COVER PHOTO U.S. MARINE CORPS PHOTO BY SGT. ISAAC LAMBERTH
1616 Rhode Island Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20036
202 887 0200 | www.csis.org
1616 Rhode Island Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20036
202-887-0200 | www.csis.orgv*:+:!:+:!
ISBN 978-1-4422-5961-4
Lanham • Boulder • New York • London
4501 Forbes Boulevard
Lanham, MD 20706
301 459 3366 | www.rowman.com
Ë|xHSLEOCy259614z
Landing Together
project director
Kathleen H. Hicks
authors
Kathleen H. Hicks
Mark F. Cancian
Andrew Metrick
John Schaus
J U N E 2 0 1 6
Pacific Amphibious Development and
Implications for the U.S. Fleet
A Report of the
CSIS INTERNATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAM
Blank
J U N E 2 0 1 6
Landing Together
Pacific Amphibious Development and
Implications for the U.S. Fleet
PROJ ECT DIRECTOR
Kathleen H. Hicks
AUTHORS
Kathleen H. Hicks
Mark F. Cancian
Andrew Metrick
John Schaus
A REPORT OF THE
CSIS INTERNATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAM
Lanham • Boulder • New York • London
594-65834_ch00_3P.indd 1 7/12/16 9:42 AM
About CSIS
For over 50 years, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) has worked
to develop solutions to the world’s greatest policy challenges. Today, CSIS scholars are
providing strategic insights and bipartisan policy solutions to help decisionmakers chart a
course toward a better world.
CSIS is a nonprofit organ ization headquartered in Washington, D.C. The Center’s 220 full-
time staff and large network of affiliated scholars conduct research and analy sis and develop
policy initiatives that look into the future and anticipate change.
Founded at the height of the Cold War by David M. Abshire and Admiral Arleigh Burke, CSIS
was dedicated to finding ways to sustain American prominence and prosperity as a force for
good in the world. Since 1962, CSIS has become one of the world’s preeminent international
institutions focused on defense and security; regional stability; and transnational challenges
ranging from energy and climate to global health and economic integration.
Thomas J. Pritzker was named chairman of the CSIS Board of Trustees in November 2015.
Former U.S. deputy secretary of defense John J. Hamre has served as the Center’s president
and chief executive officer since 2000.
CSIS does not take specific policy positions; accordingly, all views expressed herein should
be understood to be solely those of the author(s).
© 2016 by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-4422-5961-4 (pb); 978-1-4422-5962-1 (eBook)
Center for Strategic & International Studies Rowman & Littlefield
1616 Rhode Island Ave nue, NW 4501 Forbes Boulevard
Washington, DC 20036 Lanham, MD 20706
202-887-0200 | www . csis . org 301 - 459 - 3366 | www . rowman . com
594-65834_ch00_3P.indd 2 7/12/16 9:42 AM
http://www.csis.org
http://www.rowman.com
III
Contents
v List of Tables and Figures
vii Acknowl edgments
viii Introduction
ix Executive Summary
1 CHAPTER 1 | Demand for U.S. Amphibious Forces
1 Warfighting Requirements
2 COCOM Presence and Crisis Response Requirements
10 CHAPTER 2 | Supply of U.S. Amphibious Forces
10 The Amphibious Fleet: Historical Trends
13 Force Generation
15 Force Allocation
16 The Amphibious Fleet of Today and Tomorrow
20 Alternative Platforms
23 Connectors
24 Bud get Constraints: Effects on Amphibious Capacity
27 CHAPTER 3 | Pacific Allies and Partners: Amphibious Capabilities and Development
27 Australia
31 India
34 Japan
38 The Philippines
41 Republic of Singapore
43 South Korea
47 CHAPTER 4 | Assessment of U.S., Ally, and Partner Amphibious Capabilities
50 Assessing Amphibious Capability
54 Country Assessments
70 Implications for the United States
73 CHAPTER 5 | Meeting the Demands
73 Options for Pro cess and Orga nizational Adjustments
77 Options for Force Structure Changes
594-65834_ch00_3P.indd 3 7/12/16 9:42 AM
ContentsIv
89 CHAPTER 6 | Recommendations
89 Short Term
90 Mid- Term to Long Term
92 Appendix 1. Categories of Amphibious Vessels
94 Appendix 2. Description of Cost- Analy sis Tool
95 About the Authors
594-65834_ch00_3P.indd 4 7/12/16 9:42 AM
v
List of Tables and Figures
TABLES
30 3.1. Australian Amphibious Platforms
33 3.2. Indian Amphibious Platforms
37 3.3. Japa nese Amphibious Platforms
40 3.4. Philippine Amphibious Platforms
42 3.5. Singaporean Amphibious Platforms
45 3.6. South Korean Amphibious Platforms
55 4.1. Assessment of USMC ARG/MEU
57 4.2. Assessment of USMC SP- MAGTF- CR
58 4.3. Assessment of Australian Amphibious Capability
60 4.4. Assessment of Indian Amphibious Capability
62 4.5. Assessment of Japanese Amphibious Capability
64 4.6. Assessment of Philippine Amphibious Capability
66 4.7. Assessment of Singaporean Amphibious Capability
68 4.8. Assessment of Republic of Korea Amphibious Capability
79 5.1. Options for Force Structure Changes
FIGURES
4 1.1. Distances between Key Locations in the Asia Pacific
7 1.2. MEU Crisis Responses in PACOM: 2000–2012
11 2.1. Amphibious Fleet Hulls and Tonnage: 1975– Pres ent
12 2.2. Average Displacement per Ship: 1975–2015
13 2.3. Amphibious Force as a Percentage of Total Fleet: 1975–2015
17 2.4. Amphibious Ship Presence Relative to COCOM Request: FY2008–2015
18 2.5. Amphibious Force and Lift Requirement: FY2016–2045
19 2.6. Amphibious Force as a Percentage of Total Fleet: FY2016–2045
594-65834_ch00_3P.indd 5 7/12/16 9:42 AM
Tables and FiguresvI
70 4.1. Demand for U.S. Capabilities in Combined Operations— All Assessed Countries
71 4.2. Demand for U.S. Capabilities in Likely Combined Operations
78 5.1. Added Capability across the Range of Military Operations— L- Class Options
78 5.2. Added Capability across the Range of Military Operations— E/T- Class Options
594-65834_ch00_3P.indd 6 7/12/16 9:42 AM
vII
Acknowl edgments
This study began under the direction of Dr. Maren Leed, se nior adviser for the Harold Brown Chair
in Defense Policy Study, and supported by her research team— Jaimie Hoskins, Alvaro Genie,
Christine Wilkins, and Hyo Sung Joo. When Dr. Leed became special assistant to the chief of naval
operations, the study lead transitioned to Dr. Kathleen Hicks and the current study team. The
authors would like to thank Dr. Leed and the Brown Chair team for their significant early contribu-
tions to this report. Likewise, the authors are grateful for the invaluable research support provided
by Amber O’Rourke, David Hookey, and Zachary White throughout the course of this study.
The authors would also like to thank the following people for sharing their time and insights as the
study unfolded: Col o nel Anthony “Ché” Bolden, Col o nel Peter Farnum, Eric Labs, Grant Newsham,
Jonathan Geithner, Frank Hoffman, and numerous officials and officers from within the United
States and in ally or partner nations. This study has been improved by insights from those noted
here, but the content and recommendations presented— including any mistakes— remain solely
those of the authors.
Fi nally, the study team is grateful to Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII), which sponsored this work
seeing the value in growing general knowledge of amphibious capabilities across the broader
defense community. The team is deeply appreciative of HII’s re spect for our intellectual in de pen-
dence at each step along the way.
594-65834_ch00_3P.indd 7 7/12/16 9:42 AM
Introduction
This study reflects a desire to better understand how investments in amphibious capabilities by
numerous allies and partners across the Asia- Pacific region would affect the requirements for the
amphibious forces of the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps. The study’s focus on the Asia- Pacific region
is spurred by the sizable investments that have been made across the region to acquire new
amphibious capabilities and to improve capabilities that currently exist.
With that as a starting point, the study had two goals: first, to evaluate the effects of growing
amphibious capability in the Asia- Pacific region on demand for U.S. amphibious assets, and sec-
ond, to assess the policy and resource implications of vari ous strategies to meet that demand. This
required
