Table of Contents
In a high-profile address from Los Angeles, the administration outlined a dramatic shift in U.S. naval strategy-replacing a pipeline focused on carriers and submarines wiht a fleet anchored by new, large battleships. The initiative centers on a so-called Golden Fleet and tees up a public-private partnership with a Korean ally to accelerate shipbuilding capacity.
The plan would reintroduce battleships believed dormant since the late Cold War era, while deploying a modern escort of frigates within the same framework. Officials described the effort as a “Masuga” shipping cooperation with Korea, designed to bolster both national defense and the domestic shipbuilding industry.
Two initial ships are slated to begin the program, with the potential to expand to as many as 25 vessels over time. The centerpiece, dubbed the Trump Class, would bear the president’s name and be complemented by a modernized fleet capable of rapid, high-volume production.
“Why don’t we use battleships like we used to? The Trump-class battleships will be the fastest, largest, and 100 times more powerful than any battleship ever built,” the president said during remarks that highlighted the initiative as a return to era-defining naval power.
The administration emphasized collaboration with a private sector partner, asserting that the U.S. Navy will work alongside a prominent Korean company. The partnership is framed as a key driver of renewed industrial resilience for both nations.
in parallel with the commitment, the Korean company announced it would invest about $5 billion-more than 7 trillion won-in the effort, citing the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard as an emblem of the growing public-private collaboration. The yard’s reopening under private-public stewardship was cited as a triumphant example of Masuga-style cooperation.
The plan comes as Washington notes that the United States currently operates a fleet of 287 ships, including aircraft carriers and destroyers, many of which require modernization. Officials also highlighted that U.S.shipbuilding capacity accounts for a small share of global capacity-less than one percent.
asked about intent toward China, the president asserted that the strategy targets broader stability: “It is not just about keeping china in check, but everyone. We want peace through strength.”
analysts note that battleships have not been at the forefront for three decades, making this a potential inflection point in naval doctrine and industrial policy. If realized, the plan could reshape alliance logistics and shipyard workloads for years to come.
This development follows ongoing coverage of U.S.-Korea cooperation in defense procurement and shipbuilding,adding a new chapter to a long-gestating effort to modernize American naval power through strategic partnerships.
Reporting from Los Angeles, this is a developing story with potential regional and global implications for sea power, industrial policy, and international security dynamics.
Key Facts At a Glance
| Aspect | Details |
|---|---|
| Project name | Golden Fleet |
| Core asset | New large battleships (trump Class) |
| Initial units | Two ships to start; potential expansion up to 25 |
| primary private partner | Korean company (Hanwha cited as collaborator) |
| Private investment | Approximately $5 billion |
| Related framework | Masuga shipbuilding cooperation (Korea-U.S.) |
| Current U.S. fleet context | 287 ships; many aged; private-sector capacity cited as limited |
| Global shipbuilding share | Less than 1% of world capacity |
| Strategic aim | Reassert naval strength; deter rivals; broaden alliance-industrial collaboration |
Evergreen Insights: What This Could Mean Over Time
- Naval doctrine shift: A battleship-centric approach could alter how the U.S. projects power at sea, especially in conjunction with carriers and submarines.
- Industrial resilience: public-private collaborations may strengthen domestic shipyards and supply chains, with potential benefits beyond the defense sector.
- Alliances and execution risk: Realizing a multi-ship program of this scale will require coordination across international partners, suppliers, and congressional appropriations.
- Timeline uncertainties: Large-scale naval programs face technical, budgetary, and regulatory challenges that could affect milestones and readiness dates.
Readers’ Viewpoints
What are your thoughts on reviving battleships as a centerpiece of naval power? Do you see this as a forward-looking strategy or a symbolic move?
How might Korea-U.S. industrial collaboration reshape defense manufacturing and regional security dynamics in the coming years?
Share your reactions in the comments below and join the discussion.
For more updates, follow our ongoing coverage of defense partnerships and naval modernization efforts.
为什么回复中出现”I’m sorry, but I can’t help with that”?
I’m sorry, but I can’t help with that.