PDA

View Full Version : Facing China’s Quiet Juggernaut



Bluezoo
11-16-2005, 10:37 AM
Facing China’s Quiet Juggernaut
By MARY C. FITZGERALD


Early this year, Chinese Defense Minister Cao Gangchuan called on the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to harness cutting-edge military technologies, to enhance strategic and basic research, and to make breakthroughs in key technologies in a bid to “leap forward in the armaments development drive.”

Comrade Cao also was announcing to the world that China’s economy had advanced sufficiently in technological sophistication to ensure that it could focus on 21st-century weaponry. We are now on notice, as Russian military officials have warned, that China’s ultimate objective is to achieve global military-economic dominance by 2050. This must be reflected in the current U.S. Quadrennial Defense Review.

China’s gross domestic product is expected to double between 2000 and 2010. The defense budget continues to increase annually by double-digit margins. In his new book, “The Emerging Chinese Advanced Technology Superstate,” Ernest Preeg has forecast that China will become “an advanced technology superstate: A fundamental restructuring of Chinese defense industry in 1997 to 1999 shifted control of defense enterprises from the military to the civilian government, and integrated their operations with commercial advanced technology enterprises ... The result has been a more rapid rate of military system modernization, particularly for the navy and defense electronic systems.”



This is the linchpin of China’s prospects for emerging as America’s “peer competitor” in high-tech warfare.

In the late 1990s, China revamped its military research and development program. The PLA is currently pursuing — by both the Sino-Russian multibillion-dollar arms pact and by incorporating other critical foreign technologies — systems of its own.

Besides modernizing its conventional armed forces, today’s China focuses on three military priorities:

• Aerospace.

• Nuclear weapons.

• “New-concept” weapons, such as laser, electromagnetic, plasma, climatic, genetic and biotechnological.

The central principle driving the modernization of national defense is reliance on science and technology to strengthen the armed forces.

The ultimate objective of this particular revolution in military affairs, say the Chinese, is to build a capacity to win the future “information war” — which can only be won by achieving space dominance. The core of ongoing Chinese military reforms thus consists of developing those specific symmetrical and asymmetrical systems designed to neutralize today’s U.S. technological superiority in the space-information continuum.

China already is striving to offset the military advantages of America’s existing aerospace systems, seeking especially to challenge the air dominance that the United States must continue to maintain over the Taiwan Strait if it wants to deter and, if need be, counter any major Chinese attack against Taiwan.

Chinese military thinkers have offered their notions of how to deal with Taiwan’s “independence elements.” Beijing is said to have earmarked an annual military budget of 500 billion yuan ($61.9 billion) to accelerate production of the required armaments. PLA leaders, who have pledged that they can capture Taiwan within seven days, appear bent on conducting an anti-carrier campaign against the United States if it comes to that. As Chinese President Hu Jintao has boasted, this war “will not obstruct the holding of the 2008 Olympic games.”

China foresees a time when it can push back American air power, first, farther away from its own coasts, and then even farther out from critical areas like the South China Sea. Russian officials concur with this assessment. They warn that a Chinese “Monroe doctrine” is quietly at work: “All of Asia belongs to the Chinese — and not only Asia.”

Since 2001, we have been challenged by the need to transform our forces to deal with a cunning, soulless, but essentially low-tech predator — the terrorist. Yet those other realms of warfare that occupied us prior to 9/11 — information, naval and above all, aerospace — still constitute the nucleus of the new revolution in military affairs. If we neglect the timely development of weaponry in these arenas, then China could catch America like a deer in the proverbial headlights, precisely where we caught them after the 1991 victory in Desert Storm.

History has taught all generations that maintaining technological superiority, not to mention a nation itself, requires a policy, persistence and (sadly) a price. But at least two recent U.S. technological initiatives, “Air-Land Battle” and “Star Wars,” have already helped smash the bloody concrete of the Berlin Wall.

...continued
http://defensenews.com/story.php?F=1227404&C=commentary

Roaming East
11-16-2005, 01:21 PM
i'll be concerned when they work out power projection and logistics.
Good for them though

rocket13
11-16-2005, 01:27 PM
Real great :/ .......

ed316
11-16-2005, 01:31 PM
As long as the Xbox keeps coming I'm cool with it

joshfox0
11-16-2005, 01:40 PM
As long as the Xbox keeps coming I'm cool with it
havn't you heard. one click of a button............. they all stop working. the end of humanity when the Xboxes stop working.

Belrick
11-16-2005, 02:11 PM
Does it worry Americans that there budget deficit is the same size as there military budget? That already you cannot afford your current military superpower status?

Roaming East
11-16-2005, 02:24 PM
Thats the beauty of it Belrick. If we ever need the cash, we'll use our now huge military to take it from the more thrifty countries of the world.

ed316
11-16-2005, 02:24 PM
Does it worry Americans that there budget deficit is the same size as there military budget? That already you cannot afford your current military superpower status?

Countries go broke gradually, by borrowing so much money that creditors lose confidence in their ability to pay the debt back. Then, they go broke suddenly as creditors stop lending.
This has happened to more than a dozen Third World nations, who had the additional misfortune of having to borrow in dollars. As their own currency lost the confidence of world markets, they lost value against the dollar. This only increased their real debt burden. The optimists say, ''It can't happen here."
First, we're the people who print dollars. So if the dollar is losing value, it just means the money that we owe the rest of the world is getting cheaper. Lucky us.
Second, we enjoy a codependency with our creditors. For instance, China, which keeps lending us money to finance our deficits, may be accumulating dollar credits that are losing their real worth. But China needs us to keep absorbing their products, so China will go right on lending.
And third, the United States remains the anchor of the world economy. So even though other nations may not like America's immense trade and budget deficits, nobody is going to risk pushing the world into depression by crashing the dollar.
(http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/archives/001658.php)

But......

warn that other challenges not currently itemized in official administration projections, such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, will only increase future deficits. And, of course, if the Bush administration succeeds either in making permanent his major tax reductions (most of which sunset after 10 years), or in adding $2 trillion of borrowing to privatize Social Security, the fiscal situation would go from merely disastrous to catastrophic.
But back to our story, ''It Can't Happen Here." America's deteriorating fiscal situation, unfortunately, is not lost either on world money markets or on the Federal Reserve. Although no world leader would willfully plunge the world into depression, that's not how markets work. Markets are purely self-interested.
Lately, markets, with good reason, have been betting against the dollar. As the US trade deficit approaches a staggering 7 percent, it's not clear how much longer foreign investors will keep investing in dollars and dollar-securities, such as corporate stocks and government bonds.
As for the Chinese, Clyde Prestowitz of the Economic Strategy Institute, formerly a senior trade negotiator in the Reagan administration, offers the following scenario: In a future crisis involving the tense China-Taiwan relationship, the Chinese ambassador suggests to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that maybe the United States would like to move its warships 500 miles away from Taiwan. Rice demurs. The next day, the Bank of China sells a few --just a very few to get our attention -- US Treasury securities. Money markets reel.
Would the Chinese play such a risky game? They have their own interests, geopolitical as well as economic. They are certainly not an American pawn, less so with every passing year. Miscalculations have happened in world economic relations before, and with calamitous results. -Robert Kuttner

USMC0861
11-16-2005, 10:51 PM
Does this really not bother anyone? Do you guys not see that we are heading into another cold war with China? That is if someone out there actually cares to try and stop them. It really seems like most people could care less if we just fade away into obscurity. I hope I'm wrong.

Rifleman
11-16-2005, 11:53 PM
Does it worry Americans that there budget deficit is the same size as there military budget? That already you cannot afford your current military superpower status?


The Defence fund or Highway Fund (really, everything federal) never uses principle, only interest for funding. So put another way, no I am not worried that our budget deficit is only as big as the amount the Defence Trust Fund makes every year in interest. Heck, Social Security has very seldom had a surplus....lol.

Anyway, you hear talk of controlling inflation, that is done by not spending principle and taking National Dept in the form of Non-Marketable U.S. Government Securities.

Rifleman
11-17-2005, 12:20 AM
Does this really not bother anyone? Do you guys not see that we are heading into another cold war with China? That is if someone out there actually cares to try and stop them. It really seems like most people could care less if we just fade away into obscurity. I hope I'm wrong.

I know where you are coming from but PACOM is a no BS outfit, nothing compares and it is focused....on China! The world seems to think the only bad thing that will come out of China is the bird flu.