Back
About RSIS
Introduction
Building the Foundations
Welcome Message
Board of Governors
Staff Profiles
Executive Deputy Chairman’s Office
Dean’s Office
Management
Distinguished Fellows
Faculty and Research
Associate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research Analysts
Visiting Fellows
Adjunct Fellows
Administrative Staff
Honours and Awards for RSIS Staff and Students
RSIS Endowment Fund
Endowed Professorships
Career Opportunities
Getting to RSIS
Research
Research Centres
Centre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)
Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)
Centre of Excellence for National Security
Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)
International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
Research Programmes
National Security Studies Programme (NSSP)
Social Cohesion Research Programme (SCRP)
Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
Other Research
Future Issues and Technology Cluster
Research@RSIS
Science and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
Graduate Education
Graduate Programmes Office
Exchange Partners and Programmes
How to Apply
Financial Assistance
Meet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other events
RSIS Alumni
Outreach
Global Networks
About Global Networks
RSIS Alumni
Executive Education
About Executive Education
SRP Executive Programme
Terrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
International Programmes
About International Programmes
Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)
Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)
International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS)
International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
Publications
RSIS Publications
Annual Reviews
Books
Bulletins and Newsletters
RSIS Commentary Series
Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
Commemorative / Event Reports
Future Issues
IDSS Papers
Interreligious Relations
Monographs
NTS Insight
Policy Reports
Working Papers
External Publications
Authored Books
Journal Articles
Edited Books
Chapters in Edited Books
Policy Reports
Working Papers
Op-Eds
Glossary of Abbreviations
Policy-relevant Articles Given RSIS Award
RSIS Publications for the Year
External Publications for the Year
Media
Cohesive Societies
Sustainable Security
Other Resource Pages
News Releases
Speeches
Video/Audio Channel
External Podcasts
Events
Contact Us
S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies Think Tank and Graduate School Ponder The Improbable Since 1966
Nanyang Technological University Nanyang Technological University
  • About RSIS
      IntroductionBuilding the FoundationsWelcome MessageBoard of GovernorsHonours and Awards for RSIS Staff and StudentsRSIS Endowment FundEndowed ProfessorshipsCareer OpportunitiesGetting to RSIS
      Staff ProfilesExecutive Deputy Chairman’s OfficeDean’s OfficeManagementDistinguished FellowsFaculty and ResearchAssociate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research AnalystsVisiting FellowsAdjunct FellowsAdministrative Staff
  • Research
      Research CentresCentre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)Centre of Excellence for National SecurityInstitute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
      Research ProgrammesNational Security Studies Programme (NSSP)Social Cohesion Research Programme (SCRP)Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
      Other ResearchFuture Issues and Technology ClusterResearch@RSISScience and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
  • Graduate Education
      Graduate Programmes OfficeExchange Partners and ProgrammesHow to ApplyFinancial AssistanceMeet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other eventsRSIS Alumni
  • Outreach
      Global NetworksAbout Global NetworksRSIS Alumni
      Executive EducationAbout Executive EducationSRP Executive ProgrammeTerrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
      International ProgrammesAbout International ProgrammesAsia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS)International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
  • Publications
      RSIS PublicationsAnnual ReviewsBooksBulletins and NewslettersRSIS Commentary SeriesCounter Terrorist Trends and AnalysesCommemorative / Event ReportsFuture IssuesIDSS PapersInterreligious RelationsMonographsNTS InsightPolicy ReportsWorking Papers
      External PublicationsAuthored BooksJournal ArticlesEdited BooksChapters in Edited BooksPolicy ReportsWorking PapersOp-Eds
      Glossary of AbbreviationsPolicy-relevant Articles Given RSIS AwardRSIS Publications for the YearExternal Publications for the Year
  • Media
      Cohesive SocietiesSustainable SecurityOther Resource PagesNews ReleasesSpeechesVideo/Audio ChannelExternal Podcasts
  • Events
  • Contact Us
    • Connect with Us

      rsis.ntu
      rsis_ntu
      rsisntu
      rsisvideocast
      school/rsis-ntu
      rsis.sg
      rsissg
      RSIS
      RSS
      Subscribe to RSIS Publications
      Subscribe to RSIS Events

      Getting to RSIS

      Nanyang Technological University
      Block S4, Level B3,
      50 Nanyang Avenue,
      Singapore 639798

      Click here for direction to RSIS

      Get in Touch

    Connect
    Search
    • RSIS
    • Publication
    • RSIS Publications
    • CO14071 | Taiwan’s Indigenous Submarine: A Viable Project?
    • Annual Reviews
    • Books
    • Bulletins and Newsletters
    • RSIS Commentary Series
    • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
    • Commemorative / Event Reports
    • Future Issues
    • IDSS Papers
    • Interreligious Relations
    • Monographs
    • NTS Insight
    • Policy Reports
    • Working Papers

    CO14071 | Taiwan’s Indigenous Submarine: A Viable Project?
    Wu Shang-Su

    16 April 2014

    download pdf

    Synopsis

    Taiwan’s official proposal to develop an indigenous diesel-electric submarine (SSK) will face serious obstacles. It would not work, whether as a bargaining chip or a viable project.

    Commentary

    Taiwan’s Deputy Defence Minister, Andrew Hsia, recently stated, in Washington, that Taiwan is “developing, or trying to develop” an indigenous submarine. According to previous official statements, Taiwan’s indigenous SSKs would be of displacement of between 1500 and 2000 tonnes. It would strengthen its weak flotilla comprising two American Guppy II Class SSKs, antique of the Second World War, which are only for training and two Dutch Zwaardvis Class obtained in the mid-1980s, which are the only operational assets.

    The Various Constraints

    Generally, Taiwan meets several conditions for indigenously developing submarines, such as established industry of ship-building and defence, as well as financial affordability. Nevertheless, a range of technical and political factors obstruct its indigenous submarine project.

    Nowadays, independent SSK design capability is still limited to a few traditional arms exporting countries, such as Germany and Russia. Without an industrial background and experience, Taiwan’s purely independent design would be unrealistic or time consuming with “trial and error.” If Taiwan attempts to obtain an authorised licence for a foreign design, China’s comprehensive diplomatic and economic pressures would be exerted to block Taiwan’s access to all countries with a submarine building industry.

    Apart from technological issues, Taiwan’s allocation of national resources is another challenge. In the 1980s, Taiwan indeed developed an indigenous defence fighter (IDF) and manufactured several sophisticated weapon systems with American technological assistance and authorisation. However, the defence budget then occupied more than 5.3% of Taiwan’s GDP. Since the democratisation process in the early 1990s, the share of defence budget in the GDP has continuously dropped; it went below 3% in the mid-2000s and has remained there until today. Unless the decision makers in Taipei dramatically shift their priorities, the ministry of national defence (MND) would be unlikely to receive sufficient budget for such an expensive project.

    Even if Taiwan can overcome the difficulties mentioned above, the long-term goal of forming a credible submarine force would be time-consuming. For example, South Korea spent at least 14 years to establish its fleet of nine Chang Bogo class SSK, based on the German type 209 SSK. Whether the MND really adopts a purely indigenous design or gain foreign authorisation, a series of challenges including development, trial, adjustment and full production would take as much time or even longer.

    A Bargaining Chip?

    As developing an indigenous SSK would be difficult for Taiwan, another purpose of this project may be as a tactic in the negotiation of an arms deal with the US. Since 1950, the US has nearly monopolised the arms supply to Taiwan, and the latter sometimes uses alternatives to seek better offers. Concerning Taiwan’s unilateral movements, whether “to retake the Mainland” or claiming de jure independence, which may disturb the situation in the Strait by provoking China, the US has controlled the former’s military capability through conservatively providing major weapon systems, especially the ones with offensive potential. As a result, Taiwan has an obstacle to develop its own defence strategy due to inadequate arms supply and has been eager to obtain alternatives, from foreign or domestic sources.

    Alternatives would not only provide Taipei with a defence capability to match its plan, but also persuade Washington to provide similar types of weapon systems in the arms deal. The US’s decision to sell F-16 A/B fighters came after the 1992 deal of the French Mirage 2000-5 fighters. Taiwan’s locally built mini submarines with Italian technological support in the late 1960s successfully led to the US offering two Guppy II Class SSKs in 1972, despite the fact that those mini submarines were not in service for long due to their limited performance. Extrapolating such cases, if Taiwan’s indigenous submarine project can be achieved to a certain extent, the US would be more likely to provide a similar weapon system with equivalent or better performance.

    The bargaining chip role of the indigenous submarine project would face two difficulties: unavailability and Taiwan’s political position. Firstly, the American ship-building industry has not produced any SSK since the 1960s, and there is no American SSK design available for Taiwan. In the IDF project, the American aviation industry supplied Taiwan with radar, turbine jet engine and other critical parts, but such a pattern cannot be repeated owing to the unfamiliarity of the American maritime industry with SSKs. Introduction of a third party’s technology could be a solution, but such special international arrangement would be vulnerable to China’s pressure and take more time.

    Secondly, after the Chinese Nationalist Party (Kuomintang, KMT) returned to power in 2008, it has given utmost attention to harmonising the relationship with China through economic integration measures under the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) of 2010. Following this trend, a political settlement, such as the cross-Strait political agreement, has been publicly discussed and may be achieved in the near future. Although Washington openly supports Taiwan autonomy, it lacks legitimacy to intervene in the peaceful unification across the Strait. When Taiwan becomes eventually unified with China through such integration, supplying sophisticated weapon system would not be in the national interest of the US.

    Dismal Future

    As a fully indigenous development is unlikely and the US source would not be feasible, Taiwan’s SSK project may be seen as a lonely struggle by the MND. Unless the final political settlement is achieved, the MND has to continuously plan Taiwan’s defence strategy. As the shortcoming of a weak submarine capability has lasted for decades, it is understandable for the MND to pursue all possible avenues to access the SSKs, including the domestic one. Nevertheless, defence cannot be isolated from politics and Taiwan’s political circumstance, both external and internal, probably would make the indigenous SSK project neither feasible nor a bargaining chip, but merely an empty wish.

    About the Author

    Wu Shang-su is a research fellow in the Military Studies Programme of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University. He previously taught at the National Defence University in Taiwan and worked in the Legislative Yuan.

    Categories: RSIS Commentary Series / Country and Region Studies / East Asia and Asia Pacific

    Synopsis

    Taiwan’s official proposal to develop an indigenous diesel-electric submarine (SSK) will face serious obstacles. It would not work, whether as a bargaining chip or a viable project.

    Commentary

    Taiwan’s Deputy Defence Minister, Andrew Hsia, recently stated, in Washington, that Taiwan is “developing, or trying to develop” an indigenous submarine. According to previous official statements, Taiwan’s indigenous SSKs would be of displacement of between 1500 and 2000 tonnes. It would strengthen its weak flotilla comprising two American Guppy II Class SSKs, antique of the Second World War, which are only for training and two Dutch Zwaardvis Class obtained in the mid-1980s, which are the only operational assets.

    The Various Constraints

    Generally, Taiwan meets several conditions for indigenously developing submarines, such as established industry of ship-building and defence, as well as financial affordability. Nevertheless, a range of technical and political factors obstruct its indigenous submarine project.

    Nowadays, independent SSK design capability is still limited to a few traditional arms exporting countries, such as Germany and Russia. Without an industrial background and experience, Taiwan’s purely independent design would be unrealistic or time consuming with “trial and error.” If Taiwan attempts to obtain an authorised licence for a foreign design, China’s comprehensive diplomatic and economic pressures would be exerted to block Taiwan’s access to all countries with a submarine building industry.

    Apart from technological issues, Taiwan’s allocation of national resources is another challenge. In the 1980s, Taiwan indeed developed an indigenous defence fighter (IDF) and manufactured several sophisticated weapon systems with American technological assistance and authorisation. However, the defence budget then occupied more than 5.3% of Taiwan’s GDP. Since the democratisation process in the early 1990s, the share of defence budget in the GDP has continuously dropped; it went below 3% in the mid-2000s and has remained there until today. Unless the decision makers in Taipei dramatically shift their priorities, the ministry of national defence (MND) would be unlikely to receive sufficient budget for such an expensive project.

    Even if Taiwan can overcome the difficulties mentioned above, the long-term goal of forming a credible submarine force would be time-consuming. For example, South Korea spent at least 14 years to establish its fleet of nine Chang Bogo class SSK, based on the German type 209 SSK. Whether the MND really adopts a purely indigenous design or gain foreign authorisation, a series of challenges including development, trial, adjustment and full production would take as much time or even longer.

    A Bargaining Chip?

    As developing an indigenous SSK would be difficult for Taiwan, another purpose of this project may be as a tactic in the negotiation of an arms deal with the US. Since 1950, the US has nearly monopolised the arms supply to Taiwan, and the latter sometimes uses alternatives to seek better offers. Concerning Taiwan’s unilateral movements, whether “to retake the Mainland” or claiming de jure independence, which may disturb the situation in the Strait by provoking China, the US has controlled the former’s military capability through conservatively providing major weapon systems, especially the ones with offensive potential. As a result, Taiwan has an obstacle to develop its own defence strategy due to inadequate arms supply and has been eager to obtain alternatives, from foreign or domestic sources.

    Alternatives would not only provide Taipei with a defence capability to match its plan, but also persuade Washington to provide similar types of weapon systems in the arms deal. The US’s decision to sell F-16 A/B fighters came after the 1992 deal of the French Mirage 2000-5 fighters. Taiwan’s locally built mini submarines with Italian technological support in the late 1960s successfully led to the US offering two Guppy II Class SSKs in 1972, despite the fact that those mini submarines were not in service for long due to their limited performance. Extrapolating such cases, if Taiwan’s indigenous submarine project can be achieved to a certain extent, the US would be more likely to provide a similar weapon system with equivalent or better performance.

    The bargaining chip role of the indigenous submarine project would face two difficulties: unavailability and Taiwan’s political position. Firstly, the American ship-building industry has not produced any SSK since the 1960s, and there is no American SSK design available for Taiwan. In the IDF project, the American aviation industry supplied Taiwan with radar, turbine jet engine and other critical parts, but such a pattern cannot be repeated owing to the unfamiliarity of the American maritime industry with SSKs. Introduction of a third party’s technology could be a solution, but such special international arrangement would be vulnerable to China’s pressure and take more time.

    Secondly, after the Chinese Nationalist Party (Kuomintang, KMT) returned to power in 2008, it has given utmost attention to harmonising the relationship with China through economic integration measures under the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) of 2010. Following this trend, a political settlement, such as the cross-Strait political agreement, has been publicly discussed and may be achieved in the near future. Although Washington openly supports Taiwan autonomy, it lacks legitimacy to intervene in the peaceful unification across the Strait. When Taiwan becomes eventually unified with China through such integration, supplying sophisticated weapon system would not be in the national interest of the US.

    Dismal Future

    As a fully indigenous development is unlikely and the US source would not be feasible, Taiwan’s SSK project may be seen as a lonely struggle by the MND. Unless the final political settlement is achieved, the MND has to continuously plan Taiwan’s defence strategy. As the shortcoming of a weak submarine capability has lasted for decades, it is understandable for the MND to pursue all possible avenues to access the SSKs, including the domestic one. Nevertheless, defence cannot be isolated from politics and Taiwan’s political circumstance, both external and internal, probably would make the indigenous SSK project neither feasible nor a bargaining chip, but merely an empty wish.

    About the Author

    Wu Shang-su is a research fellow in the Military Studies Programme of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University. He previously taught at the National Defence University in Taiwan and worked in the Legislative Yuan.

    Categories: RSIS Commentary Series / Country and Region Studies

    Popular Links

    About RSISResearch ProgrammesGraduate EducationPublicationsEventsAdmissionsCareersVideo/Audio ChannelRSIS Intranet

    Connect with Us

    rsis.ntu
    rsis_ntu
    rsisntu
    rsisvideocast
    school/rsis-ntu
    rsis.sg
    rsissg
    RSIS
    RSS
    Subscribe to RSIS Publications
    Subscribe to RSIS Events

    Getting to RSIS

    Nanyang Technological University
    Block S4, Level B3,
    50 Nanyang Avenue,
    Singapore 639798

    Click here for direction to RSIS

    Get in Touch

      Copyright © S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. All rights reserved.
      Privacy Statement / Terms of Use
      Help us improve

        Rate your experience with this website
        123456
        Not satisfiedVery satisfied
        What did you like?
        0/255 characters
        What can be improved?
        0/255 characters
        Your email
        Please enter a valid email.
        Thank you for your feedback.
        This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. By continuing, you are agreeing to the use of cookies on your device as described in our privacy policy. Learn more
        OK
        Latest Book
        more info