sea in March 2025. [HANWHA OCEAN]

[NEWS ANALYSIS]

In the past decade, China has overtaken the United States in its volume of naval warships, driven by its vast shipbuilding capacity and aggressive fleet modernization efforts.

In a bid to narrow the widening naval gap, the Donald Trump administration is enlisting allies like Korea and Japan to help restore America’s maritime dominance primarily through an executive order dubbed “Restoring America’s Maritime Dominance.”

While the order encourages shipbuilders from allied nations to invest in U.S. shipbuilding capabilities, it stops short of authorizing the construction of U.S. fleets — commercial or military — in allied shipyards. This omission is notable, as Korea has been anticipating such a shift since reports emerged of discussions between U.S. President Donald Trump and former President Yoon Suk Yeol on enhancing bilateral maritime cooperation last November.

What does the new directive allow, and what are its limits for Korea's entry?

The initiative takes a swipe to counter China's shipbuilding supremacy while bolstering efforts to facilitate the U.S. maritime industry.

The order is focused on domestic production with acknowledgments of the need for collaboration with allied nations.

Executive branches are given 210 days to rebuild the U.S. maritime industrial base, expand the domestic fleet and strengthen the maritime work force. It also calls for the creation of a dedicated fund with financial incentives to bolster maritime programs.

A whole section is dedicated to China, to consider levying significant port fees on Chinese-built or Chinese-flagged vessels, and to request its allies adopt similar measures against Chinese ships.

Mentions of allied nations are limited to incentivizing shipbuilders from such countries if they decide to invest in U.S. facilities and offering scholarships to maritime experts to foster the U.S. talent pool.

The following day, Trump suggested he may seek congressional approval to purchase large ships from allied nations as a stopgap measure while the U.S. ramps up its domestic shipbuilding capabilities — a comment that further stoked anticipation in Seoul of securing a surge of orders from Washington.

What laws need to be passed?

What has kept Korea out of the U.S. shipbuilding market is the protectionist Jones Act, a century-old law that bars foreign shipyards from building or repairing commercial vessels operating in domestic U.S. trade. The law has long limited Washington’s ability to tap into foreign expertise, even from close allies.

Although the Jones Act applies only to commercial ships, a separate set of restrictions under the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement effectively bars U.S. Navy vessels from being built or serviced in foreign shipyards.

That could change with two new bills introduced in February by Republican Senators Mike Lee and John Curtis of Utah, which would permit U.S. Navy and Coast Guard vessels to be constructed and maintained in allied shipyards, including those in Korea. However, the bills have been in committee for two months, with no hearings or floor action scheduled.

The Ships for America Act, bipartisan legislation introduced last December, is in the works to be reintroduced soon led by Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona, Republican Sen. Todd Young of Indiana, Democratic Rep. John Garamendi of California and Republican Rep. Trent Kelly of Mississippi. Although the bill is also focused on domestic shipbuilding, it encourages international collaboration with allies to meet wartime sealift requirements and support the maritime industries of both the United States and its partners.

What kinds of vessels will be foreign-built?

Trump did not specify in his remarks whether he was referring to commercial vessels, naval support ships or front line warships.

Historically, the U.S. Navy has never constructed its combat ships overseas. However, in an effort to reduce downtime and operational costs, it began outsourcing maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) services for noncombat support vessels to foreign shipyards for the first time last year.

In 2024, two major Korean shipbuilders — HD Hyundai and Hanwha Ocean — received certifications to bid on U.S. Navy MRO projects. Hanwha Ocean quickly secured two contracts: one for the dry cargo ship USNS Wally Schirra, which was delivered in March 2025, and another for the replenishment oiler USNS Yukon, scheduled for delivery later this month.

The Wally Schirra project marked the first large-scale MRO operation of a U.S. naval vessel carried out at a foreign facility.

A view of HD Hyundai Heavy Industries' Ulsan shipyard [HD HYUNDAI]

Korean shipbuilders, however, are eyeing opportunities beyond the support vessel segment. Their ultimate goal lies in penetrating the lucrative warship market, particularly because the U.S. Navy plans to expand its fleet to 381 battle force ships in the next three decades.

“The current contracts involve noncombat support ships, which typically offer limited margins,” said an industry source who requested anonymity. “Hanwha Ocean’s back-to-back wins are seen as a strategic foothold — positioning itself for future work on larger, high-value warships that promise greater profit potential.”

For the United States, Korea is the best alternative player to reach out if it aims to exclude China, according to Prof. Choi Gi-il of Sangji University's Department of Military Studies.

“Chinese shipyards are churning out warships at a frantic pace,” Choi said. “Key players in the global business are China, Japan and Korea. If exempting China, the U.S. has no viable option left except for Korea, which is entering a super cycle at just the right moment, in contrast to Japan's shipbuilding sector, which is currently in a downturn. The timing aligns perfectly, making Korea an ideal partner.”

BY LEE JAE-LIM [[email protected]]