China's Military Power

http://www.cfr.org/publication/18459/chinas_military_power.html?breadcrumb=%2F

Author: Jayshree Bajoria, Staff Writer


February 4, 2009

Scope of the Threat
China's Modernization Agenda
U.S. Policy Response

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Threat
Since the 1990s, China has dramatically improved its military capabilities on land and sea, in the air, and in space. Recently, China has begun to project its military power beyond the Pacific Ocean by deploying a flotilla of small warships in December 2008 to the Gulf of Aden to aid in international efforts to fight Somali piracy. Historically, the United States is most concerned about the possibility of a conflict between China and Taiwan, though tensions between the two have lessened since 2008. But looking decades ahead, U.S. military planners clearly see the potential for China to develop as a "peer competitor." The U.S. Defense Department's 2008 report on China's military power says "much uncertainty surrounds China's future course, in particular in the area of its expanding military power and how that power might be used."

But experts say China is still decades away from challenging U.S. military's preeminence. Its ground forces field 1980s vintage armor and suffer from significant shortcomings in command and control, air defense, logistics, and communications. Its air force, too, lags behind those of Western powers, though China flies about one hundred top-end Russian Su-27 warplanes and has contracted to purchase newer Su-33s, which are capable of carrier-based operations. China plans to build aircraft carriers domestically, but currently has none under construction.



"China's military modernization makes perfect sense to me as a natural evolution commensurate with China's rise as a great power." -- James Mulvenon, Center for Intelligence Research and Analysis
None of this, however, adds up to an arms race. James Mulvenon, director of the Washington-based Center for Intelligence Research and Analysis, says China's military modernization "makes perfect sense to me as a natural evolution commensurate with China's rise as a great power." The concerns expressed by Western military experts focus on longer-term motives. Kerry Dumbaugh, a specialist in Asian affairs at the U.S. Congressional Research Service, sums up these security concerns (PDF) in a 2008 report, citing China's lack of transparency in military funding and operations; recurring instances of espionage directed at obtaining U.S. military secrets; evidence of China's improving military and technological prowess; and Beijing's military and technological assistance to states like Zimbabwe, Myanmar, and others viewed as repressive or international pariahs. Many of these issues may become less contentious through a better military-to-military relationship and improved trust between the two powers, say experts. For instance, the increasing economic interdependence of the United States and China should provide a solid basis for avoiding conflict. But accidents between the two militaries, such as the midair collision between a U.S. spy plane and a Chinese fighter in 2001, or the accidental missile strike on China's embassy in Belgrade in 1999, could still spark a conflict neither side desires.

China's Modernization Agenda
China says it pursues a national defense policy solely aimed at protecting its territory and people, and in keeping with its concept of "peaceful development." The government's latest white paper on national defense says it will "by and large reach the goal of modernization of national defense and armed forces by the mid-21st century." The paper stresses China's hopes to create a more technologically advanced, capable military that will allow it to conduct and sustain operations at a greater distance from its border and says the country will make much progress toward that goal by 2020.

As part of this modernization agenda, China is acquiring advanced weapons systems from foreign suppliers as well as trying to develop its own. U.S. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, in a statement to the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee in January 2009, said the areas of greatest concern are cyber- and anti-satellite warfare, anti-air and anti-ship weaponry, submarines, and ballistic missiles. "Modernization in these areas could threaten America's primary means of projecting power and helping allies in the Pacific: our bases, air and sea assets, and the networks that support them," he said.

China caused an international uproar in January 2007 when it launched a ballistic missile and destroyed one of its own satellites. The anti-satellite test displayed the growing prowess of China's space program and raised questions about China's intentions and civil-military relations within the country. In February 2008, U.S. destruction of a crippled U.S. spy satellite demonstrated that space may emerge as the new contested domain between the great powers. Yet the United States' relative space advantage will probably shrink as China strengthens its space capabilities over the next ten to twenty years, writes Bruce W. MacDonald in a September 2008 Council Special Report. The United States should champion an approach to space that emphasizes deterrence, he suggests, as well as consider new diplomatic initiatives aimed at preventing space from becoming a potential conflict zone.

The United States has also accused China of hacking into government computer networks at the U.S. Departments of State, Commerce, and Defense. Chinese electronic espionage has been alleged against British companies, as well as government agencies in France, Germany, South Korea, and Taiwan. In its November 2008 report to Congress, the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission noted that cyberspace is a critical vulnerability of the U.S. government and economy. The report warns: "China is aggressively pursuing cyber warfare capabilities that may provide it with an asymmetric advantage against the United States. In a conflict situation, this advantage would reduce current U.S. conventional military dominance."

China has been modernizing its nuclear weapons systems and continues to emphasize its "no first use" policy on nuclear weapons. However, nonproliferation expert Henry Sokolski, in May 2008 testimony (PDF) before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, said if China were to increase its nuclear weapons deployment, it could prompt its immediate neighbors--South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan--to initiate nuclear weapons programs. Mulvenon says it is a concern for Washington that China has now finally deployed the DF-31--a solid-fueled, nuclear-tipped intercontinental ballistic missile to replace its aging liquid-fueled missiles. The DF-31 provides China with credible and secure second-strike capability, the ability to respond to a nuclear attack with powerful nuclear retaliation.

Beyond specific areas of concern, analysts express worry about discrepancies in China's defense budgets. China says its defense expenditure for 2007 was around $52 billion and its 2008 defense budget is $61 billion. However, the Pentagon says these figures are grossly underreported. In its annual report to Congress, it estimated China's total military-related spending for 2007 to be between $97 billion and $139 billion. China argues that its military budget was only 1.38 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) in 2007, while U.S. defense expenditure was 4.5 percent of GDP. Experts also point to the absolute size of the United States' defense budgets to show the asymmetric comparison. The 2008 U.S. defense budget was $ 481.4 billion plus $141.7 billion for the "Global War on Terror."

U.S. Policy Response
While economic and trade relations between the United States and China have been growing, military to military relations remain relatively underdeveloped. Military conflict between the two is highly unlikely, but "not impossible" according to CFR Senior Fellow Adam Segal. Misperception or misunderstanding over an incident in the Taiwan Strait or the sudden collapse of North Korea might be the spark of a conflict neither side wants, he says.

The April 2001 "spy plane" debacle is an example of such a misunderstanding. Experts are worried there could be more incidents as the Chinese Navy and Air Force counduct exercises and patrols farther away from China and come into more frequent contact with the United States, Taiwan, and Japan.

But some experts see little prospect of a closer military relationship between the two countries in the near future. Admiral Timothy J. Keating, commander of U.S. Pacific Command, told CFR.org it would be a "giant leap of faith" to believe the United States and China could develop a close military partnership any time soon. To improve the relationship, Keating says, will require "more transparency, a better understanding of intention on our part of the Chinese, and to get there we would need more active cooperation with the Chinese."

The United States has followed a two-pronged strategy in the military-to-military relationship, says Mulvenon. It engages with the Chinese military through senior-level exchanges, and it has sought to modernize and reform its own forces. A 2007 CFR Independent Task Force report (PDF), which was cochaired by Dennis Blair, the Obama administration's director of national intelligence, recommended a sustained high-level military-strategic dialogue to complement the "Senior Dialogue" started by the deputy secretary of state in 2005 and the "Strategic Economic Dialogue" launched by the treasury secretary in 2006. It also recommends that Washington strengthen its security partnerships with China's neighbors. As this Backgrounder notes, the United States has been forging closer relations with countries in the region, including India, another regional power. It concluded a groundbreaking nuclear deal with New Delhi in 2008, lifting a three-decade U.S. moratorium on nuclear trade with India. The United States has also been upgrading forward deployed naval and air forces in Guam.

How U.S. defense planners will respond to China's military buildup going forward is also dependent on the ongoing debate over the biggest threats to U.S. national security in the twenty-first century. Writing in the latest Foreign Affairs, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates says the country now faces both conventional adversaries and irregular conflicts from insurgents and non-state actors, and it should "seek a better balance in the portfolio of capabilities it has--the types of units fielded, the weapons bought, the training done." However, in a situation of finite Department of Defense resources, some analysts argue that "striking the correct planning balance" (PDF) between operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, the war on terror, and China's military modernization will be a key defense planning challenge.


Weigh in on this issue by emailing CFR.org.
Global Economy in Crisis

Backgrounder: Obama's Stimulus Plan

Paper: Sovereign Fund Reversal

Timeline: How the Crisis Unfolded

More at CFR's Center for Geoeconomic Studies.

New CFR Books

In Money, Markets, and Sovereignty, the authors present a fascinating intellectual history of monetary nationalism from the ancient world to the present and explore why, in its modern incarnation, it represents the single greatest threat to globalization.


In Power Rules, inspired by Machiavelli’s classic The Prince, Leslie H. Gelb offers illuminating guidelines on how American power actually works and should be wielded in today’s tumultuous world.


Russian Foreign Policy convincingly demonstrates that today’s Russia is more interested in restoring what its leaders consider to be its rightful place among the world’s major powers than in directly challenging the West.

Complete list of CFR Books.



New Book from CFR and the Saban Center at Brookings
Proposes Middle East Strategy for the Obama Administration
In Restoring the Balance: A Middle East Strategy for the Next President, experts from the Council on Foreign Relations and the Saban Center at the Brookings Institution propose a new, nonpartisan Middle East strategy drawing on the lessons of past failures to address both the short-term and long-term challenges to U.S. interests.



New Council Special Reports


Congo: Securing Peace, Sustaining Progress
This report lays out a thoughtful agenda for U.S. policy toward the Democratic Republic of Congo, arguing that what happens there should matter to the United States--for humanitarian reasons as well as economic and strategic ones.

Deterring State Sponsorship of Nuclear Terrorism
In this report, CFR Senior Fellow Michael A. Levi analyzes the potential use of deterrence in preventing terrorist groups from acquiring nuclear weapons and recommends a new approach to U.S. declaratory policy, as well as ways to improve U.S. capabilities to determine the sources of terrorist attacks.

Complete list of Council Special Reports.



New Independent Task Force Reports


Confronting Climate Change
This report argues that the United States must lead with domestic action on climate change and proposes a U.S. negotiating strategy for a global UN climate agreement that includes commitments from all major economies, while also promoting a less formal Partnership for Climate Cooperation that would focus the world's largest emitters on implementing aggressive emissions reductions.

U.S.-Latin America Relations: A New Direction for a New Reality
This Task Force report examines changes in Latin America and in U.S. influence there, while taking account of the region's enduring importance to the United States. The Task Force offers an agenda for U.S. policy toward Latin America and identifies four critical areas that should provide the basis of a new U.S. approach.

About Independent Task Forces at CFR.



Middle East Peace
“ Change They Can Believe In” : Walter Russell Mead on why if it hopes to bring peace to the Middle East, the Obama administration must put Palestinian politics and goals first.

Subscribe Now and Save 47%!




Publications Information
To order Task Force reports, Council Special Reports, and Critical Policy Choices, please call, fax, or order online from our distributor, the Brookings Institution Press: phone +1.800.537.5487 , fax +1.410.516.6998.

For information on other reports that are not for sale, or for general publications information, please call +1.212.434.9516 or email publications@cfr.org.



Permissions Requests
To request permission to reuse Council materials, please email publications@cfr.org or fax +1.212.434.9859.

Please include the complete information of the requested work—author, title, sections/pages to be copied or reprinted, and number of copies to be made—along with a brief description of where and how you would like to reuse the work.

You may also request permission for Council material through Copyright Clearance Center. For more information, please click on the link below.



Browse Content By Region IssuePublication TypeThe Think TankFor The MediaFor Educators About CFR
HomeSite IndexFAQContactRSSPodcast


Copyright 2009 by the Council on Foreign Relations. All Rights Reserved.