There are a number of things to consider when it comes to why the PLA-N is trying to acquire carriers. In my view, it comes down to three factors:

1) Force projection: carriers allow any navy to deploy substantial military forces anywhere within their effective operating ranges, of course. The PLA-N uses oil-fired steam-turbine carriers, which do not have effective global range the way that US nuclear carriers do. But it is still more than enough to provide them with immediate force projection into and around the South and East China Seas, and the Indian Ocean, should they so choose.

This is why the Russians are also getting back into the carrier business. They originally only ever completed one, and had three more under construction when the Soviet Union collapsed. But Admiral Kuznetsov was, and is, not a particularly good carrier – it had major issues with its water pipes and boilers. It is currently undergoing refit to fix these issues, but it just isn’t suited for the tasks of a modern carrier. Under their new naval and broader military doctrine, the Russians are likely to equip at least two of their four (I think) fleets with smaller carriers in the 40-50K tonnage range. They don’t need supercarriers, but they do need the ability to project force beyond Russia’s immediate shores into the deep ocean, and to keep would-be aggressors away.

2) Prestige: having a supercarrier, or something close to it, in one’s fleet, gives a nation a certain degree of power and prestige that is intimidating to its enemies and allies alike. There was a time when the US could calm a situation down in a hotspot simply by sending a carrier battle group into the neighbourhood. Those days are mostly gone, but the intimidation factor remains. Never mind that the Kuznetsov-class ski-jump carriers that the ChiComs use permit only very limited air operations, and never mind that even Fujian, when completed, is probably too big and too expensive for the Chinese to use effectively against the US Navy at longer ranges in the Pacific. None of that matters – the fact that China is able to produce giant ships that rival the biggest American supercarriers, is the point.

India is getting into the act too. They bought an old Kiev-class carrier off the Russians and refitted and refurbished it into the INS Vikramaditya, and now they have their own indigenous Vikrant-class with a ski-jump arrangement and steam-turbine power unit. Does India, strictly speaking, NEED aircraft carriers? Probably not – unlike China, India has not historically been a naval power.

The same is true for Brazil, Australia, France, and several other nations. Even the Brits have, I think, two carriers and are looking to get a third. Do all of these nations NEED carriers, super or otherwise? No. But they WANT them, for the prestige and power that it brings. Which brings us to:

3) FOMO: I suspect that there is a strong element of “keeping up with the Joneses” involved with building carriers. They aren’t actually that useful in the era of high-supersonic and hypersonic ship-sinking missiles like Oniks and Tsirkon, which can engage these carriers at ranges far beyond their own ability to hit back. But, if your biggest near-neighbour and/or geopolitical rival has a carrier, then you’d damned well better get one, too, because otherwise you might miss out on the ability to show off how big and great your country is.

Personally, I suspect, but cannot yet be sure, that the age of the supercarrier is probably over. We will know definitively if the USA is ever stupid enough to start a shooting war with either Russia or China, and gets one or more of its super-precious Nimitz-class carriers BTFO’d by a hypersonic weapon. At that point, force projection may well return to relying on submarines and littoral ships, not carriers. But we’ll see.

Maybe it’s another jobs program, just like in the USA.

I’m not being quick at all. I’m simply saying that the Chinese likely took a very short-term tactical loss – in a span measured in days – to build toward a strategic victory against Taiwan and the USA. As you point out, this is exactly where things are going. The Chinese are inflicting major economic pain on Taiwan, and already it appears as though the Taiwanese population is having serious second thoughts about annoying China further.

My personal view is that, while Taiwan may ideologically and politically be a separate entity from China, in practical terms, it is best for them to reintegrate with the mainland and give up dreams of independence – at least until the CCP finally weakens to the point where the Chinese Han-dominated multiethnic empire breaks apart.

This may happen sooner than we realise. Getting to the truth about China’s economic problems is very difficult, because you simply cannot trust Chinese statistics on any subject. But it is becoming increasingly clear that their economy has structural problems that they can no longer overcome easily.

With China, my own view is: “wait and see”. While I intensely dislike their economic and political model, I’ll be the first to admit that it is actually preferable in a lot of ways to the unipolar globalist Clown World insanity that the USSA exports.

Sand?!?

What happens when you try to do concrete without sand?

How about silicon chips?

Taiwan is said to get 90% of their silicon dioxide from China. Shipping costs will raise prices and hit real estate as Taiwan works to substtitute.

https://ria.ru/20220804/tayvan-1807118327.html