Reports have recently emerged that a Chinese Type 041 Zhou-class nuclear submarine allegedly sank due to an “operator error,” specifically an “open hatch.” This assertion has raised concerns and criticisms regarding the People’s Liberation Army Navy’s (PLAN) training and safety protocols, as well as Western attitudes towards Eastern military operations. The story was first reported by The Washington Times, which cited U.S. defense officials who characterized the incident as a mishap resulting from “an operator error.” This claim, however, has provoked significant debate about its veracity and implications, with some critics arguing that this may be yet another example of Western bias in evaluating Eastern military capabilities.
In light of the recent history of alleged naval missteps, particularly the incident involving India’s INS Arihant in 2017, this article explores both the validity of the claims against China’s submarine practices and the broader cultural and geopolitical dynamics underlying such commentary.
According to reports, U.S. officials believe the Zhou-class submarine mishap stemmed from an “operator error,” which allegedly led to a critical hatch being left open while the vessel was partially submerged. This allowed water to flood parts of the submarine, contributing to its eventual sinking. While specifics about the exact location and design of the hatch remain unclear, former U.S. Navy submarine officer Thomas Shugart suggested that the incident might involve more than a simple “open hatch,” proposing a scenario where the submarine’s trim or draft could have shifted, allowing a normally high-positioned hatch to dip below the waterline temporarily.
Satellite images from June revealed at least four large cranes attempting to salvage the partially submerged submarine in a harbor in Wuhan, indicating a serious, likely costly, incident for PLAN. The timing is particularly significant, given that China is currently developing three new Shang III-class cruise missile submarines, expected to enter active duty within the next few years. The Zhou-class mishap is thus a stark reminder of the high risks inherent in operating such sophisticated, heavily engineered military equipment.
The idea of a high-stakes submarine mishap caused by something as seemingly mundane as an open hatch is reminiscent of an incident involving India’s indigenous nuclear submarine, INS Arihant, in 2017. Reports initially claimed that an improperly closed hatch had allowed water to flood the propulsion compartment. However, these assertions were later debunked. It was clarified that the submarine’s design – which includes a sealed nuclear reactor compartment and other stringent safety features – would not allow such an event under normal conditions.
The portrayal of the Indian Navy’s mishap as a careless “operator error” fueled skepticism within the military and intelligence communities, both in India and globally. A retired Indian naval officer explained that it would be improbable for a submarine’s hatch to be left open without it being part of a carefully monitored operation. Compartmentalized access hatches ensure watertight integrity, a standard in submarines worldwide. The assumption that such a sophisticated vessel could be sunk due to an open hatch, without further verification, has thus been met with considerable skepticism, fueling questions about the current claims regarding China’s mishap.
Military experts have pointed out that the “open hatch” theory may not entirely align with standard submarine protocols. As Shugart noted, a hatch positioned above the waterline could only lead to flooding if there were adjustments to the submarine’s draft or if the vessel’s trim were altered for maintenance or testing. Additionally, most submarine hatches are designed to prevent accidental flooding, particularly those near critical compartments.
The skepticism surrounding the “open hatch” theory is bolstered by the vast resources that both China and India have invested in expanding and modernizing their navies. China’s navy, which is now considered the world’s largest, includes advanced underwater and surface vessels outfitted with the latest in maritime technology. Analysts argue that the likelihood of such a rudimentary mistake remains low given the training and scrutiny that personnel on such sensitive vessels must undergo.
The response to mishaps in Eastern navies has, in some cases, led to a broader discussion about bias in military assessments. Military commentators and analysts point to a longstanding pattern of Western coverage that interprets Eastern military errors with a certain level of condescension. This phenomenon aligns with Palestinian-American intellectual Edward Said’s theory of “Orientalism,” which critiques Western portrayals of the East as culturally and intellectually inferior. Said argued that Western powers have historically used such portrayals to justify imperial ambitions, creating a narrative of “backwardness” to maintain cultural dominance.
In the current geopolitical context, some analysts believe that incidents like the alleged mishaps in Chinese and Indian submarines may be seized upon by certain Western media to reinforce this narrative, subtly suggesting incompetence within Eastern militaries. A retired Indian Navy official noted that the professionalism and training standards among submariners are among the highest worldwide, making the notion of a simple oversight sinking a vessel seem “improbable.” He further suggested that, should there be any truth to the claim, it would indicate isolated issues rather than a reflection of systemic incompetence.
Despite the suspicions surrounding the “open hatch” theory, incidents like these underscore the need for transparent inquiries into military mishaps. An unbiased investigation could help the PLAN improve its training, operational discipline, and safety protocols. The 1969 sinking of the USS Guitarro, a Sturgeon-class nuclear-powered attack submarine, serves as a valuable precedent. In that incident, the vessel sank during construction due to a miscommunication between civilian construction teams, leading to a comprehensive investigation and subsequent congressional report that aimed to address and prevent future incidents.
If the Zhou-class mishap were to be examined with a similar level of scrutiny, it could uncover procedural gaps or deficiencies in training, providing actionable insights for the PLAN. However, as China’s defense policies often emphasize secrecy, it remains unlikely that details of the incident, if known, would be released to the public. This lack of transparency, while intended to maintain operational security, may contribute to broader doubts about the PLAN’s protocols, which can inadvertently give rise to speculation and misinformation.
The Zhou-class incident, whether an isolated mishap or an indicator of underlying procedural issues, has significant implications for regional security. China’s expanding naval capabilities, especially with the anticipated operational deployment of the Shang III submarines, have already raised concerns among neighboring countries. The potential for unplanned submarine incidents in congested waters such as the South China Sea, where China asserts extensive maritime claims, could heighten tensions and the risk of accidents.
For the United States and other Western nations, the mishap serves as a reminder that even the most advanced fleets can experience costly and unexpected failures. Moreover, incidents like these, regardless of their validity, reinforce Western nations’ commitment to transparency in military operations and training protocols – a point often highlighted as a comparative strength in relation to China’s often opaque military practices.
