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.
"Taiwan is messed up?"
***Yes. From post #181, my original post in this series:
3) Taiwan has never declared independence. It's not like the brave Estonians standing up to Russia when communism fell. They're like an impudent child claiming to have sovereignty over China. Their fatal miscalculation is that they know they'll need Americans to fight for them if they are in a war, but Americans will be reluctant to shed blood for an ally that didn't have the courage to declare independence until they were invaded on an "internal dispute". The chinese will hammer away at this in the press.
That's right. Taiwan is so different culturally that the only way to compare the peoples of both is to compare apples to oranges. PRC Chinese refer to Taiwanese as "bannanas" because they are yellow on the outside and white on the inside, in other words they compare Taiwanese to Americans. It is not all like that. Most Taiwanese (86% of the population) descend from the Hoklo and Fujian (ethnic minorities from China).
Other Taiwanese descend from Korean, Japanese, and Vietnamese while the aboriginals there are Indonesian and other pacific islanders. 14% is made of the Han Chinese, which are primarily those who came over with Chiang Kai-shek and those that immigrated from China to Taiwan (not to mention the thousands of refugees they get from China each year seeking freedom).
Well I hope we have a strong administration should that happen, somone who will not give into the press's lies and disonformation.
That's not even a comparison. First thing is that unlike CHINA, the US is not a totalitarian communist dictatorship so Alaska has no reason to cede from the US.
Its not the US's fault that China is a communist dictatorship. And me, I would rather see a nuclear exchange than see free Taiwan overrun by the communist Chinese.
We should be making sure Taiwan, S. Korea, Japan, and the Philipines have a counter nuclear arsenal against N. Korea. Think that might burn China's ass?
Easy to talk tough when you don't have 1 billion + enemies 90 miles away.
It's not like the brave Estonians standing up to Russia when communism fell.
Or the brave Chechens.
They're like an impudent child claiming to have sovereignty over China.
I believe they stopped claiming that a while ago.
Their fatal miscalculation is that they know they'll need Americans to fight for them if they are in a war, but Americans will be reluctant to shed blood for an ally that didn't have the courage to declare independence until they were invaded on an "internal dispute".
I'm curious, was Tibet independent? Did we help them?
Can I get that in an X-Large?
Most definently. Rumor has it that Taiwan is already a nuclear-armed country, but Taiwan, Japan, the Phillipines all should be nuclear armed.
Yep,the US AGREED to BUILD 8 D/Es the moments Bush came in-the issue here is not on building them,but the US & Taiwan need to find a design to build subs with.We all know the US doesn't build or design D/Es & has no real plans either,so it would make it dependent on European nations to supply the design for a submarine,which would then carry American sensors & weapons & be built in the US.Sweden,France,Germany,the Netherlands & Russia are the main designers & builders of export D/Es & all these nations have made it adequately clear they won't "help Taiwan" in it's sub requirements(note the wording,they are only saying help,not build).The sub builders like South Korea,India,Turkey,Australia all build license produced D/Es from one of these countries & if they were to try to help Taiwan out,it would affect their own programmes.The only other Sub designing nation is Japan,who don't export anything & will esp be wary of p***ing of China.
PS-in 2002,there were reports that Northrop Grumman had unveiled a variant of the Type-209 D/E sub(A famous German design) to be produced for Taiwan.After that tensions between Germany & China & the US-Germany spat over Iraq sank the deal.Same goes for a plan to build a variant of the Spanish S-80 class sub(which anyways was essentially a French system).
On a side note. If North Korea (a nation possessing nuclear weapons by its own admission) should launch some "test" missle into the Western Hemisphere... I would detonate on Pyong Yang before it got wherever it was going...
I imagine it will probebly be a D/E version of a Los Angeles class or Seawolf class.
I agree. They so much as sneeze in our direction, hit em hard.
The point to be noted here is "if we wanted to" & given statements from people like Powell & Armitage,Im not exactly sure.
That won't be impossible,given America's tech base but it sure will be hard.First of all,D/E subs are a world apart from their nuclear cousins.Speed,size,sensors,armament are all vastly distinct.Tweaking an LA class boat into a D/E is nothing but a disaster as the biggest D/Es today(Australia's Collins class) only weigh about 3,000tonnes & the LAs displace 5,500+t.IT would have big manning problems(for a small navy like Taiwan) & it's size would be a massive impediment in what will essentially be shallow waters.Anyway,if a sub design is finalised,it will take atleast 2-3years to modify & settle for a design & atleast another 4 to build them.Question here is does Taiwan have the time to wait that long??
I don't know a lot about the current tech's but wouldn't Tiawan be served well to defend an invasion by lots of underwater rocket mines around their island?
That article I just posted did hint at the Aegis-equipped warships ("as well as ships equipped with advanced electronic battle management systems."), just five of them would knock down each and every missile pointed at Taiwan.
I hope Taiwan at least gets the P3 anti-submarine aircraft if they can't get te submarines.
"That's not even a comparison. First thing is that unlike CHINA, the US is not a totalitarian communist dictatorship so Alaska has no reason to cede from the US."
You're not putting yourself in their shoes. From their perspective I'm sure they think they are the nicest people and the saviors of mankind and true & wonderful communists, so there would be no reason for Taiwan to secede from their wholly benevolent union.
"I hope Taiwan at least gets the P3 anti-submarine aircraft if they can't get te submarines."
I'd rather see them get the subs. With a full load of the latest anti-shipping mines.
"You're not putting yourself in their shoes. From their perspective I'm sure they think they are the nicest people and the saviors of mankind and true & wonderful communists, so there would be no reason for Taiwan to secede from their wholly benevolent union."
I doubt they see it that way at all. At least not the leadership. They would view a formally independent Taiwan as a humiliating political defeat. So they're willing to go to war to prevent that once they believe they have enough of an edge. That's why it has to be done before that, preferably accompanied by choking off a lot of their income through the US adopting protectionist policies.
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.