China’s military power has long been assessed almost solely in terms of its ability to use that capability to invade the Republic of China or Taiwan. This has led some wags to ridicule American concerns, describing the PRC threat to Taiwan as akin to a “million-man swim” given the relative lack of amphibious landing and transportation capability in Peking. Others have ridiculed the notion that China would harm Taiwan given the latter’s significant investment in mainland business and technology. Some organizations, such as CATO, have downplayed China’s military capability for fear that any other analysis would be a justified basis for more US military spending, which runs counter to their goal of a significantly lower role of the “state” in the affairs of the United States.
It is true, however, that China’s military has been dramatically modernized recently. The Chairman of our Joint Chiefs of Staff recently said his interest in these improvements has since become a “concern” and rightfully so. Although the retirement of old legacy systems has reduced the overall “bean “count of tanks, planes, and other weapons systems, the capability of the PRC military is becoming in some cases first class, is being modernized in many areas and could be part of a basis for PRC hegemonic goals.
It is not as if the PRC could not be a joint partner with the United States in both regional security and economic development. The country of 1.3 billion has some enormous challenges. The first is putting to work hundreds of millions of people and managing their growing expectations of becoming “middle class”. The second is to provide the necessary energy to fuel this economic growth and economic opportunity. The third is managing what is becoming apparent as enormous “gulfs” between those in China that have a leg into the new entrepreneurial world of free enterprise and, the downside, of crony capitalism, and those stuck in the agrarian geography of old China.
There are major areas where we see the PRC modernizing: aircraft, ships, missiles, amphibious capability and anti-access denial capabilities. During the Cold War, the late Secretary of Defense Les Aspin, when a member of the House and chair of the House Armed Services Committee, used to talk about “counting the beans”–the relative size of the US and Soviet military. On China, yes the beans are increasing. By the 2020s, PLA missiles aimed at Taiwan could exceed 2,000 or 3,000, with close to 1,000 4th generation fighters, and more capable and larger invasion forces and significantly larger nuclear forces, upwards of 140 long-range ballistic missiles and some 300+ warheads aimed at the United States.
In addition, according to the IASC, the PRC is “building an initial anti-access/area denial combined defense. For several years analysts have been describing the PLA future anti-access combine of space, anti-space, long-range strike, mine and cyber warfare capabilities, that when netted together would significantly raise the cost for U.S. intervention to defend Taiwan from Chinese attack. By 2015 much of this anti-access combine may become reality.”
“In 2010 the PLA Air Force and PLA Naval Air Forces have about 500 4th and 3+ generation fighters and fighter bombers, with about 200 having been imported from Russia. Current production of Chengdu J-10, Shenyang J-11B and Xian JH-7A combat aircraft is estimated at about 50-to-60 per year. The key variable for future fighter production will be whether the PLA can master indigenous turbofan engines.”
“After a hiatus of four years, in mid-May 2010 the PLA started assembling its second Type 071 landing platform dock (LPD) amphibious assault ship. Will construction now accelerate? There are reports that the PLA may intend to build up to six new Type 081 landing helicopter dock (LHD) and six Type 071 ships, that when added to existing smaller LST and LSM assault ship, may give the PLA a formal amphibious lift approaching 50,000 troops.”
For what purposes then is China going to use its growing military? No, they are not going to invade Florida. (Just drill for oil some 50 miles from Spring Break.) Nevertheless, they are asserting hegemonic power and it is primarily related to energy. They seek to use their military as a coercive tool to steer investment and trade in its favor and away from its competitors. (Continued tomorrow.)