Three Strongest Navies in Southeast Asia (Vietnamese Report)

[Viet]

Overexerted its position more than "our seas" ,if we follow traditional policy of who has the longest stick gets the cow,china would get everything.

Y'all talk about naval threat while literally getting coup-ed at one's own home,and sovereignty hijacked. China threat & "white men is better " just because they are not there abusing you at the moment ? The mental damage that Hollywood and western propaganda did is apparent.ASEAN should built basics,provide better food for the mass to develop physically and mentally more than previous generation and educate themselves,learn from Korea,Japan or China instead of West.Not shame fellow asians with thoughtless acts after whatever respect the further northern counterparts has brought.

Of course our main concern is global warming. Keep your problems to yourself.

 

[Smarana Mitra]

Wouldn't be surprised if Indonesia eventually goes for an aircraft carrier to secure interests given it's growing economy and volatile neighborhood.
Any such plans to improve specifically blue water capability currently? LHDs, large fleet supports/tankers, carriers, ssns?
The Thai one is seriously only an helicopter carrier. Don't even know if it's operational.

Aircraft carriers are for open seas. Indonesian waters are filled with islands and nearby landmass. No carriers can be effective in such places. A bunch of cheap artillery on the land/island can destroy aircraft carriers in such waters. Helicopter carriers are even worse as they don't even have aircrafts to give air cover and helicopters are easy targets

In early 2010s, Vietnam refused to buy Israel's Air Defense System because it was charged very high price by Israeli partner, and then Viettel has successfully developed our own one.

Can you name the air defence developed by Vietnam? This is a new news to me

 

[Viet]

Can you name the air defence developed by Vietnam? This is a new news to me

He means Viettel’s Air defense system . We need something against aerial terror attacks from a certain neighbor. Israel plays a big part in our air defense. Certainly we have deployed Spider missiles. Our “Iron Dome”.

 

[AViet]

Aircraft carriers are for open seas. Indonesian waters are filled with islands and nearby landmass. No carriers can be effective in such places. A bunch of cheap artillery on the land/island can destroy aircraft carriers in such waters. Helicopter carriers are even worse as they don't even have aircrafts to give air cover and helicopters are easy targets


Can you name the air defence developed by Vietnam? This is a new news to me

Aircraft carriers are for open seas. Indonesian waters are filled with islands and nearby landmass. No carriers can be effective in such places. A bunch of cheap artillery on the land/island can destroy aircraft carriers in such waters. Helicopter carriers are even worse as they don't even have aircrafts to give air cover and helicopters are easy targets


Can you name the air defence developed by Vietnam? This is a new news to me

Perhaps it should be translated as Air Control System (Hệ thống cảnh giới vùng trời VQ1-M)

 

[Varunastra]

Aircraft carriers are for open seas. Indonesian waters are filled with islands and nearby landmass. No carriers can be effective in such places. A bunch of cheap artillery on the land/island can destroy aircraft carriers in such waters. Helicopter carriers are even worse as they don't even have aircrafts to give air cover and helicopters are easy targets

Well as long as Indonesia only has local defensive ambitions carriers don't have much sense. But when Indonesia due to it's increasing economy and aggressive posturing by foreign powers starts to feel it's interests need to be safeguarded or foreign policy influenced then carriers and CBGs make sense even if there is no actual war. Also carriers wouldn't go near coastal waters where it can be easily targeted by costal defense, but will be used to launch precision strikes against far off enemy targets in times of war. The main defense of the carriers is it's accompanying CBG that can provide protection while the aircrafts carry on their bombing runs, a lone carrier will be a sitting duck but a CBG is a power projection king.
LHDs/helicopter carriers on the other hand based on the aircrafts carried(STOVL say F-35Bs) can be both a full blown carrier for ofensive air ops or a troop and equipment carrier for amphibious landings, basically the role can be varied. But yeah at the end of the day all these are only if you have a offensive/blue water ambitions attached to your foreign policy which I feel a growing Indonesia will have more and more.

 

[Indos]

Indonesia just need to let China take care of the SEAs in pacific,no one wants open seas more than china,it's their lifeline.Indonesia can focus all the resource on economic development instead of wasting money on pointless sphere.Not like anyone's threatning the nation .These carriers and such only fuels right winged nationalism ,which will be used by some Trump like maniac for political gain while setting the development back by decades.

Until Today, the economic teams are still controlling Indonesia government spending, so I believe we are still under a rational spending policy where majority of weapon spending under Jokowi administration is given to local defense industries (at least since its first term until Today).

For your information, Indonesia defense spending is still less than 1 percent of its total GDP, while even Malaysia has exceeded 1 % and Singapore is more than 3 %. Indonesia defense spending relative to its GDP is the lowest in South East Asia, despite in total amount is the second largest after Singapore.

We know we are under Pandemic attack, and this is why even until Today there is no heard on reckless spending like 36 Rafales and 12 F 15 EX acquisition plan where foreign media are saying based on our Armed Force last meeting.

The fact is our planning ministry only approve 1.6 billion USD foreign loan for fighters until 2024 shows Jokowi administration is still under economic team control. Even our pandemic task force is lead by Economic person (previously CEO of state owned bank, Bank Mandiri).

Despite being approved by planning ministry, the acquisition plan for fighters and many defense equipment hasnt yet passed Finance Ministery office under former World Bank Managing Director, Sri Mulyani, leadership.

What we know last year biggest acquisition is for local defense industry, dont know the overall spending for local companies, but for state owned defense holding, Defense ID, they get around 1 billion USD revenues (total sales) last year.

Private owned companies and state owned company that are not part of state owned defense holding like PT DKB (shipbuilder) could get some contract as well last year, at least PT Batamex shipyard get another contract last year to build another oil tanker vessel for our Navy.

So we try to spend on defense that will still effect our economy and improve our industrilization. This is also why for fighters I only wants F 15 EX with EPAWS (1.6 billion USD), since Rafale will be in the same class with KF21/IFX. Better not buy any fighters and wait for KF 21/IFX completes its development in 2026 inshaAllah if we cannot get the same F 15 EX like what is owned by US Air Force

 

[Leishangthem]

Until Today, the economic teams are still controlling Indonesia government spending, so I believe we are still under a rational spending policy where majority of weapon spending under Jokowi administration is given to local defense industries (at least since its first term until Today).

We know we are under Pandemic attack, and this is why even until Today there is no heard on reckless spending like 36 Rafales and 12 F 15 EX acquisition plan where foreign media are saying based on our Armed Force last meeting.

The fact is our planning ministry only approve 1.6 billion USD foreign loan for fighters until 2024 shows Jokowi administration is still under economic team control. Even our pandemic task force is lead by Economic person (previously CEO of state owned bank, Bank Mandiri).

Despite being approved by planning ministry, the acquisition plan for fighters and many defense equipment hasnt yet passed Finance Ministery office under former World Bank Managing Director, Sri Mulyani, leadership.

What we know last year biggest acquisition is for local defense industry, dont know the overall spending for local companies, but for state owned defense holding, Defense ID, they get around 1 billion USD revenues (total sales) last year.

Private owned companies and state owned company that are not part of state owned defense holding like PT DKB (shipbuilder) could get some contract as well last year, at least PT Batamex shipyard get another contract last year to build another oil tanker vessel for our Navy.

So we try to spend on defense that will still effect our economy and improve our industrilization. This is also why for fighters I only wants F 15 EX with EPAWS (1.6 billion USD), since Rafale will be in the same class with KF21/IFX. Better not buy any fighters and wait for KF 21/IFX completes its development in 2026 inshaAllah if we cannot get the same F 15 EX like what is owned by US Air Force

View attachment 746526

ASEAN nations has always been more wiser and productive than South Asian ones, the bar should be higher not lower. But the risk for ASEAN is the western agents influence and their psychological hijack.
Indonesians are bombarded with propaganda from local version of CNN,BBC ,CNBC along with plethora of other local media funded by the western regime change experts.USAGM provides millions for propaganda dissemination on locals ( TV One, Metro TV, Kompas TV, Kompas.com and Okezone.com. etc).
And the result is what we see in this form itself.
NED also spends millions in Indonesia,IRI itself funds close to million each years in training ,coaching ,candidates for election starting from grassroots ; imagine that!

To gauge the severity of this problem, imagine if China trained young US politicians?
With such punitive meddling in Indonesian's core matters ,US is basically grooming a cadre of leaders to serve US interest or stage a riot when convenient like in HK,Myanmar,Thailand.

How are Indonesians accepting this downright meddling of sovereignty?But people are so blinded by US propaganda, personal incentive and coercion,that such has been allowed unabated.
The moment US feels Indonesian gov isn't catering to US whims and reducing the US infiltration they will attempt a political coup .

 

[Smarana Mitra]

Well as long as Indonesia only has local defensive ambitions carriers don't have much sense. But when Indonesia due to it's increasing economy and aggressive posturing by foreign powers starts to feel it's interests need to be safeguarded or foreign policy influenced then carriers and CBGs make sense even if there is no actual war. Also carriers wouldn't go near coastal waters where it can be easily targeted by costal defense, but will be used to launch precision strikes against far off enemy targets in times of war. The main defense of the carriers is it's accompanying CBG that can provide protection while the aircrafts carry on their bombing runs, a lone carrier will be a sitting duck but a CBG is a power projection king.
LHDs/helicopter carriers on the other hand based on the aircrafts carried(STOVL say F-35Bs) can be both a full blown carrier for ofensive air ops or a troop and equipment carrier for amphibious landings, basically the role can be varied. But yeah at the end of the day all these are only if you have a offensive/blue water ambitions attached to your foreign policy which I feel a growing Indonesia will have more and more.

Which water can Indonesia project its power? IOR? South China Sea? Indonesia has no region of empty water body which it can control. Indonesia is surrounded by countries like Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, Australia, Philippines and India (Andaman & Nicobar) and hence is in a cramped space. Even USSR during cold war found itself in a similar situation where it lacked sufficient ports to project power as it was surrounded by vast landmass of other countries. Indonesia is in a similar position geographically and hence can't project power even if it gets economically larger.

Also, it is surprising that you call for Indonesia to have F35 type plans while at the same time say that Indonesia is controlled by USA. Very strange logic.

ASEAN nations has always been more wiser and productive than South Asian ones, the bar should be higher not lower. But the risk for ASEAN is the western agents influence and their psychological hijack.
Indonesians are bombarded with propaganda from local version of CNN,BBC ,CNBC along with plethora of other local media funded by the western regime change experts.USAGM provides millions for propaganda dissemination on locals ( TV One, Metro TV, Kompas TV, Kompas.com and Okezone.com. etc).
And the result is what we see in this form itself.
NED also spends millions in Indonesia,IRI itself funds close to million each years in training ,coaching ,candidates for election starting from grassroots ; imagine that!

To gauge the severity of this problem, imagine if China trained young US politicians?
With such punitive meddling in Indonesian's core matters ,US is basically grooming a cadre of leaders to serve US interest or stage a riot when convenient like in HK,Myanmar,Thailand.

How are Indonesians accepting this downright meddling of sovereignty?But people are so blinded by US propaganda, personal incentive and coercion,that such has been allowed unabated.
The moment US feels Indonesian gov isn't catering to US whims and reducing the US infiltration they will attempt a political coup .

Really? ASEAN nations are more productive? You have said it yourself - they are infiltrated by USA. How can such countries be more productive? The reason why these countries have more GDP per capita is because they have vast resources of minerals, coal and oil. Indonesia and Malaysia were oil exporters since WW2. Japan conquered these land mainly for its oil in WW2. It is only recently that Indonesian oil reserves depleted and its consumption rose due to which it became net importer. Also, Malaysia and Indonesia have much lower population density and huge water resources compared to South Asia because of which they have crops like Palm trees and timber production. Singapore is rich because of its port location which is the only major gateway to China, Japan and US west coast for the oil trade. Almost entire Singaporean economy relies on its port and accompanying financial hub.

I don't see anything inherently more productive in ASEAN countries. I also don't see how ASEAN countries are wiser when they have allowed USA to infiltrate them.

 

[Varunastra]

Which water can Indonesia project its power? IOR? South China Sea? Indonesia has no region of empty water body which it can control. Indonesia is surrounded by countries like Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, Australia, Philippines and India (Andaman & Nicobar) and hence is in a cramped space. Even USSR during cold war found itself in a similar situation where it lacked sufficient ports to project power as it was surrounded by vast landmass of other countries. Indonesia is in a similar position geographically and hence can't project power even if it gets economically larger.

Also, it is surprising that you call for Indonesia to have F35 type plans while at the same time say that Indonesia is controlled by USA. Very strange logic.

Don't know which areas, that will be upto Indonesia's foreign policy, doesn't need to be a whole waterbody though, even targeting a country is enough fulfillment of a carriers use case.
Don't get the empty water body logic though, is being near isolated waters mandatory to projecting power you are saying? USSR back in it's day did ample naval power projection, though big part of their arm were SSNs and SSBNs, this is continued by the Russia of today to a smaller extent through it's carrier battle group. It was USSRs power projection by sending in their nuke subs that prevented a US intervention in the war of 1971 when US had sent their carrier battle group, that's the kind of capability that can really alter histories.
Also never said Indonesia is controlled by USA, are you mixing up posts?

 

[Smarana Mitra]

Don't know which areas, that will be upto Indonesia's foreign policy, doesn't need to be a whole waterbody though, even targeting a country is enough fulfillment of a carriers use case.
Don't get the empty water body logic though, is being near isolated waters mandatory to projecting power you are saying? USSR back in it's day did ample naval power projection, though big part of their arm were SSNs and SSBNs, this is continued by the Russia of today to a smaller extent through it's carrier battle group. It was USSRs power projection by sending in their nuke subs that prevented a US intervention in the war of 1971 when US had sent their carrier battle group, that's the kind of capability that can really alter histories.
Also never said Indonesia is controlled by USA, are you mixing up posts?

My apologies. I mixed up post of @Leishangthem with yours.

Coming back to power projection, USSR had submarines to counter USA carriers, not for projection. Submarines are for sea denial, not sea control. USSR never could achieve naval domination unlike USA because it never had the ports and open sea. The problem with USSR approach is that even USA could deploy large number of submarines and it was not exclusive to USSR. But the carriers were mostly exclusive to USA as USSR could not deploy them in enough quantity. Same is the case with Indonesia. Carriers can't work with Indonesia because of the same reason as USSR.

Also, USA fleet could have done very little to India. With just about 30 planes, a carrier can hardly do much when india would have used massive number of planes to destroy the carrier for good. In those days, there was no SAM or air defence of good quality to deter Indian planes from striking USA carrier. Also, Indian antiship missile which it used to destroy Karachi port could have been used against USA fleet too. USA was merely posturing in the hopes that India gets intimidated but would not have the capability to actually intervene. USSR submarine was not enough to stop USA but just made USA realise that India has USSR support and hence can't be intimidated by consequences or sanctions

 

[Leishangthem]

Which water can Indonesia project its power? IOR? South China Sea? Indonesia has no region of empty water body which it can control. Indonesia is surrounded by countries like Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, Australia, Philippines and India (Andaman & Nicobar) and hence is in a cramped space. Even USSR during cold war found itself in a similar situation where it lacked sufficient ports to project power as it was surrounded by vast landmass of other countries. Indonesia is in a similar position geographically and hence can't project power even if it gets economically larger.

Also, it is surprising that you call for Indonesia to have F35 type plans while at the same time say that Indonesia is controlled by USA. Very strange logic.


Really? ASEAN nations are more productive? You have said it yourself - they are infiltrated by USA. How can such countries be more productive? The reason why these countries have more GDP per capita is because they have vast resources of minerals, coal and oil. Indonesia and Malaysia were oil exporters since WW2. Japan conquered these land mainly for its oil in WW2. It is only recently that Indonesian oil reserves depleted and its consumption rose due to which it became net importer. Also, Malaysia and Indonesia have much lower population density and huge water resources compared to South Asia because of which they have crops like Palm trees and timber production. Singapore is rich because of its port location which is the only major gateway to China, Japan and US west coast for the oil trade. Almost entire Singaporean economy relies on its port and accompanying financial hub.In some nations the stress caused is severe and lesser in other,that's the difference.

I don't see anything inherently more productive in ASEAN countries. I also don't see how ASEAN countries are wiser when they have allowed USA to infiltrate them.

... What make you think India hasn't been infiltrated by CIA? Do you comprehend the scale of so called thinktanks in India funded by the US and its allies ?the news networks owned and funded by the US? the scale of US backed agents operating in India? You think the admin wasn't backed by the US?
The US social media greatly impacts the Indian election,tiktok has been successfully removed now US firms has total control of Indian social media and cyber space.
US infiltration is universal except for few nations like China,Russia,Cuba,N.Korea,Iran(the few which are targetted by the US as authoritarian for preventing their meddling)Most countries dare not stop US interference in fear of US reproach.

How's ASEAN not ahead in general ? It's safer,cleaner,business friendly,better in infrastructure,pragmatic in approach and easier to operate ,and stacks higher on almost every merit for quality of a nation. They attract way more foreign investment than India.
India is the 2nd largest producer of oil and minerals in Asia which accounts to 13.7% of total export amounting to US$44.1 billion.Oil and minerals are the top export of India
For comparison,Electrical machinery, equipment are the top export for Malaysia amounting to : US$86.6 billion (37% of total exports).
Don't use the oil ,resources excuse unless you're talking about Arab oil states,Australia and some African mining nations.India can't compete with small Vietnam which recorded export turnovers of approximately 281.5 billion U.S. dollars in 2020 which is quite a bit larger than India's total export of USD 221.86Billion .
India with 1.4 b has 3.5 trillion GDP ,ASEAN with half the population has 3.11 trillion GDP ,and the gap only gets wider.

 

[Varunastra]

My apologies. I mixed up post of @Leishangthem with yours.

Coming back to power projection, USSR had submarines to counter USA carriers, not for projection. Submarines are for sea denial, not sea control. USSR never could achieve naval domination unlike USA because it never had the ports and open sea. The problem with USSR approach is that even USA could deploy large number of submarines and it was not exclusive to USSR. But the carriers were mostly exclusive to USA as USSR could not deploy them in enough quantity. Same is the case with Indonesia. Carriers can't work with Indonesia because of the same reason as USSR.

Also, USA fleet could have done very little to India. With just about 30 planes, a carrier can hardly do much when india would have used massive number of planes to destroy the carrier for good. In those days, there was no SAM or air defence of good quality to deter Indian planes from striking USA carrier. Also, Indian antiship missile which it used to destroy Karachi port could have been used against USA fleet too. USA was merely posturing in the hopes that India gets intimidated but would not have the capability to actually intervene. USSR submarine was not enough to stop USA but just made USA realise that India has USSR support and hence can't be intimidated by consequences or sanctions

Yup I agree the actual change that the US fleet could have is debatable but the fact that the mere presence of the Soviet battle groups (which also had cruisers/destroyers along with the SSBN) forced US to steer away is an absolute win. Two world powers to come heads on at waters foreign to their own is basically the point of having a blue water capability which can include a myriad of platforms just to enforce your own foreign policy. USSR didn't need to fire a single weapon to make a statement, a statement that we are here in these waters so no funny business, and India could continue with liberating Bangladesh. Such a capability for a major power I feel is worthwhile, each growing country would need to take a call on whether to have the capability or not.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Vietnam navy is the only one with real combat experience and has unified Russian logistics. A hodge podge of random equipment bought from 5 different countries isn't as good as a single set of equipment with a unified doctrine and supply chain like Vietnam.

 

[Smarana Mitra]

... What make you think India hasn't been infiltrated by CIA? Do you comprehend the scale of so called thinktanks in India funded by the US and its allies ?the news networks owned and funded by the US? the scale of US backed agents operating in India? You think the admin wasn't backed by the US?
The US social media greatly impacts the Indian election,tiktok has been successfully removed now US firms has total control of Indian social media and cyber space.
US infiltration is universal except for few nations like China,Russia,Cuba,N.Korea,Iran(the few which are targetted by the US as authoritarian for preventing their meddling)Most countries dare not stop US interference in fear of US reproach.

How's ASEAN not ahead in general ? It's safer,cleaner,business friendly,better in infrastructure,pragmatic in approach and easier to operate ,and stacks higher on almost every merit for quality of a nation. They attract way more foreign investment than India.
India is the 2nd largest producer of oil and minerals in Asia which accounts to 13.7% of total export amounting to US$44.1 billion.Oil and minerals are the top export of India
For comparison,Electrical machinery, equipment are the top export for Malaysia amounting to : US$86.6 billion (37% of total exports).
Don't use the oil ,resources excuse unless you're talking about Arab oil states,Australia and some African mining nations.India can't compete with small Vietnam which recorded export turnovers of approximately 281.5 billion U.S. dollars in 2020 which is quite a bit larger than India's total export of USD 221.86Billion .
India with 1.4 b has 3.5 trillion GDP ,ASEAN with half the population has 3.11 trillion GDP ,and the gap only gets wider.

CIA exists everywhere. That does not mean Indian power circle is infiltrated. It is a fact that India has 15% muslims who will side with anyone who is anti India and hence easy to get moles. India has maintained strict control over its strategic interests. That is how India could hide its nuclear testing in 1998. Indian english news and social media has been always pro USA. But the reality is that most of Indian news is disseminated by local media and gossips. Indian elections are not heavily influenced by social media. There is indeed an influence of Whatsapp but that is peer to peer and hence the issue of US control does not arise. No election is won or lost on SM like Twitter, FB etc. So, though India ahs been infiltrated by CIA, it is limited to non strategic domain and even without CIA, India has large number of muslims and christians who are anyways foreign agents. Even in 1920, they started Khilafat movement in support of Ottomans. India does have infiltration but has enough ammunition to counter it and that nullifies USA power.

"safer,cleaner,business friendly,better in infrastructure,pragmatic in approach and easier to operate" - this is a big joke. ASEAN countries have no real technology and only serve as labour camps. In return for their oil, USA invested in infratsructure and other equipment manufacturing but all of these are simpler technologies. Malaysia and Indonesia can't even make a full car by itself till now and if you call that "safer,cleaner,business friendly,better in infrastructure,pragmatic in approach and easier to operate" you have some problems.

India is a second largest producer of oil? Are you out of your mind? India is a refiner of oil which refines imported oil and sells it back. Indian oil production is just 700k barrels a day whereas Indonesia produces close to 1million barrels a day. Malaysia, Vietnam etc act as USA hub for providing labour in assemblig electronics. But they have no real economy independently. India on the other hand, has technology to make semiconductors upto 65nm, radars, ships, submarines, nuclear rectors, aircrafts (older gen) and many other equipment of advanced technology.

Why should anyone ignore oil or mineral production or limit it to Arab states? If you don't know the net exports of Indonesia, Malaysia in oil, coal and other minerals historically, it is your fault. Vietnam is an exception and that too because it is located next to China and acts as an intermediary to China by helping reroute shipments to subvert customs duty and also as a trading hub to Chinese industrial areas by virtue of its long coastline. In other words, without acting as China's hub, Vietnam's economy will be similar to Cambodia or Laos.

You have not given a single proper reason to say why ASEAN is better than India but simply made rhetorical remarks and denied the most obvious thing - oil, coal and mineral resources and simply jumped to foolish conclusions

 

[Viva_Viet]

"safer,cleaner,business friendly,better in infrastructure,pragmatic in approach and easier to operate" - this is a big joke. ASEAN countries have no real technology and only serve as labour camps. In return for their oil, USA invested in infratsructure and other equipment manufacturing but all of these are simpler technologies. Malaysia and Indonesia can't even make a full car by itself till now and if you call that "safer,cleaner,business friendly,better in infrastructure,pragmatic in approach and easier to operate" you have some problems.

"safer,cleaner,business friendly,better in infrastructure,pragmatic in approach and easier to operate" are good enough for investors. Before 1979, CN also had Zero technology , too and they had to ask help from JP to build up their infrastructure, despite JP just massacred 6 million CNese in WW2.

Investors have good technology, so they only need "safe,clean,business friendly,good infrastructure" countries to operate their bussiness.

Why should anyone ignore oil or mineral production or limit it to Arab states? If you don't know the net exports of Indonesia, Malaysia in oil, coal and other minerals historically, it is your fault. Vietnam is an exception and that too because it is located next to China and acts as an intermediary to China by helping reroute shipments to subvert customs duty and also as a trading hub to Chinese industrial areas by virtue of its long coastline. In other words, without acting as China's hub, Vietnam's economy will be similar to Cambodia or Laos.

We r an exception bcs we fought very hard to regain our independence . If your country had the same location like VN (CN want to control the half North while US want to control the half South), then I bet that your country would still be split into half like North and South Korea.