China’s development of a highly capable Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) battle plan to deter, slow, or deny U.S. forces from entering a contested geographic area or combat zone has been well covered in The Diplomat by myself and others. It makes sense for American military planners to assess the challenges such a strategy will present as Chinese forces begin to deploy over greater distances.
But it’s also clear that the United States should develop its own symmetrical and asymmetric strategies to counter such threats. A joint operational concept of AirSea Battle combined with a strong cyber component could damage, deter, and destroy any Chinese A2/AD capabilities and ensure U.S. maritime access. A newly reconstituted “AirSeaCyber” operational concept would give U.S. forces the best chance to defeat Chinese or any other nations’ A2/AD forces now and in the future.
Of course, the present Joint Operational Access Concept does make strong mention of cyber operations. However, an even stronger emphasis on cyber warfare is needed beyond present day convention. In short, AirSea Battle as an operational concept might already be obsolete.
The first component of a refocused AirSeaCyber operational concept would be defensive: the hardening of all U.S. airfields in range of Chinese ballistic or cruise missiles. U.S and allied air forces as currently organized are in large part unprotected from Chinese missile strikes. Kadena Air Base in Okinawa has a total of 15 shelters, enough for at most 30 fighters if one packs two into each. The Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Futenma, also located on Okinawa, has no aircraft shelters whatsoever. There are also surprisingly no shelters at MCAS Iwakuni and Yokota Air Base on Honshu, or Andersen Air Force Base either. Chinese forces could quickly deal a fatal blow to U.S. and allied aircraft sitting out in the open. This can be remedied with hardened shelters for U.S. and allied planes and essential equipment.
A second vital element of AirSeaCyber would be the fully funded procurement of a new long range bomber. Such a weapon is being conceptualized to replace the B-52, B-1 and possible B-2 platforms. This system should have an optional unmanned component, carry large payloads of precision guided conventional or nuclear ordinance, and have longer ranges then present B-2 bombers with reduced need for in-air refueling. The aircraft should also be able to conduct deep strikes against Chinese command and control capabilities (C2), disabling many Chinese weapons systems. The cost of such a bomber per unit has been assessed at $ 550 million per unit, compared to the B-2 at $1.07 billion per unit.
U.S. underwater naval assets would play a pivotal part in AirSeaCyber. Chinese forces lack proper operational deployment, equipment, and training in areas of Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW). American attack (SSNs) and guided missile submarines (SSGNs) would have tremendous capacity to attack Chinese naval assets, launch guided missiles strikes on coastal or inland targets, as well as deny access to the near seas. American planners must therefore continue to design, fund, and deploy Virginia-class attack submarines with increased payloads of Tomahawk cruise missiles. This will be of increased importance as Ohio class SSGNs start to retire around 2029.
As Chinese planners rely heavily on asymmetric warfare strategies, American tacticians, if developing AirSeaCyber, must also prepare to utilize such abilities. Cyber warfare offers proportionally the strongest asymmetrical capabilities at the lowest possible cost. Almost all of China’s military C2 and deployed weapons systems rely on computer hardware and software. As Chinese planners develop networked joint operations for multi-domain warfare, they also open their systems for exploitation by U.S. cyber-attack. American technology experts must begin long range studies of Chinese hardware, software, computer networks, and fiber optic communications. This will allow U.S. cyber command to deploy malware, viruses, and coordinated strikes on fiber-based communications networks that would launch any Chinese offensive or defensive operations. Cyber warfare, if conducted in coordination with standard tactical operations, could be the ultimate cross-domain asymmetrical weapon in modern 21st century warfare.
Asymmetrical warfare must also extend beyond the cyber domain and into modern combat operational domains. Larger next generation air and sea-based drone weapons could be utilized for intelligence gathering as well as offensive operations as part of AirSeaCyber. One new approach could be to utilize smaller submersible drones to gather intelligence outside of Chinese ports or in the near seas if possible hostilities appear imminent. Such undersea drones could be armed with small packages of torpedoes or possibly cruise missiles, and could strike rapidly. In theory, such a weapon could be developed with an extended loitering capability of several months while being highly cost effective.
These are only a sample of capabilities that could be utilized to create a joint operational concept that transitions from present AirSea Battle ideas into a more focused AirSeaCyber operational concept. Such notions are compliant with current fiscal realities, utilize modern military technologies, and take advantage of current Chinese weaknesses. Any operational concept that will guide America’s armed forces in the future is obsolete without intense conceptualizations of cyber warfare. U.S. military planners must develop cross domain symmetrical and asymmetrical capabilities as nations such as North Korea, Syria, Iran, and others are intently studying Chinese A2/AD capabilities. It should be the policy of U.S. strategic planners to develop an AirSeaCyber concept to negate any such abilities.

TAMMIE
You really make it seem so easy with your presentation but I to find this matter to be actually one thing that I feel I’d by no means understand. It kind of feels too complicated and extremely wide for me. I am looking forward to your next publish, I will attempt to get the hold of it!
Lauren Garza
Back in the 1920's the RAF presented a white paper detailing how it posited that the next war, sometime in the 1940's, would be between France and England. Hence the need for increased funding to counter this threat axis from France.
So consequently in 1949 England had an integrated air defence network of airfields, pilots, planes, TACTICAL DOCTRINE, early warning systems (Chain Home Low radar mainly pointing South towards France as well as East) and the filter rooms and central nodes of control to sucreed in a battle with France.
Or at least from that direction….think about it.
a123
Neither a Taiwan takeover, international water claims, or subjugation/bullying of smaller nations by China is acceptable under any situation, no matter what country you are from. America's allies and partners in the region do have a legitimate threat to worry about. American capabilities and forces in the area can play a balancing role should China maintain its aggressive posture towards its neighbors. America can and will deliver on its security commitments in that area should the need arise. However, the ASB concept is indeed obsolete because we are not facing a subpar military (at least number wise) but because they have modernized in such a rapid rate. This breakneck modernization is clearly vulnerable to cyber offensives. As such, it is no surprise that American strategists are not looking at asymmetric solutions to act as a force multiplier to achieve a decisive outcome. But one thing the US needs to do immediately is increase and tighten cyber security of its defense industrial base. Chinese cyber espionage, intellectual property theft and advanced technology transfer has given china a good start to counter American might.
jim jesilla
What China is doing now, by being the new bully and using its military might to steal lands and claim territories as its own, will only compel smaller nations to develop their own nuclear capability. In time, this capability will be achieved. China must remember that because it is the sole reason behind the small nations' adoption of a nuclear arms strategy, it will be the only target country of the thousands of nuclear bombs that will be developed. So, to all Chinese who share the flawed and distasteful ambitions of its leaders, your time will come!
pirugenia
In cyberspying & asymetrical warfare, the US should keep an eye on what its advisor in Gulf War II, Richard Perle, sold to China through one of his two companies (one sold optic fiber for the Chinese systems, and the other sold software to the Pentagon); I would not be too surprised if all of a sudden our defense systems did not work, with catastrophic consecuences for US. Idiot W Bush made Perle and advisor, and shared intelligence with this Israel-firster who had been previously caught spying for Netanyahu. What a disaster! Everybody has forgotten that time when in Pasadena, California, rocket scientists from Cal Tech & the Jet Propulsion Lab met; men like Tsieh, arrested and later sent to China, where he died in 2009, and the satanic Jack Parsons, who died in a misterious last minute accident when he was on his way to Israel. US sheeple, wake up for the love of Christ our Lord, true one God, amen. Stop worshipping Mamon, the god of Wall Street. Oh Jesus have mercy!
Vic
Yes, Tsien was the founder of the Jet Propulsion Lab at Caltech. So China and US ended up having the same founder for their rocketry programs.
enigmaticblake
The USA and China have nuclear armed missles. They will not fight each other. If they did everyone will be dead on both sides. Guns tanks and boats don't matter. The United states should reduce its military bases or keep them the same level and just sell weapons to China's nieghbors. Reduce military spending and make money selling arms. This way the USA can make money and counter the threat without going bankrupt.
Vic
Excellent common sense. The problem is the US governmental heads are not that smart. Furthermore, it is more fun for them to do battles. The is our problem in Asia. If US reduces it's 'primacy' role in Asia, we will all be better off whether or not China becomes the "Godfather" in our area.
Matt
If you are going to include cyber it seems we might as well include space. Japan has recently passed a law permitting the development of space weapons. X-37 and China's version are performing missions. Much of this is still out of the public's eye but its obvious that a space weapon's race has begun. Russia has lost a few satellites and the N. Korean missile was conveniantly delivered to S. Korean waters. The first shots have been fired. I even read an article here about turning the moon into a base. The US should claim the moon since we planted our flag their first and tell the Chinese they can't land anyone on it until they give up the South China Sea.
Errol T
I like that analogy about flag-planting on the moon. I wonder how China would react to that.
Vic
Drawing dotted lines on maps or flag planting on land, whether here or on the moon, are easy tasks, The real task is – can one enforce it. Mao said, "political power grows out of the barrel of a gun".