Donald Trump is back in the White House, and he's brought a new obsession: bigness. Everything must be big. Whether it's big and useless is another question entirely.
Late last year, Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth unveiled a plan for a 'Century Mega-Ship.' Trump boasted it would be 'the fastest, the biggest, and by far 100 times more powerful than any battleship ever built' in U.S. Navy history.
It all sounded grandiose. Astonishing.
Last Friday, the Congressional Budget Office ran the numbers. The sticker shock is real. The first giant battleship, the Intrepid, now carries a price tag of $23.4 billion, about HK$182.5 billion. And the total bill for the entire 'Golden Fleet'? A staggering $275 billion, or nearly HK$2.2 trillion. That's terrifyingly expensive.
Trump's $23.4B mega-ship: A costly fantasy that America's failing shipyards simply cannot build.
But the cost isn't the only nightmare. Senior Navy officials have a huge worry: America's shipyards are in decline. They simply can't handle a mission this surreal. With those two factors combined, if Washington forces the issue, the whole thing is likely to end in failure.
Half a year ago, Trump dropped a bombshell of a concept. The Navy would build two ships of a class Trump called 'the largest battleship in the history of our country.' These behemoths would displace 30,000 to 40,000 tons. They'd pack hypersonic weapons, electromagnetic railguns, cruise missiles, and the world's most advanced lasers. The class? Trump-class, naturally.
Later, the Navy confirmed something even more chilling. These ships would carry nuclear-tipped missiles. That gives them a deterrent punch similar to nuclear-armed submarines.
The grand plan? Eventually build 20 to 25 of these mega-ships of the century. Together, they'd form a 'Golden Fleet.' A force a hundred times more powerful than today's Navy, capable of dominating the seas.
The Eye-Watering Price Tag
The Navy's initial budget put the first mega-ship, the Intrepid, at $15.1 billion (HK$117.8 billion). The next two ships would average $10.2 billion. That's nearly HK$80 billion each.
But Trump wanted even more firepower. He demanded the entire fleet go nuclear. That one decision blew up the cost.
Last Friday, the Congressional Budget Office weighed in with a new report.
If the first new battleship displaces 35,000 tons, the cost jumps to $23.4 billion (about HK$182.5 billion). That's 50% higher than the original estimate. It's nearly the cost of a Ford-class aircraft carrier.
Build 15 of these mega-ships, and the total bill hits $275 billion (about HK$2.2 trillion).
Call it a super money pit. The plan is staggeringly expensive. Will Congress actually write the check? Far from certain.
But the real showstopper is even bigger. America's shipyards simply lack the capacity to pull off a mission of this century.
Why It's Doomed to Fail
For years, American industry has fled overseas. Shipbuilding has been in steady decline. The ability to build warships has eroded. Delays are now routine.
Consider the Burke-class destroyer. US media report deliveries are running up to five years late. Now imagine a Trump-class battleship, 3.5 times larger. Asking shipyards to deliver that on time? It is a ' mission impossible.'
At a congressional hearing, former Navy Secretary Ferran, who recently stepped down, called recent warship programs a total mess. Even the best-performing project was delayed over half a year and ran 57% over budget.
He admitted the hard truth. America cannot accelerate warship construction. It is not a lack of will. It is a lack of capability.
But Trump never cares about reality. According to US media, one reason Ferran was fired was his insufficient push for the 'Golden Fleet' plan.
With destroyers to be delivered five years late, America's dying shipyards can never build a "Golden Fleet."
If Trump forces this century's giant warship, it will also threaten plans for new aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines.
US media note that Newport News Shipbuilding handles most nuclear-powered vessel construction. If it prioritizes the Trump-class battleship, production of Ford-class carriers and nuclear submarines will inevitably suffer.
Trump has a natural instinct for size contests. He promised the 'largest' arch in Washington. The 'largest' banquet hall in the White House. None of it has ever materialized.
Given all these headwinds, this 'largest in history' Golden Fleet looks likely to sink before it ever sails. Another grand promise, left unfinished.
Lai Ting-yiu
What Say You?
** 博客文章文責自負,不代表本公司立場 **
A New York Times writer asked a good question yesterday: "Why the United States Can’t Quit Its Wars?" Quite rightly so. From Iraq and Afghanistan to Iran, the United States can never escape the fate of "easy to start a war, hard to pull the troops out."
The harder it strikes, the stronger its enemies grow. The more allies those enemies attract, the deeper Washington sinks. It has no choice but to keep raising the stakes. The Iran war is now trapped in exactly this vicious cycle.
The Wall Street Journal reports today that Iran's "Axis of Resistance" has expanded further of late. The al-Qaeda branch entrenched in Somalia, Africa, has stepped up its alliance with the Houthis, Iran's "sworn brothers." The pair could choke off the Red Sea exit at any moment. That would sever the other oil shipping lane beyond the Strait of Hormuz. Should that happen, America's troubles will multiply, and pulling out will become harder still.
Al-Qaeda's Somali branch joins the Houthis. Washington's headache grows.
According to the report, al-Shabaab, al-Qaeda's branch in Somalia, is the wealthiest of them all. It controls local ports, roads and gold mines, and it is raking in money hand over fist. Annual revenue exceeds US$100 million.
Yet bulging coffers are not enough. The group lacks advanced weapons, and its fighters need proper military training. Which is why it has cut frequent "deals" in recent years with the Houthis in Yemen, Iran's "sworn brother." Since the US attacked Iran, the two have grown closer still, united by common enemies in America and Israel.
Al-Qaeda was founded by bin Laden in 1988. It began as a "jihadist organization" resisting the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, covertly funded, no less, by the CIA. When the Soviets went down in defeat, the United States took over the role of "invader." Al-Qaeda promptly turned its guns on America.
In 2001 Al-Qaeda orchestrated 9/11, the terrorist attack of the century. Washington has regarded it as the greatest threat ever since.
In recent years, its leaders have been killed by the US one after another. Rival "jihadist groups" keep grabbing its turf, leaving it in steady decline. Yet al-Qaeda remains powerful in parts of the Middle East and Africa. The Somali branch is a case in point. The US has long seen it as a mortal danger, and the American military has struck it as many as 40 times.
The "Perfect Partners"
To build up its military muscle, the group has in recent years bought large batches of advanced weapons from the Houthis through intermediary arms dealers. It has also sent fighters to Yemen for military training, learning, among other things, how to operate attack drones. The Houthis, for their part, have dispatched instructors to Somalia to pass on combat skills.
The US went to war against Iran in late February this year. That pushed the "deadly duo" into even closer contact. Al-Qaeda belongs to Islam's Sunni branch, while the Houthis are Shia. The two are age-old foes. But faced with the common enemies of America and Israel, both are willing to set aside their feud and point their guns outward in unison.
What is more, each side of the "deadly duo" has something the other craves. The Houthis need hard cash to fund their war effort. Al-Qaeda, keen to sharpen its fighting power to consolidate its grip, must acquire advanced weapons and military technology. This mutually beneficial relationship has turned the two into "perfect partners."
To Washington, two "terrorist organizations" banding together is a real nightmare. It is enough to rob it of sleep and appetite. The Houthis are entrenched in Yemen, facing Somalia, home of the al-Qaeda branch, across the Gulf of Aden. That is the gateway through which oil is shipped via the Red Sea. If the pair join forces, they could lock down this shipping lane for good.
The Choke Point
The Strait of Hormuz is already firmly in Iran's grip. If this other lane is cut as well, Saudi Arabia and the rest will lose their alternative route for shipping oil. Global energy supplies will go from bad to worse. Remember: 12 percent of the Middle East's oil is transported through this passage. The impact must not be underestimated.
The "deadly duo" could shut Saudi Arabia's backup oil route.
Worryingly, the "deadly duo" genuinely possesses the capability to seal the strait. The Houthis have precision missiles and large fleets of attack drones. They are now helping al-Qaeda install radar in Somalia and supplying it with attack drones and more. The two could coordinate operations down the road, striking merchant vessels and US warships that try to force their way through.
Whether the American military could juggle that many fronts at once would then be a big question mark.
America's current predicament recalls 2010. President Obama decided then to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan to fight the Taliban. The deputy assistant secretary of defense at the time, Lavoy, raised doubts. "Afghanistan has countless tribes, and every one of them harbors resentment towards America," he said. "Even if the Taliban did not exist, there would still be an insurgency in Afghanistan."
No matter how many troops were poured in, the war could not be won. Better to simply withdraw.
Those words describe the Iran war today just as aptly. By attacking Iran, America has opened a "Pandora's box," and "demons" like al-Qaeda have come pouring out. How many of them, one has to ask, can America possibly fight at once?
Lai Ting-yiu
