Why is the Navy’s largest shipbuilder looking for a subcontractor in China?


Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) in 2014. (Rogelio V. Solis/Associated Press)

Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) in 2014. (Rogelio V. Solis/Associated Press)

By Josh Rogin September 15

Senior executives from a major U.S. defense contractor toured China last month as part of their search for a foreign company to build a dry dock for U.S. Navy ships, with the help of the chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. The trip raised eyebrows both inside the Pentagon and among experts who don’t believe a Chinese company should be involved in U.S. military-related projects.

The company, Ingalls Shipbuilding, is a division of Huntington Ingalls Industries, which advertises itself as “America’s largest military shipbuilding company” and has built more U.S. Navy ships than any other military shipbuilder. Ingalls is based in Mississippi. The problem is, it needs a new dry dock to build ships there and says there are no American companies that can do it. So Ingalls is looking abroad for help.

Last month, senior Ingalls executives traveled to China for two weeks to visit several different ports. They also met with officials at the U.S. Consulate in Shanghai, a meeting facilitated by a very powerful Mississippi lawmaker.

“The staff of Sen. Thad Cochran (R-MS), the Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, has requested that Consulate Shanghai meet with a Mississippi constituent company Ingalls Shipbuilding,” wrote an official from the State Department’s legislative affairs bureau in a July 19 email I obtained. “The constituent is looking for a new Chinese vendor to build a new drydock for their shipbuilding company. They would like advice from the Consulate to walk them through how to do business in China.”

Ingalls executives met with U.S. officials in Shanghai, including Cameron Werker, the principal commercial officer at the consulate. In a follow-up email, Werker said Ingalls executives were planning to visit seven ports in China. The company has already conducted technical evaluations of proposals, and “China is the leading candidate,” Werker wrote. The other candidates are South Korea and Japan.

Ingalls’s only client is the U.S. Navy, according to Werker. He wrote that the plan is to build ships to about 50,000 tons in Mississippi and then float them out to the dry dock for adding another 20,000 tons of exterior work. The dock would then be used for “launch and retrieve.”

After the Ingalls executives left China, the defense liaison officer in Shanghai, Steve Angel, alerted the Pentagon, the Navy and the U.S. Embassy in Beijing about the trip.

“Ingalls Shipbuilding was here looking at Chinese shipbuilding companies to build a dry dock for USN ship construction,” Angel wrote. “Lobbied for by a U.S. Senator (Cochran). Not sure what Big Navy’s or OSD’s awareness are, but wanted to flag this for awareness.”

Larry Ferguson, China country director for the Office of the Secretary of Defense’s policy shop, responded to Angel’s email: “I think it’s fair to say we’ll want to do some fact finding.”

The Pentagon declined to comment about whether it has concerns about a Chinese shipbuilding company potentially building a dry dock that will then be used to build and maintain U.S. Navy ships.

“As many other shipyards in America, including those that also build Navy ships, have done in the last decade when needing to replace a large dry dock, Ingalls Shipbuilding is looking across the world market for a solution,” said Bill Glenn, a spokesman for Ingalls. “Since no decision has been made, it is premature to discuss this effort further.”

Chris Gallegos, a spokesman for Cochran, told me that the senator’s office didn’t actually lobby for Ingalls to get meetings with U.S. officials in China, but only forwarded a request for a point of contact at the U.S. Consulate in Shanghai from Ingalls to the State Department.

As for whether there is a security concern about having a Chinese company help build U.S. Navy ships, Gallegos said, “Senator Cochran expects all security precautions to be in place to protect U.S. national security.”

According to its public filings, Huntington Ingalls spent $4.8 million on lobbying in 2015. One of Huntington Ingalls’s in-house lobbyists, Carolyn Apostolou, spent 26 years as a professional staffer on the Senate Appropriations Committee before joining Huntington Ingalls in 2013, according to the Center for Responsive Politics’ Open Secrets project. Gallegos said Ingalls employees have also supported Cochran financially.

“Ingalls is the single largest private employer in Mississippi. Given Senator Cochran’s strong record of support for industry in Mississippi, I suspect many Ingalls employees have supported his campaigns,” he said.

Some Asia experts believe that there’s a real security risk in having a Chinese company build a dry dock for U.S. Navy ships because all large Chinese companies have deep ties to the Chinese government.

“Any time you have an entity like that working on U.S. military systems, common sense tells you there’s likely a security risk,” said Michael Auslin, Asia scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. “We know that there are connections, we know there is influence, we know there is government assistance. The Chinese government will have the plans.”

The Chinese government could use the project to implant surreptitious recording devices or other surveillance equipment near where sensitive U.S. Navy operations are ongoing, he said. U.S. intelligence agencies suspect that China uses projects of its largest telecom company, Huawei, as a means of spying on foreign countries.

Moreover, the Ingalls project would be a boon to the Chinese defense industry at the expense of the defense industry of U.S. allies, Auslin said. The money is essentially coming from the U.S. taxpayer because the U.S. government is Ingalls’s only client, he said.

“Wouldn’t it be better to go with an ally like Japan or South Korea?” Auslin said. “In an environment like this, you are basically subsidizing the Chinese defense sector. Is that something we want to do?”

It’s a shame the United States can’t handle 21st-century shipbuilding with its own domestic industry. But if U.S. defense contractors have to go abroad, they might want to think twice before subcontracting to America’s biggest naval competitor. It’s either a security risk or an economic subsidy that could better benefit an allied country. Either way, it’s a bad idea.

Josh Rogin is a columnist for the Global Opinions section of The Washington Post. He writes about foreign policy and national security.  Follow @joshrogin

Source: Washington Post “Why is the Navy’s largest shipbuilder looking for a subcontractor in China?”

Note: This is Washington Post’s report I post here for readers’ information. It does not mean that I agree or disagree with the report’ views.

Advertisements

8 Comments on “Why is the Navy’s largest shipbuilder looking for a subcontractor in China?”

  1. johnleecan says:

    Something fishy is going on here and I like the idea. Time to do some reciprocation to the American government.

    The Chinese government should allow these Americans to build their US Navy’s warships in China. After finishing the projects, the warships should not be allowed to leave China because it is a national security issue and these vessels are deemed as security threats to China. China then should seize all the blueprints, documents and vessels of the Americans.

    To add one more thing. Re accusations the Chinese government is using Huawei to spy on other countries, totally baseless and without any evidence. Re Apple and USA government spying on almost anyone whether Americans, foreigners, government officials, etc. using Apple Iphone is documented. Even if you’re Iphone is turned off, they can hear your conversations and even activate the video camera to spy on you.

    Like

  2. Steve says:

    The US is suffering from hegemonism anxiety. They are seeking top of the art construction and engineering works from China, yet complain about security risks, but the most stupid part is that No American Companies has the capacity or expertise to construct a dry dock. Presently, China are building more state of the art stealth warships than All of NATO combined annually. The same can be said by the Russian Sputnik report that China is building state of the art generation fighter Jets more than NATO annually. And yet these ungrateful Rattlers, Sneaks and Snakes are complaining about security risks in China when No American company has the potential to construct Dry Docks.

    Regardless if it is;

    1… A Dry Dock.
    2… A Wet Dock.
    3… A Dick Dock.
    OR
    4… A Tick Tock.

    China should be extremely careful of these Rattlers since the US economy is on borrowed time within an hourly glass. The world is waking up to a post dollar world, a shift of geopolitical and geo-economic to the East. The US is bankrupt and printing TRD (toilet roll dollars) and still borrowing more money to service it’s path of sequestration. With $19 trillion in debts and with No collaterals, the Chinese ship building companies should demand high deposits and monies up front at each stage of construction.

    Like

  3. Simon says:

    I briefly read something that Chinese builders were involved in construction of the two new British aircraft carriers.

    Like

    • Steve says:

      Hmmm — Wonder if the C-builders will install miniature quantum communication tracking devices to locate the carriers.

      Like

  4. alking1957 says:

    China should not build any such thng for USN. Why help them get the best at low prices ?

    Like

    • Jane says:

      Because it would improve relations with the United States.

      The U.S. is run by the military-industrial complex. They’re the ones that tell the government what to do.

      If China can become friendly with some military contractors in the U.S., then they will not want to fight China. Instead, they will push to buy more Chinese parts, and they’ll find another enemy to fight.

      Like

  5. […] via Why is the Navy’s largest shipbuilder looking for a subcontractor in China? — Tiananmen’s … […]

    Like