Skip to content

ExpatSingapore

Home Message Board Contact Us Search

ExpatSingapore Message Board 12 February 2012, 22:31:11 pm *
Username: Password: (or Register)
 
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
Author Topic: Pentagon warns of China's military push  (Read 2005 times)
TheWrathOfGrapes
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 728


View Profile
« on: 18 August 2010, 13:00:34 pm »

Is this US trying to go back to the good old cold war days?
Hoping to sell more advanced weapons to Taiwan?
Yellow Peril?
McCarthyism once more?
Reds under the beds?

Some facts:

China is thinking of operating in the Indian Ocean; the US has been operating around the world for decades.

China may add 5 nuclear attack submarines - how many does the US have which are already in operations (besides the 5 carrier groups)?

US's 2009 military expenditure:US$663 billion; China - meagre US$99 billion.


China Seeks Military Capabilities Beyond Its Region, U.S. Says
August 16, 2010, 9:02 PM ED

By Viola Gienger and Tony Capaccio

Aug. 17 (Bloomberg) -- China is pursuing military capability to operate as far as the Indian Ocean and the western Pacific, as the country’s growing demand for oil and natural gas makes strategic sea routes more important, the Pentagon said.

New weapons and carriers give China an increasing ability to operate far afield, and it continues a military buildup opposite Taiwan even with improved economic ties across the strait, the U.S. Defense Department said in an annual report to Congress released yesterday.

The report outlines China’s use of naval forces, ballistic missiles and air power to extend its influence to areas where the U.S. also is seeking more and stronger alliances.

The navy of the People’s Liberation Army is investing in nuclear-powered submarines and its first aircraft carrier, a refurbished Russian vessel, “to support additional missions beyond a Taiwan contingency,” according to the report. The force may add as many as five advanced nuclear-powered attack submarines.

The U.S. assessment coincides with China surpassing Japan to become the world’s second-largest economy. Japan’s nominal gross domestic product for the second quarter totaled $1.288 trillion, less than China’s $1.337 trillion, the Japanese Cabinet Office said yesterday.

The same economic advances “have also enabled China to embark on a comprehensive transformation of its military,” the Defense Department reported. China announced in March it plans to raise defense spending by 7.5 percent this year, after increases of at least 10 percent annually for the past decade.

Energy Needs

China’s growth means its future energy needs can be met only by supplies from the Persian Gulf, Africa and North America, according to the Pentagon study. Such supply points will keep China reliant on maritime transport even as it seeks to develop pipelines to avoid sensitive sea routes such as the Strait of Malacca.

“Pipeline projects, for example, will do little to minimize Beijing’s vulnerability in the Strait of Hormuz, through which 40 percent of China’s crude oil imports transited in 2008,” the Pentagon said. “This percentage is expected to rise.”

China’s military reach beyond its region is reflected in its participation in joint anti-piracy operations in the Gulf of Aden. That mission marked the first deployments other than occasional ship visits outside China’s immediate Pacific region.

The People’s Liberation Army isn’t “solely a local force anymore,” Dean Cheng, an analyst for the Heritage Foundation in Washington, wrote in an e-mail. The phenomenon has emerged over two decades and raises the question of how the U.S. will respond, he said.

Frog in Pot

“Like the proverbial frog in the pot, have we become so accustomed to expanding Chinese capabilities that we think we can afford to ignore them,” Cheng wrote, in commenting on the Pentagon report.

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton said the absence of explanations for China’s military expansion raises “a dangerous risk that miscommunication and misperception between the U.S. and China could lead to a miscalculation.” The two countries don’t necessarily need to view each other as threats, he said.

“Yet, conflict between our nations remains a possibility,” said Skelton, a Missouri Democrat. “We must remain prepared for whatever the future holds.”

Cruise Missile

The Chinese Air Force is developing longer-range versions of a bomber that can be equipped with a land-attack cruise missile, the Pentagon said.

The weapons would extend China’s operational abilities to a chain of islands in the western Pacific that the country considers as a kind of second defensive perimeter, extending from off Japan’s eastern coast, west and south through the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam and Palau to Indonesia, according to the report.

The U.S. has spotlighted Chinese influence in Southeast Asia. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi sparred last month over China’s claims to sovereignty over almost all of the South China Sea. The area is bordered by countries including Vietnam, which is increasing defense ties with the U.S.

Wang Baodong, a spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, said the Pentagon report exaggerates China’s military strength and intentions.

“China is committed to maintaining peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region and in the world at large,” Wang said.

Chinese Aims

The China report illustrates the limited success that President Barack Obama’s administration has had in curbing China’s military expansion or encouraging the nation’s leaders to reveal more about their aims.

The administration sought to improve defense links soon after entering office in 2009 by persuading China to resume military talks cut off after an October 2008 announcement of a U.S. sale of arms to Taiwan. China considers Taiwan as breakaway territory that should be unified with the mainland by force if necessary.

Chinese leaders shunned the talks again in the wake of a planned U.S. arms sale of $6.4 billion to Taiwan announced in January and later rescinded an invitation for a visit from U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

Taiwan has said it needs the weapons to give it the strength and confidence to pursue improved ties with China such as a trade agreement signed on June 29.

China is “developing the capability to deter Taiwanese independence or influence Taiwan to settle the dispute on Beijing’s terms,” the Pentagon said in the report. “The balance of cross-strait military forces continues to shift in the mainland’s favor.”

The report cited a range of 1,050 to 1,150 missiles stationed opposite the island, the same unclassified tally as in 2008. Still, the Chinese have improved the effectiveness of the weapons, the Pentagon reported.

China “is upgrading the lethality of this force, including by introducing variants of these missiles with improved ranges, accuracies and payloads,” according to the study.

--Editors: Edward DeMarco, Don Frederick

To contact the reporters on this story: Viola Gienger in Washington at vgienger@bloomberg.net; Anthony Capaccio in Washington at acapaccio@bloomberg.net.

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Mark Silva in Washington at msilva34@bloomberg.net

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-08-16/china-seeks-military-capabilities-beyond-its-region-u-s-says.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

Logged
ExpatSingapore Message Board
« on: 18 August 2010, 13:00:34 pm »



 Logged
redacted
Full Member
***
Posts: 221


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: 18 August 2010, 13:26:35 pm »

I personally think, as I am sure others do, the US is being realistic.

China invaded Tibet. It still wants Taiwan. India and Japan are scared. Time and time again the army is called in for civil unrest.

China is unpredictable and still keeps to itself. At this stage, the US is still the stabilizing force in Asia. It will remain so for at least the next 50 years if not longer.

For this to change, China has to open up to their neighbors or exert more military muscle. What do you think is most likely?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hainan_Submarine_Base

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/00666/china-nuclear-big_666891a.jpg
Logged
TheWrathOfGrapes
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 728


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: 18 August 2010, 13:39:57 pm »

I would not call it being realistic. I think the word is hypocrite or "do what I tell you to do, and not do what I do".

What so alarming about the Hainan base? The US has tens and hundreds of them. And the US has bases in many countries, including Japan, Korea, etc.  What about the 5 carrier groups that can operate anywhere in the world, not some dinghy hole in Hainan.

Well, China has always consider Tibet and Taiwan as its territory. Funny you didn't mention Hong Kong.

Now, how many countries have the US invaded at the slightest pretext?  Grenada, Iraq (twice over), Afghanistan. Now itching for a fight over Iran and North Korea. Bullying Cuba (how many nuclear subs does Cuba have) over the decades.

So, maybe you are right - the West are more dependable and are stabilizers. Like how 8 countries combined to stabilize China during the two opium wars. Like carving up China and looting China to stabilize it. Like how the US is now stabilizing Iraq and Afghan.
Logged
redacted
Full Member
***
Posts: 221


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: 18 August 2010, 14:02:27 pm »

How is a report on a military build up being hypocritical?

If I was an ASEAN member I would be extremely concerned. From this base China could effectively cut of all routes to these countries. Half the worlds merchant shipping tonnage passes through the Straights of Malacca and South China Sea.China has claims on the majority of the area.

As shown before, one submarine can evade a carrier group. A fortified base with which to operate out of close to a potential conflict will only make it easier to protect the area.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-492804/The-uninvited-guest-Chinese-sub-pops-middle-U-S-Navy-exercise-leaving-military-chiefs-red-faced.html

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/nov/13/20061113-121539-3317r/

China also plans to have their own carriers, with some reports saying as close as 2015.

Well, China has always consider Tibet and Taiwan as its territory. Funny you didn't mention Hong Kong.

China didn't invade Hong Kong.

While you may not agree with the US's methods, there are many who do. While you may not agree that the US is a stabilizing force in Asia, there are people who do.

I would rather the US policing my backyard then China. Who would you rather?
Logged
TheWrathOfGrapes
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 728


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: 18 August 2010, 14:13:02 pm »

I will rather have 3 policemen - not one - US, China and India. Or any competent policeman - not one only, and who is nice to you only when it suits him.
Logged
TheWrathOfGrapes
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 728


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: 18 August 2010, 15:35:54 pm »

China also plans to have their own carriers, with some reports saying as close as 2015.

The point being? That the US should be worried because the US will only have its own carriers some time beyond 2020?
Logged
redacted
Full Member
***
Posts: 221


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: 18 August 2010, 15:52:20 pm »

You noted that the US already has 5 carrier groups. I responded China has its goals set on becoming a blue water navy.

The point of the report is to show China's military build up. Scaremongering is what the press does. The US government does the same type of reporting on other countries, but people will be afraid of China as it is an unknown quantity with goals that are hard to fathom.
Logged
TheWrathOfGrapes
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 728


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: 18 August 2010, 16:02:12 pm »

You noted that the US already has 5 carrier groups. I responded China has its goals set on becoming a blue water navy.

The point of the report is to show China's military build up. Scaremongering is what the press does. The US government does the same type of reporting on other countries, but people will be afraid of China as it is an unknown quantity with goals that are hard to fathom.

That is exactly the point.  China is thinking of having aircraft carriers. Not a done deal. Some time in the distant future. And we have the Americans crying wolf.  OTOH, the US have had 5 carrier groups which is in operations for decades.  Four carrier groups too many and you don't hear a squeak of complaint from China or anyone else. This is what I meant by hypocritical.

Yes, China is modernizing its armed forces - from bare-foot soldiers to slightly decent ones. Say, expenditure exploded by 1000% to US$100 billion. And the US? Say, slashing its defence spending by half from US$1,300 billion to US$650 billion. Therefore we should view US with equanimity and view China with suspicion.
Logged
redacted
Full Member
***
Posts: 221


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: 18 August 2010, 16:19:34 pm »

China having been researching carriers for close to 30 years. For the craft(s) to be ready, it would already be in production, which some say they are. 5 years isn't that distant.

China isn't happy that the Americans have carrier groups. That's why they have developed "carrier killer" missiles, nuclear subs and are ramping up for a blue water fleet. 

China maintains a greater number of active troops. America has a technical advantage. The two armies are currently set up differently and have different goals.

The US has been vary clear in their goals and have more public oversight than China. While the US may go to war, the people can still protest and even change policy. Can that be said about China? How is military policy going to be changed?

Logged
fareastjunebug
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 330



View Profile
« Reply #9 on: 18 August 2010, 20:42:59 pm »

What is different and is being 'scare mongered' is that China is thinking about projecting power.
However, one carrier is a target. You need the whole integrated system and experience to operate it (or it goes to the bottom against the first competent opposition).

It'll be a while for China to effectively project power. I think money and soft power will be much more effective tools for China.
Logged

Do or do not, there is no try.
tcz
Newbie
*
Posts: 9


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: 29 August 2010, 13:23:24 pm »

I personally think, as I am sure others do, the US is being realistic.

China invaded Tibet. It still wants Taiwan. India and Japan are scared. Time and time again the army is called in for civil unrest.

China is unpredictable and still keeps to itself. At this stage, the US is still the stabilizing force in Asia. It will remain so for at least the next 50 years if not longer.

For this to change, China has to open up to their neighbors or exert more military muscle. What do you think is most likely?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hainan_Submarine_Base

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/00666/china-nuclear-big_666891a.jpg

Go back school and read some histories then come talk!
Logged
Dr. Phil
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1182


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: 29 August 2010, 14:43:41 pm »

I visited Qingdao 10 years ago when the PRC had purchased a de-commisioned aircraft carrier from Russia and they were dismantling it piece by piece to study the technology.

Today China builds whole cities, very well planned and constructed. I do believe China could build a spectacular aircraft carrier if it wanted to do so.

If China wants an aircraft carrier, why not?
India, Pakistan, north Korea, Iran... all have nuclear weapons with a long-range ballistic delivery which truly projects their power.

The question is how stable are these nations and would they ever launch in anger?
We British do not believe they would be so irresponsible. I mean, that's not cricket. Grin  Smiley Shocked
« Last Edit: 29 August 2010, 17:20:06 pm by Dr. Phil » Logged
TheWrathOfGrapes
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 728


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: 30 August 2010, 8:37:00 am »

You noted that the US already has 5 carrier groups. I responded China has its goals set on becoming a blue water navy.

The point of the report is to show China's military build up. Scaremongering is what the press does. The US government does the same type of reporting on other countries, but people will be afraid of China as it is an unknown quantity with goals that are hard to fathom.

If it is the press that is doing the scaremongering, at least it is defensible. But it is the US government that is doing the scaremongering which shows its hypocrisy.

Quote
the U.S. Defense Department said in an annual report to Congress

Remember the Cuban crisis during the good old Russian days?

What would the US do if China set up military bases in Cuba or the Bahamas?  Yet this is exactly what the US had been doing over the decades - they have bases in Japan and Korea.  And becoming deliberately provocative by holding exercises in the Yellow Sea.

So, what is sauce for the gander is not sauce for the goose?
Logged
Dr. Phil
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1182


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: 30 August 2010, 18:54:05 pm »

We do tend to judge and label other countries with a supreme arrogance and a blissful disregard to our own actions.  Cool

The first political parties, in 17th Century England were actually named by their opponents, who were not short of insults and the names given were derogatory and insulting.

Similarly we see in USA the Democrat Party could not be more undemocratic, pushing for a Big Brother government controlled by left wing ideology. And the Republicans appear to put the continued prosperity of the corporate USA above the integrity of the nation.

In UK we remain paralyzed with the political correctness introduced over 13 years of New Labour mind control, however we have at least stopped stimulus spending; that treacherous path to obscurity laid by Bush The Younger, prior to being dumped from office and incredibly accepted unquestioningly by a grateful Obama.  Roll Eyes

In UK New Labour spoke of their pride in being British, whilst removing history from the school curricula (and religion), introducing new criminal offences to silence dissent (and empowering minority and immigrant rights).....
At this time there are two brothers vying for leadership of the opposition Labour Party and one was a senior minister responsible for sending UK troops into action in Iraq and Afghanistan. Both sons of their radical left wing father, one offers a right of centre and the other a left wing manifesto; something for everyone?
At the risk of attracting abuse I must point out both are of Eastern European Jewish parents. It is likely that one, as a future Labour Prime Minister, will control British Forces and Foreign Policy and will be involved in decisions affecting Middle East and the Palestinian struggle to survive.

What You See Is (most definitely Not) What You Get.  Cry

« Last Edit: 30 August 2010, 19:09:11 pm by Dr. Phil » Logged
redacted
Full Member
***
Posts: 221


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: 03 September 2010, 16:24:28 pm »

I personally think, as I am sure others do, the US is being realistic.

China invaded Tibet. It still wants Taiwan. India and Japan are scared. Time and time again the army is called in for civil unrest.

China is unpredictable and still keeps to itself. At this stage, the US is still the stabilizing force in Asia. It will remain so for at least the next 50 years if not longer.

For this to change, China has to open up to their neighbors or exert more military muscle. What do you think is most likely?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hainan_Submarine_Base

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/00666/china-nuclear-big_666891a.jpg

Go back school and read some histories then come talk!

Perhaps you could tell me where I am wrong?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.15 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines