[By Guancha Observer Network, Liu Chenghui] "Revitalizing the shipbuilding industry" can be called an ardent wish of US President Trump. Cunning as he is, he not only requested cooperation from Japan and South Korea but even proposed taxing Chinese ships entering ports, a scheme so toxic.
But reality is harsh.
"The cost of building ships in the US is five times that in Asia. Can Trump's maritime dream come true?" In an article published on May 27th, The New York Times poured another bucket of cold water over Trump.
This article points out that Trump's dream of countering China's shipbuilding industry faces daunting challenges: high production costs, low efficiency in American shipyards, and although there may be potential to introduce automated shipbuilding technology from Japan and South Korea, years of shortages of skilled workers, loss of talent, and other deep-seated problems are hard to overcome. Historically, government support for the industry has mostly ended in failure.
Now some American politicians and scholars worry that China's shipbuilding industry is "irresistible," and China is gaining an almost indestructible strategic advantage.
Trump: We Are Too, Too, Too Behind
The article states that Trump and some members of the U.S. Congress aim to revitalize the gradually declining domestic shipbuilding industry, enabling it to compete with China, currently the world's largest ship manufacturer.
However, this goal is so challenging that some shipping experts are completely pessimistic. Optimistic analysts and industry executives believe there is a possibility of success for the Trump administration and Congress, but only if they are willing to invest billions of dollars over many years.
One of the shipyards located south of Philadelphia might be one of the key places determining whether the U.S. government's maritime dreams can be realized. One of the world's largest shipbuilders, South Korea's Hanwha Group, acquired this shipyard last year.
"American shipbuilding is ready to revive its glory," said David Kim, CEO of Hanwha Philadelphia Shipyard, in an interview.
He said that to achieve revival, the shipyard needs a steady stream of new ship orders, and the federal government needs to implement policies to subsidize shipbuilding in the U.S. while punishing shipping companies for docking foreign vessels at U.S. ports.
On May 2, 2025, in Tongzhou District, Nantong City, Jiangsu Province, a bustling scene was seen inside the shipyard of Nantong Xiangyu Marine Equipment Co., Ltd. Workers were busy making ships. Visual China.
Last month, Trump signed an executive order aimed at revitalizing the struggling U.S. shipbuilding industry. This order authorized various government agencies to develop plans within seven months to revitalize domestic shipbuilding and strengthen maritime workforce reserves. The order stated that both are crucial to economic prosperity and national security.
"We will invest heavily in shipbuilding," Trump said when announcing the executive order. "We are too, too, too behind."
Soon after on April 17th, the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) released a notice on its official website, stating that all ships built by China and owned by Chinese entities would be taxed according to the volume of goods they carry if they dock at U.S. ports. These measures will be implemented in 180 days, in two phases.
In Congress, bipartisan lawmakers are promoting an all-encompassing bill that includes substantial subsidies to boost the U.S. shipbuilding industry.
However, many challenges still need to be overcome.
The order schedule at the Philadelphia shipyard extends to 2027, and other U.S. shipyards are saturated with naval orders, unable to handle commercial vessel construction.
Building ships in the U.S. takes much longer than in Asia, and the cost is nearly five times higher.
According to Mr. Kim, the annual capacity of this shipyard in Philadelphia is approximately 1.5 ships, while Hanwha’s large shipyards in South Korea produce about one ship per week.
Colin Grabow, deputy director of the Cato Institute, a research institution advocating reduced government regulation of commerce and the economy, said that the shipbuilding revitalization plan evokes an eerie sense of déjà vu for him.
Prior efforts by the U.S. government to promote domestic shipbuilding have mostly failed, including initiatives to boost local merchant ship manufacturing after the closure of the Philadelphia Navy Yard in 1995.
"We've been through this before," Grabow said.
Ships traveling to and from the U.S. are also manufactured in Japan, South Korea, and elsewhere. These ships are usually owned and operated by global shipping companies, many of which have their headquarters in Europe and Asia.
However, as China's commercial ship production has surged in recent years, U.S. lawmakers worry that China is gaining an almost indestructible strategic advantage.
"This is simply an irresistible wave," said Michael Roberts, a senior researcher at the Hudson Institute, a conservative think tank in the U.S.
According to data from BRS Shipbrokers, over the past decade, Chinese shipbuilding enterprises have delivered a total of 6,765 commercial ships, accounting for nearly half of the global deliveries. Japan delivered 3,130 ships, South Korea delivered 2,405 ships, and the U.S. delivered only 37 ships.
Currently, China not only produces most of the world's non-military ships but also dominates the ship repair market with a 90% share. According to data from the international shipping research consultancy firm Clarksons, as of February this year, the uncompleted order backlog of U.S. shipyards accounts for less than 1% of the global total, while shipyards in China, Japan, and South Korea account for 63.62%, 12.33%, and 12.05%, respectively.
"High costs, low efficiency, and retention issues..."
Shipping companies usually purchase only a few American-made ships to transport goods between U.S. ports. According to the Jones Act, which came into effect more than a hundred years ago, such shipping can only be operated by ships made in the U.S.
The previous owner of the Philadelphia shipyard received three orders for container ships compliant with the Jones Act, each costing about $330 million. James Lightbourn, founder of the ship financing advisory company Cavalier Shipping, pointed out that a similar capacity ship built in Asia would cost only around $70 million.
On May 21, 2025, in Fairhaven, Massachusetts, a ship was undergoing repainting at a shipyard in Fairhaven. Visual China.
In the shipbuilding bill proposed by bipartisan lawmakers, they seek to address the cost disparity by providing subsidies to shipping companies to create a "strategic commercial fleet" of 250 ships made in the U.S. and manned by U.S. crews. The U.S. Secretary of Defense could use these vessels for supply missions.
Lawmakers hope that creating such a fleet and related incentives will not only provide a steady stream of orders for U.S. shipbuilders but also help them grow and improve efficiency.
Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona, one of the bill's sponsors and a Democrat, frankly stated that the purpose of this move is to "revitalize U.S. shipbuilding and commercial maritime industries to counter China's dominance at sea."
However, critics of the bill argue that due to the high costs of U.S. shipyards, government subsidies would be endless. A better approach to counter China's dominance would be to form a strategic fleet using ships built in Japan and South Korea.
Although the U.S. is pushing for shipbuilding cooperation with Japan and South Korea, insiders emphasize that even if formal agreements are reached, it will take at least four to five years to turn design blueprints into physical products.
"Both Japan and South Korea possess existing shipbuilding capabilities, technology, shipyards, skilled workers, and experience, and may expand faster than the U.S.," said Stephen Nagy, professor of international relations at Tokyo International Christian University. "It will still take several years to see results."
In the view of David Kim, a senior executive of Hanwha, not just ships, but many products manufactured in the U.S. are more expensive than those produced abroad. He said outsourcing shipbuilding to other countries has led to a decline in U.S. manufacturing.
"This is not just a business issue," he said. "This concerns the nation, the workforce, priorities, and strategic decisions."
Even if Hanwha successfully transfers manufacturing technology to the U.S., the shortage of skilled workers remains a major challenge.
Regarding this, Kelly Whitaker, spokesperson for Hanwha Philadelphia Shipyard, said the company plans to increase its workforce from 1,500 to 3,000 within less than ten years.
However, even if shipyards find workers, retaining them is often difficult.
Brett Seidle, acting assistant secretary of the U.S. Navy, said at a congressional hearing in March that many new employees recruited by shipyards building naval vessels leave within less than a year.
Some U.S. lawmakers intend to train more sailors working on ships made in the U.S. This shipping bill will provide subsidies for the higher costs of U.S. crew members.
Roland Rexha, secretary and financial officer of the Marine Engineers' Beneficial Association, the senior union of U.S. mariners, said that providing such subsidies is necessary; otherwise, sailors would rather spend time at home instead of at sea, "spending energy on family and children."
This article is an exclusive piece by the Observer Network and cannot be reprinted without permission.
Original source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7509500642767929906/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author. Welcome to express your attitude by clicking the "Top/Downvote" button below.