When people first compare China\u2019s Fujian aircraft carrier with America\u2019s USS Gerald R. Ford, the resemblance is impossible to ignore.<\/p>\n
Both have large flat flight decks.
\nBoth use catapult-assisted aircraft launch systems.
\nBoth are designed to launch heavier fixed-wing aircraft.
\nBoth move away from old ski-jump carrier limitations.
\nBoth represent the most advanced carrier technology their countries have put to sea.<\/p>\n
At a glance, it is easy to ask the obvious question:<\/p>\n
Did China copy America\u2019s supercarrier?<\/p>\n
The real answer is more complicated.<\/p>\n
Fujian certainly shows that China studied Western carrier development closely. Beijing has watched U.S. carrier operations for decades, analyzed American naval doctrine, examined deck layouts, and learned from the evolution of U.S. aircraft carriers. No serious navy builds in isolation.<\/p>\n
But Fujian\u2019s resemblance to USS Gerald R. Ford is not simply a matter of copying.<\/p>\n
It is also the result of convergent naval evolution.<\/p>\n
That means two countries facing the same engineering problem eventually arrive at similar solutions.<\/p>\n
If a navy wants to launch heavy fixed-wing aircraft from a large carrier using catapults, certain design choices become almost unavoidable. The flight deck needs to be wide and flat. The landing area needs to be angled. The island must be positioned to avoid blocking flight operations. Aircraft elevators must support movement between hangar and deck. Catapults must be arranged to maximize launches without interfering with recoveries.<\/p>\n
In simple words, physics pushes carrier design in a certain direction.<\/p>\n
That is why Fujian looks like a modern supercarrier.<\/p>\n
But looking similar does not mean fighting the same.<\/p>\n
The USS Gerald R. Ford remains larger, nuclear-powered, more mature, and backed by decades of U.S. Navy carrier-operating experience. Fujian is a major Chinese breakthrough, but it is still the beginning of a new chapter for the People\u2019s Liberation Army Navy, not the final proof that China has matched the United States at sea.<\/p>\n
Aircraft carriers are not designed for beauty.<\/p>\n
They are designed for motion, weight, wind, fuel, weapons, aircraft movement, takeoff, landing, maintenance, command, and survival.<\/p>\n
That is why modern carriers share similar features.<\/p>\n
A carrier that launches and recovers fixed-wing aircraft must solve the same basic problems no matter which country builds it.<\/p>\n
Aircraft need space to take off.
\nAircraft need space to land.
\nAircraft need to be moved, fueled, armed, repaired, parked, and launched again.
\nThe ship must support all of that while moving at sea.
\nThe deck must be arranged so launches and recoveries can happen safely.<\/p>\n
Once a navy chooses a CATOBAR design \u2014 Catapult Assisted Take-Off But Arrested Recovery \u2014 the shape of the ship becomes more predictable.<\/p>\n
You need catapults.
\nYou need arresting wires.
\nYou need an angled landing area.
\nYou need deck space for aircraft staging.
\nYou need elevators to move aircraft between deck and hangar.
\nYou need an island positioned to support command while interfering as little as possible with flight operations.<\/p>\n
That is why Fujian and Ford resemble each other.<\/p>\n
They are both trying to solve the same carrier aviation equation.<\/p>\n
The resemblance does not automatically mean one is a clone of the other. It means the most efficient answer to the problem has become clear.<\/p>\n
China\u2019s first two aircraft carriers, Liaoning and Shandong, use ski-jump ramps.<\/p>\n
A ski-jump carrier launches aircraft by allowing them to accelerate down the deck and lift off from a curved ramp at the bow. This system is simpler than catapults, but it has limits. Aircraft usually take off with less fuel or fewer weapons because the ramp does not provide the same launch energy as a catapult.<\/p>\n
That affects range, payload, and mission flexibility.<\/p>\n
Fujian changes that.<\/p>\n
With its flat deck and catapult launch system, Fujian can launch heavier aircraft than China\u2019s previous carriers. That means fighters can take off with more fuel and more weapons. It also opens the door for specialized fixed-wing aircraft that ski-jump carriers struggle to operate effectively.<\/p>\n
This is one of the most important reasons Fujian looks more like an American carrier.<\/p>\n
The moment China moved beyond ski-jump operations, its carrier design had to move toward a large flat-deck CATOBAR layout.<\/p>\n
That does not mean China copied the deck only for appearance.<\/p>\n
It means China wanted a carrier that could do what ski-jump carriers cannot.<\/p>\n
The most important shared feature between Fujian and Ford is electromagnetic launch technology.<\/p>\n
The U.S. Navy\u2019s Ford-class carriers use the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System, known as EMALS. This system replaces older steam catapults with electromagnetic power to launch aircraft more smoothly and with more control.<\/p>\n
Fujian also uses an electromagnetic catapult system.<\/p>\n
That is a huge development for China.<\/p>\n
Instead of first building a steam-catapult carrier and then later moving to electromagnetic launch, China skipped directly from ski-jump carriers to electromagnetic catapults. That is one reason Fujian is viewed as a major leap forward.<\/p>\n
EMALS-style technology matters because it provides better control over launch energy. It can support different aircraft weights more efficiently. It can reduce stress on aircraft compared with older catapult systems. It can help launch heavier aircraft with more fuel and weapons. It can also support future aircraft types, including unmanned aircraft.<\/p>\n
This is where Fujian becomes more than just a bigger Chinese carrier.<\/p>\n
It becomes a platform for a different kind of Chinese naval aviation.<\/p>\n
With catapults, China can develop a more balanced carrier air wing \u2014 not only fighters, but also support aircraft that make carrier operations more powerful.<\/p>\n
That is a major step toward blue-water naval power.<\/p>\n
The USS Gerald R. Ford and Fujian are both built around CATOBAR operations.<\/p>\n
CATOBAR is the most capable carrier launch-and-recovery system because it allows aircraft to launch with catapult assistance and land using arresting gear. This system supports heavier aircraft and more flexible flight operations than ski-jump carriers.<\/p>\n
But CATOBAR is also complex.<\/p>\n
It requires advanced machinery, trained crews, careful deck choreography, reliable arresting gear, strong aircraft structures, and pilots trained to land on a moving ship.<\/p>\n
This is where the Ford and Fujian comparison becomes important.<\/p>\n
Both ships may use similar launch logic, but the U.S. Navy has been operating CATOBAR carriers for generations. American naval aviation has decades of experience launching and recovering aircraft from carriers around the world, day and night, in peace and war.<\/p>\n
China is much newer to this world.<\/p>\n
Fujian gives China the hardware for CATOBAR operations.<\/p>\n
But hardware is only the beginning.<\/p>\n
The real test is whether China can master the rhythm of sustained carrier air operations.<\/p>\n
Another reason Fujian and Ford look similar is island placement.<\/p>\n
The island is the command structure on the flight deck. It houses bridge functions, flight-control spaces, sensors, communications, and other important systems.<\/p>\n
On older carriers, island placement could interfere more with deck flow. Modern carrier design tries to move and shape the island so aircraft can be staged, launched, recovered, and moved more efficiently.<\/p>\n
Ford\u2019s island is smaller and positioned farther aft compared with older U.S. carriers. This helps optimize the flight deck for aircraft movement and sortie generation.<\/p>\n
Fujian\u2019s island also appears streamlined and placed to support a modern deck layout.<\/p>\n
Again, this does not necessarily prove copying.<\/p>\n
It reflects the same design pressure.<\/p>\n
If you want to maximize flight-deck efficiency, you do not put the island wherever it looks nice. You place it where it best supports aircraft operations.<\/p>\n
The deck is a machine.<\/p>\n
Every meter matters.<\/p>\n
One of the most important features of a modern aircraft carrier is the angled flight deck.<\/p>\n
This allows aircraft to land on a diagonal section of the deck while other areas remain available for aircraft movement or launch preparation. It also improves safety. If a landing aircraft misses the arresting wire, it can continue forward and take off again instead of crashing into parked aircraft at the bow.<\/p>\n
Both Ford and Fujian use this basic layout because it is the most effective design for modern carrier operations.<\/p>\n
Again, this is not just copying.<\/p>\n
It is aviation logic.<\/p>\n
A carrier designed for fixed-wing aircraft operations needs to separate landing, launching, parking, and servicing as much as possible. The angled deck helps make that possible.<\/p>\n
This is why modern large carriers tend to converge toward similar shapes.<\/p>\n
The most important difference between USS Gerald R. Ford and Fujian is not visible from the flight deck.<\/p>\n
It is deep inside the ship.<\/p>\n
Ford is nuclear-powered.
\nFujian is conventionally powered.<\/p>\n
That difference changes everything.<\/p>\n
A nuclear-powered aircraft carrier can operate for extremely long periods without refueling its propulsion system. It still needs food, aviation fuel, weapons, spare parts, and crew support, but its own power plant gives it enormous endurance and electrical capacity.<\/p>\n
The Ford class was designed with far greater electrical generation than older carriers. That matters because modern carriers need power for EMALS, sensors, communications, weapons elevators, electronic systems, and future technologies.<\/p>\n
Fujian, by contrast, uses conventional propulsion. Public reporting widely describes it as conventionally powered rather than nuclear-powered. This does not make it weak, but it creates limits.<\/p>\n
A conventional carrier needs more frequent fuel support. It depends more heavily on tankers and logistics ships. It may have less long-duration operational flexibility than a nuclear-powered carrier.<\/p>\n
For regional operations near China\u2019s coast, that may be acceptable.<\/p>\n
For global operations far from home, nuclear power is a major advantage.<\/p>\n
This is one of the clearest differences between the two ships.<\/p>\n
Ford was built for global power projection.<\/p>\n
Fujian is more likely designed first for regional dominance and expanding Chinese reach in the Western Pacific.<\/p>\n
The USS Gerald R. Ford is also larger.<\/p>\n
Ford-class carriers displace more than 100,000 tons. Fujian is generally assessed at around 80,000 to 85,000 tons.<\/p>\n
That difference matters.<\/p>\n
A larger carrier can support more aircraft, more fuel, more weapons, more maintenance capacity, more deck space, and more long-term operational flexibility. Size does not automatically make a ship better, but in carrier aviation, size often supports endurance and air-wing capacity.<\/p>\n
Ford\u2019s greater displacement gives it more margin.<\/p>\n
Fujian is still massive. It is much larger than Liaoning and Shandong. It is larger than most non-American carriers. It is one of the most important warships China has ever built.<\/p>\n
But it is not the same size as Ford.<\/p>\n
The visual resemblance can hide that reality.<\/p>\n
From a distance, both look like modern supercarriers. On paper, Ford remains the larger and more mature platform.<\/p>\n
Another major operational difference is catapult layout.<\/p>\n
Ford-class carriers use four electromagnetic catapults. Fujian is widely assessed to have three electromagnetic catapults.<\/p>\n
That difference matters for launch capacity and deck flexibility.<\/p>\n
More catapults give a carrier more options for launching aircraft quickly and managing flight-deck flow during high-tempo operations. It can help support rapid sortie generation, especially during intense combat cycles.<\/p>\n
Fujian\u2019s three-catapult layout is still a major improvement over China\u2019s ski-jump carriers. It gives the PLAN the ability to launch heavier aircraft and support a more capable air wing.<\/p>\n
But Ford\u2019s four-catapult setup reflects the U.S. Navy\u2019s demand for sustained, high-intensity, around-the-clock carrier aviation.<\/p>\n
The difference is not simply one extra catapult.<\/p>\n
It reflects different levels of operational ambition and experience.<\/p>\n
Carrier power is not only about launching aircraft.<\/p>\n
It is about moving aircraft.<\/p>\n
Aircraft must move between the hangar deck and flight deck. They must be parked, fueled, armed, repaired, launched, recovered, and moved again. If the elevators are slow or poorly positioned, flight operations suffer.<\/p>\n
The Ford class redesigned aircraft and weapons movement systems to improve sortie generation and reduce crew workload. Its deck layout, island placement, catapults, arresting gear, and elevators are all part of one system intended to support faster air operations.<\/p>\n
Fujian also needed to solve these problems, but China is still learning how to operate a large CATOBAR carrier air wing.<\/p>\n
This is a key point.<\/p>\n
A carrier\u2019s power is not only in its technology.<\/p>\n
It is in the choreography of the flight deck.<\/p>\n
The U.S. Navy has spent generations perfecting that choreography. China is now entering a much more demanding phase.<\/p>\n
Ford and Fujian also serve different strategic needs.<\/p>\n
The USS Gerald R. Ford is built for worldwide U.S. power projection. It can deploy across oceans, support combat operations far from American shores, reassure allies, deter adversaries, and serve as the centerpiece of a carrier strike group.<\/p>\n
It is part of a global system.<\/p>\n
The U.S. has bases, allies, logistics ships, submarine support, tankers, satellite networks, munitions stockpiles, and decades of carrier doctrine. Ford fits into that global naval machine.<\/p>\n
Fujian is different.<\/p>\n
China\u2019s priority is the Western Pacific. That includes Taiwan, the East China Sea, the South China Sea, the First Island Chain, and maritime approaches near China\u2019s coast.<\/p>\n
Fujian gives Beijing a stronger ability to project airpower at sea, but its most likely early strategic role is regional \u2014 strengthening China\u2019s hand around Taiwan and nearby waters rather than immediately replacing U.S.-style global carrier presence.<\/p>\n
That does not make Fujian unimportant.<\/p>\n
It makes it more dangerous in the region China cares about most.<\/p>\n
Fujian\u2019s significance is especially clear when viewed through the Taiwan Strait.<\/p>\n
China already has large numbers of land-based aircraft and missiles that can reach Taiwan. Because Taiwan is close to the mainland, China does not need a carrier to threaten it.<\/p>\n
But Fujian can still change the equation.<\/p>\n
A carrier like Fujian could support operations east or southeast of Taiwan. It could help China project airpower beyond the immediate mainland coastline. It could complicate U.S. and allied planning. It could support a blockade scenario, maritime pressure campaign, or wider regional operation.<\/p>\n
Its name also carries symbolism.<\/p>\n
Fujian province sits directly across the Taiwan Strait from Taiwan. Naming China\u2019s newest and most advanced carrier Fujian naturally draws attention, even if the ship\u2019s military value goes beyond symbolism.<\/p>\n
In a Taiwan crisis, Fujian would not be the only weapon that matters.<\/p>\n
But it would be another powerful tool in China\u2019s growing naval arsenal.<\/p>\n
Fujian also matters in the South China Sea.<\/p>\n
China claims vast areas of this waterway, overlapping with claims by the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, and Taiwan. The region includes key trade routes, fishing grounds, energy resources, artificial islands, and military outposts.<\/p>\n
A more advanced Chinese carrier gives Beijing another way to show presence and pressure.<\/p>\n
It can sail with escorts.
\nIt can launch aircraft during exercises.
\nIt can demonstrate power near disputed waters.
\nIt can support coercive diplomacy.
\nIt can show smaller countries that China\u2019s navy is no longer limited to coastal operations.<\/p>\n
In peacetime, a carrier is often a political weapon.<\/p>\n
It does not need to fire missiles to send a message.<\/p>\n
Its presence is the message.<\/p>\n
Fujian gives China a bigger message than Liaoning or Shandong could send.<\/p>\n
The most important American advantage is not only technology.<\/p>\n
It is experience.<\/p>\n
The U.S. Navy has operated large aircraft carriers for generations. It has launched and recovered aircraft in war, crisis, exercises, night operations, bad weather, and long deployments. It has learned through accidents, failures, improvements, and decades of intense operations.<\/p>\n
Carrier aviation is one of the hardest military skills in the world.<\/p>\n
It requires trained pilots.
\nIt requires deck crews.
\nIt requires maintainers.
\nIt requires air traffic control.
\nIt requires weapons crews.
\nIt requires escorts.
\nIt requires logistics.
\nIt requires commanders who know how to use the carrier strike group.<\/p>\n
China is learning quickly, but it cannot instantly buy experience.<\/p>\n
Fujian gives China a powerful platform.<\/p>\n
The U.S. Navy already has a mature carrier culture.<\/p>\n
That is a major difference.<\/p>\n
A carrier is only as strong as the aircraft it carries.<\/p>\n
Ford\u2019s air wing can include F\/A-18E\/F Super Hornets, EA-18G Growlers, E-2D Hawkeyes, helicopters, and increasingly F-35C stealth fighters. The U.S. Navy has years of experience integrating these aircraft into carrier operations.<\/p>\n
Fujian\u2019s future air wing is still developing.<\/p>\n
It is expected to support upgraded J-15 variants, the J-35 stealth fighter, and the KJ-600 airborne early warning aircraft. If China successfully integrates these aircraft, Fujian will become far more capable than Liaoning and Shandong.<\/p>\n
The KJ-600 is especially important because fixed-wing airborne early warning aircraft are essential for modern carrier operations. They allow a carrier group to see threats farther away and manage the air battle more effectively.<\/p>\n
But integration takes time.<\/p>\n
Launching an aircraft in a test is not the same as operating a full air wing continuously at sea.<\/p>\n
Fujian\u2019s air wing will be one of the biggest tests of China\u2019s carrier future.<\/p>\n
The USS Gerald R. Ford does not operate alone.<\/p>\n
It is the center of a carrier strike group.<\/p>\n
That group can include cruisers, destroyers, submarines, supply ships, aircraft, helicopters, and long-range support from satellites and other U.S. forces. The carrier\u2019s power is multiplied by the network around it.<\/p>\n
This is another area where the U.S. remains far ahead.<\/p>\n
The United States has built the world\u2019s most mature carrier strike group system. Its escorts are trained to defend the carrier from aircraft, missiles, submarines, and surface threats. Its logistics ships keep the group supplied. Its submarines extend undersea reach. Its allied bases support operations across the world.<\/p>\n
China is building similar pieces, but the full system is still maturing.<\/p>\n
Fujian may be impressive, but a carrier alone is vulnerable.<\/p>\n
A carrier becomes powerful when surrounded by a trained, integrated, and well-supported naval force.<\/p>\n
So, did China copy the USS Gerald R. Ford?<\/p>\n
The best answer is this:<\/p>\n
China studied the Ford and other Western carriers, but Fujian\u2019s design is also the result of the same engineering logic that shaped modern CATOBAR carriers.<\/p>\n
It is not useful to reduce Fujian to a simple \u201ccopy.\u201d<\/p>\n
China\u2019s carrier development has followed a clear learning path.<\/p>\n
Liaoning taught China how to operate a carrier.
\nShandong taught China how to build one domestically.
\nFujian moved China into catapult carrier aviation.<\/p>\n
That is an indigenous development path influenced by foreign study, Soviet legacy, Western observation, and China\u2019s own strategic requirements.<\/p>\n
Fujian looks like a modern supercarrier because China is trying to build a modern supercarrier.<\/p>\n
And modern supercarriers tend to look similar when they are built for similar missions.<\/p>\n
The resemblance should not be dismissed.<\/p>\n
Even if Fujian is not a copy, it shows that China is moving into the same design category as the U.S. Navy\u2019s most advanced carriers.<\/p>\n
That matters.<\/p>\n
China no longer appears satisfied with ski-jump carriers. It wants catapults. It wants heavier aircraft. It wants fixed-wing early warning aircraft. It wants a more complete carrier air wing. It wants better deck efficiency. It wants a navy that can project power farther from home.<\/p>\n
That is exactly why Fujian matters.<\/p>\n
It shows intent.<\/p>\n
China is not only building ships. It is building the tools of maritime power projection.<\/p>\n
The United States still has the lead, but the gap is no longer as visually obvious as it once was.<\/p>\n
Fujian changes the psychological and strategic picture.<\/p>\n
At the same time, Fujian should not be exaggerated.<\/p>\n
A ship that looks like a supercarrier is not automatically equal to a U.S. supercarrier.<\/p>\n
The Ford has nuclear power.
\nThe Ford is larger.
\nThe Ford is built around decades of U.S. operational experience.
\nThe Ford operates inside a mature global strike group system.
\nThe Ford\u2019s air wing and support network are more mature.
\nThe U.S. Navy has generations of CATOBAR carrier experience.<\/p>\n
Fujian is a major step, but it must still prove sustained operations, high sortie rates, air-wing integration, long deployments, maintenance reliability, and combat effectiveness.<\/p>\n
These things cannot be proven at a commissioning ceremony.<\/p>\n
They are proven at sea over years.<\/p>\n
The deeper lesson is that aircraft carrier design has a winning formula.<\/p>\n
If a navy wants maximum flight-deck efficiency for heavy aircraft, it will likely choose:<\/p>\n
A large flat deck.
\nCatapult launch.
\nArrested recovery.
\nAn angled landing area.
\nA compact island.
\nAircraft elevators positioned for deck flow.
\nA strong power system.
\nA large aviation support infrastructure.<\/p>\n
That formula is not American because of national pride.<\/p>\n
It is American because the U.S. Navy refined it over decades and proved that it works.<\/p>\n
China is now adopting many of the same broad principles because those principles are effective.<\/p>\n
This is convergent evolution at sea.<\/p>\n
Different countries, same problem, similar solution.<\/p>\n
China\u2019s Fujian and America\u2019s USS Gerald R. Ford may look similar, but they represent different stages of naval power.<\/p>\n
The Ford is the product of a mature global carrier navy with nuclear propulsion, four-catapult flight operations, a massive air wing, advanced systems, and decades of experience behind it.<\/p>\n
Fujian is the product of a rising naval power moving rapidly from carrier learning to carrier competition. It is China\u2019s first true CATOBAR carrier, its first electromagnetic catapult carrier, and its most serious attempt yet to build a ship that can launch a modern, heavier, more flexible carrier air wing.<\/p>\n
The resemblance between the two ships is real.<\/p>\n
But the meaning is deeper than copying.<\/p>\n
It shows that China has reached the point where it is building carriers shaped by the same physics and operational logic that define the world\u2019s most advanced navies.<\/p>\n
That should not be ignored.<\/p>\n
But it should also be understood carefully.<\/p>\n
Fujian is not Ford\u2019s equal yet.<\/p>\n
It is smaller.
\nIt is conventionally powered.
\nIt has fewer catapults.
\nIts air wing is still maturing.
\nIts crew must build experience.
\nIts logistics system must prove itself.<\/p>\n
But Fujian is also not just a symbolic ship.<\/p>\n
It is a major leap in Chinese naval aviation.<\/p>\n
It tells the world that China is learning fast, building big, and preparing for a future where carrier aviation plays a larger role in the Western Pacific.<\/p>\n
So the right question is not simply, \u201cDid China copy America?\u201d<\/p>\n
The better question is:<\/p>\n
How close is China getting to the carrier model that made America dominant at sea?<\/p>\n
And with Fujian now in service, the answer is clear enough to worry Washington:<\/p>\n
China is not there yet.<\/p>\n
But it is getting closer.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
When people first compare China\u2019s Fujian aircraft carrier with America\u2019s USS Gerald R. Ford, the resemblance is impossible to ignore. Both have large flat flight … <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":2145,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1,46,3,45,4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2144","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-aviation","category-featured-stories","category-military","category-motivation","category-technology"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/talesofmotivations.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2144","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/talesofmotivations.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/talesofmotivations.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/talesofmotivations.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/talesofmotivations.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2144"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/talesofmotivations.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2144\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2146,"href":"https:\/\/talesofmotivations.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2144\/revisions\/2146"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/talesofmotivations.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/2145"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/talesofmotivations.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2144"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/talesofmotivations.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2144"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/talesofmotivations.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2144"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}