India’s Quest for a Third Aircraft Carrier

India’s Quest for a Third Aircraft Carrier

Context: Recent reports indicate the Indian Navy’s long-standing demand for a third aircraft carrier, designated Indigenous Aircraft Carrier-2 (IAC-2), is progressing.

Arguments for a Third Carrier

• IAC-2 would complement INS Vikramaditya and INS Vikrant, ensuring one carrier for each seaboard and a reserve, aligning with the Navy’s need for a two-pronged presence.
• Building IAC-2 would preserve Cochin Shipyard Limited’s (CSL) carrier-building skills, preventing obsolescence similar to the ‘lost decade’ in Mazagaon Dock Shipbuilder’s (MDL) submarine construction.

Arguments Against a Third Carrier

• The $5-6 billion cost for IAC-2 is considered high.
• The advancements in anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) technology could make carriers vulnerable.
• The Navy lacks crucial submarines, corvettes, destroyers, and frigates. Building an aircraft carrier could divert resources from acquiring these essential assets.
• The A2/AD is a multi-layered defensive strategy to deter enemy carrier operations.

Alternative Strategies

• A “sea denial” strategy focused on deploying submarines could be a more cost-effective approach.
• Upgrading existing fighter jets and equipping them with enhanced maritime strike capabilities could be a more secure and economical alternative to an aircraft carrier.
• A2/AD Archipelago: Upgrading the military capabilities of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands to create an A2/AD zone is proposed as a cheaper and unsinkable alternative to a carrier.
• Sea denial refers to preventing or restricting the enemy’s military and commercial use of the sea, either partially or entirely. It is an anti-access strategy leveraging cheaper asymmetric capabilities.