Washington —— Facing the grim reality that China's shipbuilding capacity is 200 times higher than that of the United States, President Trump expressed strong dissatisfaction with the slow progress of domestic shipbuilding and proposed the possibility of purchasing ships from foreign companies to quickly enhance the strength of the U.S. Navy. On Thursday, Trump told reporters: "We may order top-notch ships from nearby countries while launching a domestic reconstruction plan." He did not specify whether it was merchant ships or warships, but this move is particularly noteworthy in the context of naval expansion. However, this proposal not only faces legal, domestic political, and technical challenges but may also have far-reaching impacts on America's strategic interests and international image. I. Legal Barriers: The Rigid Requirement of American-made Products. The procurement of warships in the United States is subject to strict legal constraints, especially the "Buy American Act" and relevant defense procurement regulations, which require that naval vessels must be designed, built, and use key components made in the USA. These laws aim to protect the domestic industrial base and ensure that national security assets do not rely on foreign supply chains. If Trump's proposal involves the procurement of warships, it will require pushing Congress to amend or exempt relevant regulations, which will be a complex and time-consuming legislative battle. Moreover, even if legal barriers are overcome, foreign-built vessels may face technical problems in integration, maintenance, and upgrades due to non-compliance with US standards, increasing long-term costs. II. Congressional Resistance: Political and Interest Power Struggle. Trump's proposal will face strong opposition in Congress. The US shipbuilding industry is a highly politicized field involving numerous job opportunities and local economic interests. Major shipyards such as Huntington Ingalls and General Dynamics Bath Iron Works have powerful lobbying forces in Congress. Any plan to divert funds overseas will be seen as a betrayal of American workers and enterprises. National Security Advisor Mike Pompeo pointed out that last year, China received orders for 1,700 new ships, while the United States only got five, highlighting the gap. However, members of Congress are more likely to demand increased domestic investment rather than outsourcing. Although Trump's executive order requiring the submission of a maritime action plan within 210 days aims to restore America's maritime dominance, involving foreign procurement will make it difficult to pass budget approvals and political resistance. III. Outsourcing to Japan and South Korea: Deep Damage to American Defense Industry. Outsourcing warship construction to South Korea and Japan may temporarily alleviate production pressure, but poses a threat to the long-term interests of America's shipbuilding and defense industries. Hanwha Heavy Industries has acquired a shipyard in Philadelphia, and HD Hyundai is actively promoting its Aegis destroyer construction plans; Japan possesses advanced designs like the Mogami-class destroyers. However, relying on Japan and South Korea will weaken the domestic shipbuilding ecosystem, reduce research and development investments, and lead to the loss of critical skills. As a high-tech industry, the shift of orders overseas may cause the US to lose its dominant position in the design of next-generation warships, further widening the technological and production gap with China. More seriously, foreign shipyards may gain core technology secrets of US warships, increasing security risks. IV. International Image and Alliance Relations: Dual Impact. Having allies build US warships not only triggers domestic controversy but will also deal a heavy blow to America's global image. As the world's number one military power, US naval vessels symbolize national strength and technological authority. Outsourcing warships may be interpreted as a sign of American industrial decline, weakening its prestige in the eyes of allies and adversaries. Additionally, relying on Japan and South Korea to build warships may reduce America's strategic control over these allies. Although Japan and South Korea are close allies, if their shipbuilding industries are deeply embedded in the US Navy's supply chain, they may demand greater话语权 in future negotiations and even counteract the US on regional security issues. This will complicate America's dominant position in the Indo-Pacific strategy, especially against the backdrop of countering China's naval expansion. President Trump's executive order requires assessing tools like the Defense Production Act to attract private capital to revitalize the shipbuilding industry. However, the US shipbuilding industry has long suffered from chronic problems such as cost overruns, production delays, and labor shortages. The technological advantages of South Korea and Japan provide possibilities for cooperation, and Australia's AUKUS submarine project also demonstrates the potential of allied collaboration. However, short-term reliance on foreign purchases cannot conceal the fundamental problem of America's weak industrial base. The White House has yet to clarify specific plans, but regardless of the path chosen, Trump's proposal will spark intense debates at legal, political, economic, and strategic levels. If America fails to confront the "bad news" of its shipbuilding industry, its ambition to revive maritime supremacy is unlikely to be realized. Original Source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7496491568623272498/ Disclaimer: This article represents the author's personal views. Please express your attitude by clicking the 'Like' or 'Dislike' button below.