U.S. seeks shipbuilding expertise from South Korea and Japan to counter China
triblive.com -- Sunday, August 17, 2025, 12:26:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: U.S.–China Relations, Foreign Policy & International Relations, Presidential Campaigns
WASHINGTON -- American lawmakers are using a trip to South Korea and Japan to explore how the United States can tap those allies' shipbuilding expertise and capacity to help boost its own capabilities, which are dwarfed by those of China.
Sens. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., and Andy Kim, D-N.J., who are scheduled to land in Seoul on Sunday before traveling to Japan, plan to meet top shipbuilders from the world's second- and third-largest shipbuilding countries. The senators want to examine the possibilities of forming joint ventures to construct and repair noncombatant vessels for the U.S. Navy in the Indo-Pacific and bring investments to American shipyards.
"We already have fewer capacity now than we did during Operation Iraqi Freedom" in 2003, Duckworth told The Associated Press. "We have to rebuild the capacity. At the same time, what capacity we have is aging and breaking down and taking longer and more expensive to fix."
Their trip comes as President Donald Trump demands a plan to revive U.S. shipyards and engage foreign partners. The Pentagon is seeking $47 billion for shipbuilding in its annual budget. The urgency stems from the fact that Washington severely lags behind China in building naval ships, a situation raising alarms among policymakers who worry the maritime balance of power could shift to China, now the world's No. 1 shipbuilder.
Duckworth, who serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said she hopes the trip could lead to joint ventures among the U.S. military, American companies and foreign partners to build auxiliary vessels for the Navy and small boats for the Army.
Another possibility is repairing U.S. ships in the Indo-Pacific region.
"If we have to bring ships all the way back to the United States ... to wait two years to be fixed, that doesn't help the situation," Duckworth said.
The discussions, she said, will focus on auxiliary vessels, which are noncombatant ships such as fueling and cargo vessels that support naval and military operations. The Navy's auxiliary fleet is aging and insufficient in numbers, she said.
The U.S. commercial shipbuilding accounted for 0.1% of global capacity in 2024, while China produced 53%, followed by South Korea and Japan, according to a report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. A Navy review from April 2024 found that many of its major shipbuilding programs were one year to three years behind schedule.
During the trip, the senators are expected to meet representatives from major shipbuilders in the region.
South Korea and the U.S. are already making progress on shipbuilding cooperation. In March, Hanwha Ocean completed maintenance work for a 41,000-ton U.S. Navy dry cargo and ammunition ship in South Korea. The overhaul of USNS Wally Schirra was the Korean company's first project after it secured a repair agreement with the U.S. Navy in July 2024.
Hanwha Group last year acquired Philly Shipyard in Philadelphia, which builds large merchant mariners, part of the reserve auxiliary fleet.
Earlier this month, South Korea proposed to invest $150 billion in the U.S. shipbuilding industry to support Trump's "Make American Shipbuilding Great Again" initiative as part of its tariffs talk with the White House.
Duckworth said she had earlier conversations with Hyundai Heavy Industries "about them actually buying into U.S. shipyards on U.S. soil".
This month, China formed the world's biggest shipbuilding company by merging two state-owned shipbuilders. The combined entity China State Shipbuilding Corporation produces Chinese navy's combat vessels from aircraft carriers to nuclear submarines. It commands 21.5% of global shipbuilding market.
Sign Our PetitionThe recent trip by Senators Tammy Duckworth and Andy Kim to South Korea and Japan illuminates a crucial aspect of contemporary geopolitical strategy: the urgent need for the United States to enhance its shipbuilding capabilities in the face of China's ascendant naval power. In a world increasingly defined by competition over maritime resources and trade routes, the U.S. finds itself at a significant disadvantage, with domestic shipbuilding capacity representing a mere 0.1% of global output as of 2024. This stark reality prompts an examination not just of military readiness but also of the broader implications of such international partnerships, particularly in the context of historical U.S. foreign policy and its economic ramifications.
Historically, American shipbuilding prowess was a cornerstone of its military might and economic resilience. However, the decline in this sector reflects a troubling trend in U.S. manufacturing more broadly, which has seen a significant erosion since the 1980s due to outsourcing and globalization. The reduction in shipbuilding capacity serves as a microcosm of the larger economic shifts that have left many American workers and communities vulnerable. As the U.S. seeks to engage with South Korea and Japan for their shipbuilding expertise, it raises questions about the long-term sustainability of such partnerships and their potential impact on American jobs. Rather than relying on foreign expertise, there is a compelling case to be made for revitalizing domestic industries through investment and innovative policies that prioritize American labor.
Moreover, the urgency of this situation calls into question the underlying motivations of U.S. foreign policy. The push to counter China's growing naval capabilities is not merely about military strategy; it intertwines with economic competition and the preservation of U.S. influence in the Pacific. The historical narrative of the U.S. as a dominant maritime power is at stake, yet this narrative often overlooks the complex realities of international relations and the interconnectedness of global economies. As the U.S. seeks to bolster its naval fleet through partnerships with allied nations, it must consider the implications of such strategies on regional stability and its long-term diplomatic relationships. The potential for conflict—whether military or economic—remains high, and the U.S. must tread carefully to avoid exacerbating tensions in an already fraught geopolitical landscape.
The discussions around joint ventures for auxiliary vessels and the repair of U.S. Navy ships in the Indo-Pacific also highlight a critical aspect of military logistics that is often overlooked. The acknowledgment by Senator Duckworth regarding the inefficiencies in the current ship repair process—where ships may take years to return to operational status—underscores the need for a more agile and responsive military infrastructure. This systemic inefficiency not only compromises national security but also strains resources that could be better allocated to address pressing domestic issues, such as healthcare, education, and climate change. The focus on military readiness should not overshadow the equally pressing need for comprehensive social policies that uplift communities and provide a foundation for long-term national resilience.
Finally, as the U.S. engages in these international efforts, it is imperative to consider the social justice implications of military spending and foreign partnerships. The proposed $47 billion budget for shipbuilding is a staggering investment that reflects a prioritization of military capabilities over social welfare. While national security is undoubtedly important, it should not come at the expense of critical social programs that address inequality and support vulnerable populations. Advocates for social justice and equitable economic policies must challenge the narrative that equates military spending with security and instead advocate for a holistic approach that prioritizes human well-being. By framing military readiness within a larger context of social responsibility, we can foster a more inclusive dialogue about the future of U.S. policy both at home and abroad.
In conclusion, the exploration of U.S. shipbuilding partnerships with South Korea and Japan sheds light on the multifaceted nature of contemporary geopolitics. It serves as a reminder of the historical trajectory of American manufacturing, the implications of international collaborations for domestic industries, and the urgent need to balance military readiness with social justice initiatives. As voters and advocates engage in conversations about national security and economic policy, they must grapple with these interconnected issues and advocate for strategies that foster both military effectiveness and social equity.
The recent news about U.S. lawmakers seeking shipbuilding expertise from allies in South Korea and Japan highlights a crucial turning point in American military and industrial capacity, particularly as the nation finds itself trailing behind China in naval capabilities. This situation is not merely an operational concern; it sits at the intersection of national security, economic policy, and international relations. Historically, the U.S. has prided itself on its military might, rooted in a robust domestic manufacturing base. However, the current reliance on foreign expertise raises questions about the sustainability of American military readiness and the implications of outsourcing critical defense capabilities.
The context of this endeavor is deeply linked to the ongoing strategic competition with China, which has rapidly expanded its shipbuilding capabilities and is now the world's leading shipbuilder. This shift in maritime power dynamics is alarming for American policymakers, who fear that an insufficient naval presence could undermine U.S. interests in key global regions. The urgency expressed by Senators Duckworth and Kim on their trip underscores the recognition that without a revitalization of America's shipbuilding industry, the U.S. risks ceding control over vital sea lanes and military operations to a rival power. The decline of the U.S. shipbuilding sector, which only accounts for a mere 0.1% of global capacity, is alarming and reflects broader trends of deindustrialization and neglect of critical infrastructure in America.
For concerned citizens, this situation presents a clear call to action. Firstly, there is an opportunity to advocate for policies that prioritize revitalizing domestic manufacturing. By supporting initiatives that invest in American shipyards and workers, individuals can play a part in restoring the nation’s industrial base. This can be achieved through grassroots campaigns that promote job creation in the manufacturing sector, alongside pushing for federal policies that incentivize domestic production over reliance on foreign entities. Emphasizing the need for a robust shipbuilding industry should resonate with a wide array of stakeholders, from labor unions to national security advocates.
Moreover, educating the public about the implications of this reliance on foreign partnerships is paramount. The discussion should extend beyond military readiness to encompass broader economic and social ramifications. By outsourcing shipbuilding and repair, the U.S. risks not only its strategic autonomy but also the loss of high-skilled jobs in manufacturing. Engaging conversations about the importance of investing in American labor and technology, along with the potential risks of foreign dependency in defense, can help build a coalition for change. This dialogue is essential in fostering a more informed electorate that recognizes the value of a strong domestic industrial base not just for military purposes, but for economic resilience and job creation.
Additionally, there exists an opportunity to frame this issue within the broader context of international cooperation and competition. While enhancing partnerships with allies like South Korea and Japan is critical, it is equally important to ensure that these alliances do not come at the expense of American workers and industry. Advocates can argue that the U.S. must lead in developing innovative shipbuilding technologies that can not only compete globally but also set standards for environmental sustainability and labor rights. By positioning the U.S. as a leader in ethical manufacturing practices, we can promote a vision of growth that aligns with progressive values while addressing national security needs.
In conclusion, the current efforts to seek shipbuilding expertise from South Korea and Japan should serve as a catalyst for broader discussions about the future of American manufacturing and defense. It presents an opportunity for citizens to engage actively in shaping policies that prioritize domestic capability, job creation, and innovative practices. The maritime balance of power is shifting, and how the U.S. responds will determine not only its military readiness but also the economic vitality of its workforce. By advocating for policies that embrace these principles, Americans can help forge a secure, prosperous future that reflects the nation’s values and aspirations.
The article outlines the urgent need for the U.S. to enhance its shipbuilding capacity, particularly in response to competition with China. While the focus is largely on military capabilities, there are broader implications and actions that can be taken from a community perspective, especially regarding economic and environmental sustainability. Here’s a detailed list of ideas and actions we can personally take:
### Personal Actions: 1. **Educate Yourself and Others:** - Stay informed about military-industrial complex developments and the implications of increased military spending on social programs. - Share articles and resources on social media platforms to raise awareness among your network.
2. **Support Local Shipbuilding and Maritime Industries:** - Advocate for policies that support domestic shipbuilding, potentially through community town halls or local meetups. - Purchase products or support companies that focus on sustainable maritime practices.
3. **Engage in Environmental Advocacy:** - Encourage the development of green shipbuilding practices. This can include advocating for policies that fund research into sustainable materials and technologies for naval vessels.
### Specific Actions: 1. **Sign Petitions:** - **Petition to Support Sustainable Shipbuilding Practices:** Websites like Change.org or Care2 often have petitions regarding environmental regulations in industries. Look for existing petitions or start one advocating for sustainable practices in shipbuilding.
2. **Contact Elected Officials:** - Write to your senators and representatives to express your views on military spending and the need for a focus on domestic shipbuilding. - **Who to Write To:** - **Senator Tammy Duckworth** Email: senator_duckworth@duckworth.senate.gov Mailing Address: 524 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20510 - **Senator Andy Kim** Email: senator_kim@kim.senate.gov Mailing Address: 2452 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20515
3. **Draft a Letter:** - **What to Say:** - Express your concerns about the reliance on foreign shipbuilding and the potential risks it poses. - Advocate for increased investment in domestic shipbuilding and the importance of sustainable practices in the military-industrial sector. - Request that they support legislation aimed at revitalizing U.S. shipyards while emphasizing environmental responsibility.
### Community Involvement: 1. **Attend Local Meetings:** - Participate in local government meetings or town halls to advocate for policies that support domestic job creation in shipbuilding and maritime industries.
2. **Create a Local Advocacy Group:** - Form a community group focused on maritime issues and sustainable industry practices. This could involve organizing events, workshops, or discussions with local businesses and environmental groups.
3. **Promote STEM Opportunities:** - Encourage local schools to offer programs focusing on engineering and maritime studies to foster interest in shipbuilding and related fields among young people.
### Broader Advocacy: 1. **Engage with Nonprofits:** - Partner with organizations focused on sustainable practices in industry, such as the Environmental Defense Fund or the Sierra Club, to amplify your voice on environmental issues related to shipbuilding.
2. **Push for Transparency:** - Advocate for transparency in military spending and shipbuilding contracts to ensure that taxpayer money is being spent responsibly and effectively.
By taking these actions, individuals can collectively influence the conversation around U.S. shipbuilding capacity, ensuring that it prioritizes sustainability and domestic job creation.