🚢 The Future of Naval Power: Aircraft Carriers vs. Submarines – India’s Strategic Dilemma

Manoj Ambat, Editor in Chief, Strategic Vanguard
Oct 13
6 min read

Naval power has always been a central pillar of global strategy. Control of the seas determines trade, security, and influence. In the 21st century, this reality has become sharper than ever before. The Indo-Pacific is now the epicenter of global power rivalry, with the United States and China vying for supremacy. In this context, two platforms dominate naval debates: the aircraft carrier and the submarine.

Aircraft carriers are massive floating airbases, capable of launching power across oceans. Submarines, on the other hand, are stealthy predators, often unseen until they strike. Both are expensive, both are complex, and both represent different philosophies of warfare. The debate is not merely technical — it is strategic, political, and deeply tied to national identity.

For India, this debate is particularly urgent. As a rising power with dual-ocean responsibilities, India faces the challenge of balancing prestige with practicality. Should it build more aircraft carriers to signal its great-power status, or invest in submarines to secure its deterrence and survival?

This article explores the past, present, and future of this enduring debate.

1. A Historical Perspective: From Battleships to Carriers and Submarines

For centuries, the battleship was the ultimate symbol of maritime dominance. Massive guns, armored hulls, and commanding presence made battleships the pride of every navy. The early 20th century saw a naval arms race dominated by these giants.

But World War II changed everything. The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 demonstrated that aircraft carriers, not battleships, were now decisive. Carrier-based aircraft could strike far beyond the horizon, rendering the battleship obsolete. The Battle of Midway, fought entirely by aircraft launched from carriers, confirmed this shift.

At the same time, submarines became the silent hunters of the seas. German U-boats nearly strangled Britain by targeting convoys in the Atlantic. In the Pacific, American submarines cut off Japan’s supply lines. Submarines had transformed from experimental platforms in World War I into deadly strategic assets by World War II.

The Cold War further sharpened this divide. The United States relied on carriers to project power globally, ensuring presence in every major ocean. The Soviet Union, unable to match US carriers, instead focused on submarines, especially nuclear-powered ones. These platforms became central to nuclear deterrence, ensuring second-strike capability in case of all-out war.

Thus, the stage was set: aircraft carriers for power projection, submarines for deterrence and stealth.

2. Aircraft Carriers: Floating Cities of Power

Aircraft carriers are often described as "floating sovereign territory." They bring a country’s air force to distant shores, without the need for overseas bases. With decks large enough to host dozens of fighter jets, helicopters, and surveillance aircraft, they are unmatched in mobility and firepower.

Global Examples

United States: The US Navy operates 11 nuclear-powered supercarriers, primarily Nimitz-class and the newer Gerald R. Ford-class. These are the backbone of American global dominance.
United Kingdom: The Royal Navy has two Queen Elizabeth-class carriers, signaling its continued global ambitions.
China: China has rapidly expanded its carrier fleet — from the refurbished Liaoning to the domestically built Shandong, and now the advanced Fujian.
India: India operates INS Vikramaditya and the indigenously built INS Vikrant, marking a milestone in self-reliance.

Why Carriers Matter

Power Projection – Carriers can operate anywhere, launching airstrikes, surveillance, or humanitarian aid missions.
Prestige – A carrier is more than a weapon; it is a symbol of great-power status.
Deterrence – A carrier battle group is not just one ship, but an entire fleet, often including destroyers, frigates, submarines, and logistics vessels.

Criticisms

But carriers come with challenges:

Extremely costly to build and maintain.
Require large escort fleets for protection.
Increasingly vulnerable to advanced missile systems and drone attacks.

Despite these challenges, carriers remain indispensable for any nation aspiring to global influence.

3. Submarines: The Silent Assassins of the Seas

In contrast to the visible might of carriers, submarines embody stealth. They operate unseen, striking without warning. Their strength lies in their invisibility.

Types of Submarines

SSKs (Diesel-Electric Submarines): Cost-effective, quieter, and ideal for coastal defense.
SSNs (Nuclear-Powered Attack Submarines): Fast, long-range, capable of operating globally.
SSBNs (Nuclear-Powered Ballistic Missile Submarines): Armed with nuclear missiles, they provide a secure second-strike capability.

Global Examples

United States: Ohio-class SSBNs remain a cornerstone of US deterrence.
Russia: The Borei-class continues Russia’s tradition of powerful subs.
China: Expanding rapidly, with Jin-class and new SSNs.
India: The Arihant-class represents India’s entry into the SSBN club.

Why Submarines Matter

Stealth – Difficult to detect, they can operate even in hostile waters.
Deterrence – SSBNs guarantee retaliation, making nuclear war less likely.
Cost-Effective Asymmetry – Smaller nations can use subs to counter larger navies.

Limitations

Limited ability for power projection compared to carriers.
Require advanced technology and training.
Still vulnerable to anti-submarine warfare improvements.

Nonetheless, submarines remain indispensable for deterrence and asymmetric warfare.

4. The Changing Threat Landscape

Technology is rapidly reshaping naval warfare. The dominance of carriers is being questioned by emerging threats.

Hypersonic Missiles

China’s DF-21D and DF-26 are dubbed “carrier-killers.” Traveling at hypersonic speeds, they can penetrate defenses and sink billion-dollar carriers with relatively inexpensive missiles.

Drones and Swarms

Unmanned systems — both aerial and underwater — threaten to overwhelm traditional defenses. A swarm of cheap drones could damage or disable even the most advanced carrier.

Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW)

While subs remain stealthy, advances in sonar, satellite tracking, and AI-driven detection are narrowing their advantage. The cat-and-mouse game beneath the seas continues.

The result: both carriers and submarines face new challenges, forcing navies to rethink doctrine.

5. India’s Strategic Dilemma

India, with its vast coastline and strategic position, cannot ignore this debate.

Carriers in India

INS Vikramaditya: Acquired from Russia, remains India’s main carrier.
INS Vikrant: Commissioned in 2022, a symbol of indigenous capability.
Future Plans: Debate over a third carrier, possibly a nuclear-powered one.

Submarines in India

Arihant-Class SSBNs: India’s nuclear deterrent at sea.
Scorpene-Class (Kalvari): Diesel-electric attack subs.
Planned SSNs: India plans to build nuclear-powered attack subs for long-range operations.

The Core Dilemma

A carrier costs billions — enough to fund several submarines.
Carriers provide prestige and presence in peacetime.
Submarines provide survivability and deterrence in wartime.

India’s geography complicates this further. With responsibilities in both the Arabian Sea and Bay of Bengal, India needs power projection and deterrence. But budgetary constraints mean trade-offs are inevitable.

6. Global Naval Doctrines: Who is Winning the Debate?

United States

The US Navy continues to invest in carriers, but is also heavily funding unmanned submarines and next-gen undersea warfare.

China

China is pursuing both aggressively, reflecting its ambition to dominate the Indo-Pacific.

Russia

Russia leans more on submarines, especially SSBNs, as a cost-effective way to maintain deterrence.

Smaller Nations

Countries like Australia, Vietnam, and even Pakistan emphasize submarines as asymmetric counters to larger navies.

The global trend suggests that no single platform will dominate — instead, hybrid doctrines combining carriers, submarines, and drones will define the future.

7. India’s Road Ahead: Balancing Prestige and Practicality

India’s path cannot be about choosing one over the other. Instead, it must integrate both platforms into a coherent doctrine.

Why India Needs Carriers

Project power into the Indo-Pacific.
Maintain presence in both the Arabian Sea and Bay of Bengal.
Symbol of rising global status.

Why India Needs Submarines

Secure nuclear deterrence against China and Pakistan.
Dominate chokepoints and deny enemy fleets.
Cost-effective survivability in wartime.

Toward a Hybrid Doctrine

India’s future naval strategy must combine:

2–3 carriers for power projection.
A robust submarine fleet of SSBNs and SSNs for deterrence.
Investment in drones and ASW to counter emerging threats.

This balance will allow India to secure its maritime interests while managing limited resources.

Conclusion: The Sea Will Decide the Century

The debate between carriers and submarines is not about replacement — it is about balance. Carriers dominate headlines, while submarines dominate strategy. Both are essential, but in different ways.

For India, the challenge is sharper than for most nations. As it rises on the global stage, it must showcase power while ensuring survival. Carriers like INS Vikrant symbolize India’s ambitions. Submarines like Arihant safeguard its very existence.

The future of naval power will not be decided by one platform. It will be decided by how nations integrate carriers, submarines, drones, and missiles into a cohesive doctrine. The seas will remain contested, and dominance will belong to those who master both the skies above the waves and the shadows beneath them.

As the world shifts toward the Indo-Pacific century, India’s choices in the next two decades will shape not just its own destiny, but the balance of power across the oceans.