Posted on 11/21/2004 11:45:29 AM PST by TapTheSource
China Rapidly Modernizes for War With U.S.
Alexandr Nemets Tuesday, Aug. 10, 2004
During the last several months, there have been numerous hints in the Chinese and Taiwanese media indicating that war is more likely than believed here in the West.
Some strategists suggest that the 2008 Olympics scheduled for Beijing constitute a key benchmark, after which a war may be possible. However, it is clear that both nations are preparing for a conflict in the near term, and that 2008 may not be as pivotal as some experts believe.
In fact, China’s media have been repeating the mantra in their news reports that the People’s Liberation Army is preparing to gain a victory in this “internal military conflict in a high-tech environment.”
Chinese war planners have studied carefully the recent U.S.-Iraq War, a war that demonstrated to PLA strategists that U.S. military might is derived from its technological superiority.
China’s military experts conducted similar studies after America’s first Gulf War. One military study written by two Chinese colonels entitled “Unrestricted Warfare” suggested that China could not compete with America’s technological prowess.
Instead, China had to develop “asymmetrical” warfare to defeat the U.S. in any conflict.
Interestingly, “Unrestricted Warfare” became an instant best seller in China after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. In the 1998 book, the Chinese colonels suggested that a successful bombing by Osama bin Laden of the World Trade Center would be an example of this new “unrestricted warfare” concept.
Apparently, China feels much better positioned after the recent Iraq War and wants to challenge the U.S. on a technological level.
Almost instantly after the Iraq War, in May 2003, China’s President and Communist Party General Secretary Hu Jintao declared at the party’s Politburo meeting the necessity of “active support of national defense and modernization of the army.”
Hu emphasized the need for further integrating information technology (IT) into the PLA and mobilizing China’s entire scientific and technological potential for PLA’s needs.
As a result, the PLA’s modernization in these areas has accelerated significantly.
Since the second half of 2003, the PLA has been engaged in the latest stage of its RMA – Revolution in Military Affairs – program, which was officially announced by the chairman of China Central Military Commission, Jiang Zemin, in his speech on Sept. 1, 2003.
He emphasized that that PLA should transform itself into a “smaller and much smarter science- and technology-based army.”
Jiang defined the major tasks of new PLA reform as follows:
Reducing PLA’s ranks, primarily ground forces, by 200,000.
Maximizing IT and other advanced technologies – including nanotechnologies, space technologies, electromagnetic weapons, etc.
Improving the educational and qualitative training of PLA servicemen.
Transforming the PLA into an “army of one” that is comparatively smaller and of very high quality, similar to the U.S. Army.
Acquiring the most advanced weaponry.
The Russia Connection
During 2003 and 2004, Russia – jointly with Belarus and Ukraine – has been a major source of advanced weapons for the PLA.
According to official figures from Russia’s weapons export state monopoly, Rosoboronexport, Russia’s total weapons export in 2003 approached $5.7 billion, making Russia the second largest arms exporter after the U.S. (Please note that China is arguably the leading arms exporter in quantity of arms transported, as its weaponry is considerably less expensive than that of the U.S.)
China has purchased 38 percent of Russian arms exports, or around $2.2 billion.
If one takes into account the weapons deliveries from Belarus and Ukraine to China, along with “double use” nuclear and space technologies supplied by Russia to China, then Chinese real arms imports from greater Russia would, in my estimation, be $4 billion.
Clearly, Russia and her allies have been a huge factor supporting the PLA in its rapid modernization and planned confrontation with the U.S.
3-Pronged Strategy
The PLA has been following its “three-way policy” of advanced weapons acquisition.
This three-pronged strategy calls for China to gain technologically advanced weaponry through (1) imports, (2) joint (Chinese-foreign) weapons R&D, and (3) independent weapons R&D within China.
The details of this mechanism were given in the article “China’s military affairs in 2003,” published by the Taiwanese journal Zhonggong yanjiu (China Communism Research) in February 2004.
According to Taiwanese experts, though weapons import and joint R&D still play the major role in PLA modernization, the role of “independent R&D” has been increasing gradually.
Appointed in March 2003, new Chinese Defense Minister (former chief of Defense Ministry’s Armament Division) Col.-Gen. Cao Gangchuan was personally in charge of this work.
He has tried to decrease China’s dependence on Russian arms and increase the share of advanced weapons imports from Germany, France and Israel.
China also is engaged in joint weapons R&D projects with EU and NATO countries, including R&D of mid-range air-to-air missiles and highly precise satellite positioning (Galileo project).
The Air Force
China believes that in a conflict with Taiwan, air dominance will be key to a quick victory.
The PLA has been beefing up its PLA Air Force (PLAAF) and aircraft troops of the PLA Navy (PLAN).
Reportedly, by the end of February 2004, the PLAAF purchased from Russia 76 SU-30 MKK fighters belonging to the advanced “4 plus” generation.
PLAN air troops obtained 24 even more advanced SU-30 MKK fighters.
There is no data regarding future deliveries of the “finished” SU-30 from Russia to China; however, the Chinese aircraft industry is more or less capable now of producing the SU-30 as well as other fighters belonging to the fourth generation, or close to this level.
Dramatic modernization of China’s First Aviation Industry Corp., or AVIC-1, from 2001 to 2004, is of principal importance here (the data in this account are given in the above-mentioned article in the Zhonggong yanjiu journal).
Four major companies are developing China’s jet-manufacturing capability. Interestingly, each of these companies recently underwent radical modernization and upgrading, including advanced equipment obtained from Europe’s Airbus, claiming the help is for “cooperation in passenger aircraft production.”
Shenyang Aircraft Corp. continued, in the past year, to produce SU-27 SK (J-11) heavy fighters from Russian kits at a rate of at least 25 units annually, and the share of Chinese-made components surpassed 70 percent.
The same company now prepares SU-30 MKK (J-11A) fighters for manufacturing.
In the frame of “independent R&D” within China, the Chengdu Aircraft Corp. has mastered the serial production of medium J-10 fighters and FC-1 light fighters. These planes reportedly can match the U.S. F-16 fighter.
Here are some other developments in China’s air wing:
Guizhou Aircraft Corp. developed the advanced Shanying fighter-trainer, while Xian Aircraft Corp. mostly finished developing the new generation of FBC-1 (JH-7) long-range fighter-bomber, which became known as JH-7A.
Other enterprises, belonging to AVIC-1, mastered production of KAB-500 guided bombs and several kinds of air-to-air and air-to ground missiles.
By the end of 2003, the new generation of Flying Leopard, i.e., JH-7A, was being tested. This fighter-bomber’s weapons include new air-to-air and air-to-ground missiles of beyond-vision range, guided bombs, etc. This aircraft is adapted for anti-radar reconnaissance, effective low-altitude strikes against large naval vessels, and general strikes of ground-based and naval targets.
By the end of 2004, as a result of supply from Russia and increased fighter production at AVIC-1 subsidiaries, the number of advanced fighters of various kinds in PLAN air troops and the PLAAF – including SU-27 (J-11), SU-30 (J-11A), J-10, FC-1, Shanying, FBC-1 (JH-7) and JH-7A – could surpass an estimated 400 units. The Sea Component
China also sees its navy as critical in any successful assault on Taiwan.
The PLA Navy (PLAN) has numerous Chinese-Russian projects under way this year and next, including:
Purchase of two Russian Sovremenny destroyers, equipped with improved ship-to-ship supersonic cruise missiles (SSM) Sunburn 3M80MBE of 240 km range. Initially, Sunburn had a range of 160 km. However, in 2001-2003, Raduga Design Bureau in Dubna (about 150 km north of Moscow) designed, under PLAN’s orders, a much more lethal version of SSM.
Very probably, serial production of new SSM would be mastered in China, so it would be installed on two Sovremenny destroyers, purchased by PLAN in 1999-2000, on Chinese-built Luhu- and Luhai-class destroyers as well as Jiangwei-class frigates. According to media reports in the Hong Kong and Taiwan media, two new Sovremenny destroyers could be transferred to PLAN before the end of 2005.
Purchase of eight Kilo submarines, equipped by “super-advanced” 3M54E (CLUB-S) submarine-launched anti-ship missiles. In 2003, China already obtained 50 missiles of this kind, which would greatly improve PLAN’s striking capacity. China intends to organize production of these missiles. They probably also could be used on Chinese-built conventional submarines of the Song class.
New Kilo submarines could enter PLAN service in 2005 or the first half of 2006. (Information regarding destroyers and conventional submarines was repeated in several articles in Zhonggong yanjiu in January 2003 through February 2004 and in multiple media reports from Hong Kong during the same period.)
Construction of “093 project” nuclear attack submarines and the “094 project” strategic nuclear submarine, using Russian plans and technology, at Huludao (a port city in northeast Liaoning province) military shipbuilding plant. By the end of 2005, PLAN would have in its service at least two “093 project” and at least one “094 project” nuclear submarines. Reportedly, Russia had to make significant improvements in design and weapons of these submarines, in accordance with Chinese customers’ requirements.
Along with Russian contracts is the construction of a new generation of destroyers, frigates and conventional submarines at modernized shipbuilding plants in Dalian, Shanghai, Qingdao and Wuhan cities. An upgraded PLA could be capable pf establishing sea control around Taiwan in 2008.
Aso important is the fact that both the PLAAF and PLAN would be equipped, by 2008, with perfect military information technology systems, more precisely by C4ISR (command, control, computers, communication, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) systems, which would make the use of the listed weapon systems much more effective.
We needed you 60 years ago to plan the defense of Pearl Harbor.
Perhaps Harry S. Truman should not been afraid of Josef Stalin (even though he had already tested the first Russian atomic bomb) and let Douglas MacArthur to nuke China, when the Chinese entered North Korea to help fighting the Americans.
Erratum: SS-N-2, not SS-2, for "Styx".
,,, maybe, maybe not. They've left Hong Kong alone to a greater extent than I envisaged they would. They'll get a lot of mileage out of trade if they leave Taiwan alone too. What has to be watched is the build up in the Panama canal area and the Bahamas, along with the alliances being forged in South America.
.....what China will probably continue to do is proliferate weapons all over the world to rouge nations and use it's superior military as a negotiating point to get trade concessions and territorial concessions. The United States needs to have the strongest possible military to thwart these efforts and have leverage with China.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yes, this is certainly true as others have noted- they are going to "incrementally" increase their political, economic, and military pressure and influence everwhere they can- just like us. But I'm not buying the many assertions on this thread they are either stoopid or suicidal. Folks who assert this do not know the Chinese M.O. and are basing their fears on, possibly, our experience with Soviet style communism. Again, China has NO history of foreign aggression. None. It's all talk, bluff and incremental increase of pressure. They are NEGOTIATING the new geo-political world order- and if we are not smart they will screw us royally and continue to get what they want without a fight. Think Klinton.....
>Once China is completely under the spell of capitalism (and it is close now) I think that China will become more and more similar to us - in that our best interests (selfishly) are seeing other countries prosper and remain peaceful in order to enrich ourselves from the increased trade.
The more capitalist China becomes the more it will be in it's interest to keep the world safe to keep the prosperity of the it's citizens at what they are used to. Businessmen are already proliferating throughout the Communist party structure and they will (again, selfishly) try to leverage the party to gain profit for themselves, which requires the country remain at peace.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Again, I agree with this. Chinese only start war with their weaker neighbors. At the moment we have ALL SEVEN OF OUR CARRIER BATTLEGROUPS OFF TAIWAN. Message to China: Hands off Taiwan or else suckers. Will they gamble now or later that we are bluffing? They do not like gambling.
France is a rouge nation; China is a rogue nation. There's a difference..
The 'other message' to China is: Bush better come home safe from Chile
France is a rouge nation; China is a rogue nation. There's a difference..
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BIG difference..... LOL!
I can think of plenty.
Food: grocery stores such as Publix (in Florida.)
Electronics: Best Buy, Circuit City, CompUSA, or various online stores (there are plenty of good ones with prices are lower than Wal*Mart's, and the Chinese aren't in the business of selling PC components.)
Clothing: hit the mall. Don't buy from The Gap or other such designer stores, but stick with the department stores and you'll be alright.
Furniture: I've yet to see a couch with "made in China" on the back.
Home supplies: Home Depot and Lowe's. Don't need Wal*Mart's tool isle.
The great thing is that all of these stores are usually within a few minutes' drive of each other, traffic considered. Pretty much all I buy at Wal*Mart these days are pencils, pens, and the occasional small CD rack.
Food won't be from China but you are fooling yourself on the other items and stores you mention.
Thanks for the ping. It's difficult to accept, but what we are doing with the trade imbalance is buying China the weapons it will need to bury us with.
,,, european countries are buying Chinese debt big time and a fair amount of that is transacted thru Hong Kong. Hong Kong has acted very successfully as China's buffer with the west for decades, until China started opening up. Associations made in Hong Kong have provided immeasurable benefits for east and west. If China leaves it the way it is they'll be doing a smart thing.
I think China realizes that. If I remember correctly, China has attempted a few minor crack-downs and had been majorly rebuffed. The bottom line is money talks.
OK, I stand corrected. But the incident does still further my point that it is relatively easy to disable a ship at sea. There aren't many places to duck. And unfortunately for nuclear carriers, the bigger the target, the harder to hide.
This next decade could be known as the "China Decade", where we first bleed jobs to China, then we pour real blood.
Like I said, I've yet to see a couch that comes with a "made in China" sticker.
I like the odds. If they want a fight, let's kick their ass. Game over.
>>It's difficult to accept, <<
Why? I see a few other things where we are comitting suicide by continuing them.
Intentionally? Probably so.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.