The Pentagon’s report on the PLA suggests China is getting closer to nixing the US military’s ability to intervene in Asia.
Last month, the US Department of Defense released the latest version of its annual publication on the Chinese military. Previously known as ‘Military Power of the People’s Republic of China,’ the US Congress has decided to rename the document, ‘Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China.’
But while the title may have changed, the language in the report hasn’t. China is not only increasing the size of its military, but also the quality—with significant implications for the Asia-Pacific region and the United States.
The US Congress has since 2002 directed the Pentagon to submit an annual report (with both a public and a classified version), on the PLA, assessing its current and likely future capabilities, doctrine, strategies, technologies, force structure, organization and operational concepts.
This year’s report notes as usual that ‘the pace and scope of China’s military modernization have increased over the past decade.’ But this time, it also makes clear that it isn’t just in terms of hardware that the PLA has been pressing forward—it’s also becoming more effective at integrating these capabilities through improvements in its Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) systems, as well as by developing the capacity for integrated joint operations involving more than one service branch.
This doesn’t necessarily have to be bad news for the United States and its allies. In fact, the authors of the report make a point of welcoming the fact that the
The problem is that these same augmented capabilities can also be used for coercive diplomacy and to contest territorial disputes by force.Indeed, Defense Department analysts believe that the main purpose of the
Of course there’s one consideration above all others that the Chinese have in mind in developing their maritime capabilities. That is deterring and, if necessary, defeating any effort by Taiwan to claim formal independence from Beijing—even if the US military intervenes on Taipei’s behalf.
Photo Credit: Colin J / Flickr
View as Single Page
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
Jimmy China
The US defence forces outgun the PLA by a mammoth margin.Why does the Pentagon require such apowerful militray?To defend US from attack?Ask yourself would Russia/China/Nk be naive to attack the US?
When the Chinese build up their forces to defend China from attack ie US attack there is a hue and cry.Why?Because the US forces could come under attack as well as the CONUS.You see in all wars involving the Us the conus has never been threatened like now aspecially if the US were to attack China.
Taiwan is an internal problem of the Chinese.Don’t give the bs about freedom of the sea and democracy . It is a charade to attack China.
Fortunately the PLA aint weak or defenceless.Like it or not the PLA will go on modernising until such time as the US finds it is not worth defending Taiwan and not involved in a war with China.
Jeremy
For those readers who believe China to be a threat must be naive.China is ougunned by the US in both conventiona/nuclear forces.They are buying the US lie. Similarly the US considers both NKand Iran to be nuclear threats.Anyonw who believes this US propaganda must be crazy.
The only way these countries will use nw is if the US attacks them with nw.The pentagon is very clever to portary Nk to be athreat to the international community likewise with Iran.NK is only a threat to US forces and Japan going to attack it.NK is not going to attack SEA,Australia,NZChina,Russia.
Those who believ this lie must think for themselves. There are always two sides to a story.
For every action there will be a reaction. Think about it,my fellow readers.
,
Vikas
This statement is wrong:
“In contrast, perhaps also predictably, the government of Taiwan cited the report to support its request that the United States agree to sell it more advanced weapons, especially the F-16 C/D variant and diesel submarines”
USA does not produce diesel submarine.
David
Vikas: Actually, the U.S. offered back in 2001 to provide diesel-electric submarines to Taiwan, and the discussion about whether to pursue this deal has been going on ever since.
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2010/08/23/2003481083
The_Observer
You are both right. The USA was talking to Taiwan about providing them with diesel subs and the USA currently doesn’t make any. The USA would have to sub-contract out part of the manufacture to some European manufacturer if the contract ever comes to fruition.
Praveen Kumar
Alas but the real world geopolitik is not governed by what is right and what is wrong..plain economics..i have money i will build and to hell with anyone else. Although I am Indian I want a stronger china, since it will allow Indian Army to revisit its strengths. and be prepared for anything catastrophic. Competition is not only good in the market its good in defense too.
The_Observer
That’s warped logic.
Money for defense takes money away from other areas of the economy such as developing infrastructure and providing services to the needy. You need a military spending that bears some semblance to the size of your economy. China with a similar sized population as India has an economy is currently 3.5 times the size of that of India. For India to compete dollar for dollar and especially as she imports weapons will risk blowing not just her defense budget but the Indian economy as well.
John Chan
Military spending does not bear relationship with a nation’s economic size. Throughout the history there are numerous records shown that nations spent totally disproportional amount of national resources on military expenditures. Restrict military spending within a nation’s economic means is only a story put up by the rich and strong nations to fool other nations not to defend themselves. To deter USA and USSR from attacking and blackmailing China, even Mao said, “we want nuclear bombs rather than trousers.” in order to rally the nation for the scarifies needed to build the bombs. If India is willing to sacrifice for the greater good of India, it can spend any amount of money on military irrespective to India’s economic size, such as 17% of Gross National Product for the next 30 years.
mandrewsf
Why do you talk about the Chinese military but upload a picture of the Chinese paramilitary armed policemen next to the heading?
In any case, Chinese military capacity is grossly overhyped. The Pentagon is just trying to wiggle out of serious potential budget cuts by playing the China card.
Jeyaprakash
Not only that…….US is indirectly pushing china’s neighbours like india, Taiwan, Japan, Vietnam (Now) to buy more defence goods from US, Ultimately wherever US puts it hand only for Money (Business), it is oil or Defence…….Long Live US strategy…….! but not at the cost of other nations………Jai Hind.
ashleyhk
“In fact, the authors of the report make a point of welcoming the fact that the PLA’s growing capabilities could enable China to make a greater contribution to managing international security challenges. For example, China can now allocate more military resources to supporting international peacekeeping operations, foreign disaster relief and humanitarian assistance missions as well as countering maritime piracy.”
Anyone who believes this is nuts.
That is not China’s intention. It is quite obvious that it intends to remove the US from Asia. Not going to happen, but it is very worrying the way, it seems to me, that the PLA “hawks” are gaining more ascendancy as we lead up to the 2012 leadership changes.
China is, on present trajectory, going to plunge us into war again,which would be truly horrible, but they seem to be following the tragic path of Japan in the early 20th Century.
Weatern “domination” is not good but neither is an attempt to destroy a system which, on balance, has benefitted the people of Asia since 1945/6.
China’s young officers and the 1930s syndrome
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ambroseevans-pritchard/100007519/china%e2%80%99s-young-officers-and-the-1930s-syndrome/
Stammy
Not trying to advocate a build up or anything but why shouldn’t China have a right to have a strong military? Reading all these articles and comments from diplomats, it seems if the world wants China to shed its military and lay down like a meek kitten. I mean, what self-respecting country would do that? Why is it that the US or other nations should have the right to have a global military and a free hand to attack other nations but not China? Again for those who would misread this I am not advocating China to attack other nations.