The United States faces a growing challenge regarding its naval capabilities and maritime industrial capacity.
For years, U.S. shipbuilding has significantly declined, with the country now producing just 0.1 percent of the world’s commercial shipbuilding output.
In stark contrast, China has made extensive investments in bolstering its naval fleet and enhancing its shipbuilding infrastructure, creating a widening capabilities gap that poses a potential strategic threat to Washington.
Experts from the U.S. defense and policy circles agree that addressing this gap cannot solely rely on domestic resources, particularly within the limited timeframes strategists envision for deterring or countering a possible confrontation with a near-peer adversary.
The inherent deficiencies, along with an eroded industrial base and a challenging regulatory environment, necessitate not only reinvestment but also innovative collaboration with trusted allies.
Among these allies, South Korea emerges as a critical partner.
Renowned for its efficient and high-tech shipbuilding capabilities, South Korea can significantly aid the United States in modernizing its naval assets, from warships to advanced autonomous platforms.
The revitalization of U.S. maritime strength calls for a transformative approach to strategic maritime thinking, a concept aptly described by a former U.S. Secretary of the Navy as “new maritime statecraft.”
This new vision emphasizes maritime power as a fundamental aspect of U.S. national security and global leadership, integrating naval hardware, defense, diplomacy, commerce, and innovation through long-term planning and international collaboration.
A key component of this approach is anticipating future challenges such as competition for ocean resources, disputed maritime territories, and the complexities of maintaining a high-tech, distributed naval force.
The message is clear: the United States must adopt a bold, forward-thinking stance while enhancing cooperative efforts, particularly through leveraging the industrial capacities of allies like South Korea.
To fulfill this ambitious agenda, Washington must navigate several challenges.
First on the agenda is the need to provide a consistent demand signal that encourages allied shipbuilders to invest in the U.S. shipbuilding sector.
An example of this is Hanwha’s acquisition of Philly Shipyard in 2024.
The SHIPS (Shipbuilding and Harbor Infrastructure for Prosperity and Security) for America Act aims to expand the U.S.-flag international fleet by 250 ships over the next ten years, seeking to revitalize the U.S. shipbuilding and commercial maritime sectors.
While the SHIPS Act represents a positive step, Korean shipbuilders require a significant number of vessels on order to justify substantial capital investments, highlighting the need for increased demand from the U.S. shipping industry.
Addressing the deficiencies in the U.S. shipbuilding industry may involve revising existing laws concerning overseas manufactured ships and national security-related restrictions on partnerships.
Furthermore, considering the skilled labor shortage in U.S. shipyards, leveraging workers from countries like South Korea could address this gap effectively.
Implementing these changes via executive orders or legislative reform could unlock new possibilities for joint production with allies while revitalizing domestic capabilities.
In addition to rethinking legal frameworks, the U.S. can employ several strategies to rebuild its domestic shipbuilding capacity.
Establishing a framework for best practice exchanges with allied shipbuilders is one way forward.
Expanding maintenance and repair operations within allied shipyards while collaborating on modular builds also offers viable paths.
Although these initiatives require time for meaningful implementation, short-term acquisitions of foreign-built vessels could support U.S. objectives while domestic capabilities are strengthened.
There exists a notable debate on the implications of foreign purchases for the U.S. naval shipbuilding sector.
Some stakeholders argue that allied shipbuilders can produce faster and more cost-effectively, while others caution against the political barriers that complicate foreign acquisitions.
Participants in discussions underscore the need for U.S. investment in domestic capabilities and the strategic importance of keeping shipbuilding local, even as opportunities for South Korean engagement grow.
It remains uncertain how much time and resources should be allocated toward revitalizing domestic shipbuilding, given the urgency of the situation.
Continued, robust dialogues with key oversight and administrative bodies are also essential.
By providing transparent information about South Korea’s advanced shipbuilding capabilities, the U.S. can shift institutional perceptions and facilitate more flexible procurement approaches.
Informal, closed-door discussions, such as those initiated through roundtables by organizations like Stimson, are promising engagements that can pave the way for more effective policies.
Additionally, South Korean shipbuilders must enhance their public diplomacy and business strategies in the U.S.
There is a clear need to raise awareness about the capabilities of Korean firms and the benefits they can bring to maritime needs in both countries.
Illustrating their potential for meeting commercial and naval demands, as well as opportunities for co-investment in U.S. facilities, will be instrumental in building political support.
Finally, the dialog surrounding shipbuilding needs to shift from mere numbers of ships to strategic outcomes.
As emphasized by experts, the focus should not only be on how many vessels are constructed but on achieving an operationally cohesive fleet that remains sustainable and quickly replaceable in wartime.
In conclusion, America’s maritime decline can be traced back several decades, beginning with reduced federal support for shipyards in the 1980s under the Reagan administration.
Market forces alone cannot sustain the remaining industrial base without strategic direction and investment.
Today’s maritime landscape demands a combined strategy of industrial policy, strengthened partnerships with allies, and a clear vision for the future.
The most perilous assumption is that the current state of U.S. naval power is sufficient.
A decisive and thoughtful shift in how the U.S. approaches shipbuilding, domestically and internationally, is crucial for maintaining its ability to project power, deter adversaries, and safeguard critical global trade routes.
What is required now is the creativity and determination to act decisively.
image source from：https://www.stimson.org/2025/envisioning-allied-cooperation-in-us-shipbuilding/
