There is a natural tendency to
focus on the crisis of the moment, and in the case of China, this has become
the South China Sea. The U.S. and China’s neighbors also, however, need to look
at China’s overall strategy and goals, and to what is likely to be a set of far
broader challenges that will shape Asian and Pacific security over at least the
next quarter century.
China is emerging as a major global power
after centuries of outside attack, invasion, and exploitation from the first
Opium War in 1839 to Deng Xiaoping’s decision to adopt the major economic
reforms that have allowed China to develop one of the world largest and most
competitive economies. Chinese strategists may see China’s growing military
power and challenge to the U.S. and neighboring states as both defensive and a
reaction to what some call centuries of humiliation. They also see the need for
caution, the necessity for China to avoid direct confrontation with the U.S.
until its forces are fully ready, to rely on limited advances using asymmetric
means like fortifying offshore reefs, and emerge securely as the key power in
Asia without any serious conflict.
The problem for China – and all the other
states affected by its rise – is that there is no clear way to predict how
peaceful China’s rise will be, how far China will go, and the end result in
changing the balance of power in Asia, the Pacific, and the global economy.
These challenges and uncertainties also create a clear need for China to use
its declared strategy as a political tool and to do so with care. All nations
use their declared military strategies and policies as a form of political
leverage, but China has even more incentive than most.
China is an emerging military power whose
economic leverage greatly exceeds its current military capability, and must be
cautious for the next decade or more in provoking the U.S. as well as key
neighbors like Australia, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan. It is seeking
to dominate East Asia, not a war that can cripple its economy or an
accelerating arms race it may be able to avoid. Its claims to the South China
Sea, islands Japan now occupies, and extended naval and air zones assert its
new strength and interests, but are not “vital” national security interests
compared to the free flow of its imports and exports and internal development.
Its memories of the past, particularly
foreign colonial invasions and economic zones and Japan’s wars and invasions
are real. Currently some of its efforts to assert its emerging power
before it has actually emerged bear at least a slight resemblance to the U.S.
Monroe Doctrine – assertions of power it does not yet have the strength to
enforce.
Here it is important to pay close attention
to what China says as well as what it does. No nation ever fully states its
strategy in public, but China still says a great deal in formal statement like
its 2015 defense white paper, China’s Military Strategy:
China's national strategic goal is to
complete the building of a moderately prosperous society in all respects by
2021 when the CPC celebrates its centenary; and the building of a modern
socialist country that is prosperous, strong, democratic, culturally advanced
and harmonious by 2049 when the People's Republic of China (PRC) marks its
centenary. It is a Chinese Dream of achieving the great rejuvenation of the
Chinese nation. The Chinese Dream is to make the country strong. China's armed
forces take their dream of making the military strong as part of the Chinese
Dream.
Without a strong military, a country can
be neither safe nor strong. In the new historical period, aiming at the CPC's
goal of building a strong military in the new situation, China's armed forces
will unswervingly adhere to the principle of the CPC's absolute leadership,
uphold combat effectiveness as the sole and fundamental standard, carry on
their glorious traditions, and work to build themselves into a people's
military that follows the CPC's commands, can fight and win, and boasts a fine
style of work.
China also tacitly recognizes that its
very real advances in extending its power out into the East Pacific, creating
new sea-air capabilities along its entire coast, building new “islands,”
projecting power into the Indian Ocean, and creating new “Silk Roads” to secure
its trade routes all have limitations that will exist for at least the next
decade. Once again, its 2015 White Paper stresses the need for major military
reform and diplomatic caution as well as China’s strength:
In the new circumstances, the national
security issues facing China encompass far more subjects, extend over a greater
range, and cover a longer time span than at any time in the country's history.
Internally and externally, the factors at play are more complex than ever
before. Therefore, it is necessary to uphold a holistic view of national
security, balance internal and external security, homeland and citizen security,
traditional and non-traditional security, subsistence and development security,
and China's own security and the common security of the world.
To realize China's national strategic goal
and implement the holistic view of national security, new requirements have
been raised for innovative development of China's military strategy and the
accomplishment of military missions and tasks. In response to the new
requirement of safeguarding national security and development interests,
China's armed forces will work harder to create a favorable strategic posture
with more emphasis on the employment of military forces and means, and provide
a solid security guarantee for the country's peaceful development.
In response to the new requirement arising
from the changing security situation, the armed forces will constantly innovate
strategic guidance and operational thoughts so as to ensure the capabilities of
fighting and winning. In response to the new requirement arising from the
worldwide RMA, the armed forces will pay close attention to the challenges in
new security domains, and work hard to seize the strategic initiative in
military competition.
In response to the new requirement coming
from the country's growing strategic interests, the armed forces will actively
participate in both regional and international security cooperation and
effectively secure China's overseas interests. And in response to the new
requirement arising from China's all-round and deepening reform, the armed
forces will continue to follow the path of civil-military integration (CMI),
actively participate in the country's economic and social construction, and
firmly maintain social stability, so as to remain a staunch force for upholding
the CPC's ruling position and a reliable force for developing socialism with
Chinese characteristics.
China's armed forces will effectively
perform their missions in the new historical period, resolutely uphold the
leadership of the CPC and the socialist system with Chinese characteristics,
safeguard China's sovereignty, security and development interests, safeguard
the important period of strategic opportunities for China's development,
maintain regional and world peace, and strive to provide a strong guarantee for
completing the building of a moderately prosperous society in all respects and
achieving the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.
Like the United States, China is very
careful not to be too specific about tying its public strategy
specifically to the ways it challenges the “other major power.” In fact,
some Chinese military planners privately make it clear that their greatest
present fear is that the U.S. will act to challenge China before China’s forces
are ready. At the same time, China does seek to find ways to assert its
strength, develop asymmetric options that can make gains without risking
dangerous levels of conflict, and develop its military forces in ways that make
fundamental changes in what used to be a land power that relied far more on
mass than force quality:
In line with the strategic requirement of
mobile operations and multi-dimensional offense and defense, the PLA Army
(PLAA) will continue to reorient from theater defense to trans-theater
mobility. In the process of building small, multi-functional and modular units,
the PLAA will adapt itself to tasks in different regions, develop the capacity
of its combat forces for different purposes, and construct a combat force
structure for joint operations. The PLAA will elevate its capabilities for
precise, multi-dimensional, trans-theater, multi-functional and sustainable
operations.
In line with the strategic requirement of
offshore waters defense and open seas protection, the PLA Navy (PLAN) will
gradually shift its focus from "offshore waters defense" to the
combination of "offshore waters defense" with "open seas
protection," and build a combined, multi-functional and efficient marine
combat force structure. The PLAN will enhance its capabilities for strategic
deterrence and counterattack, maritime maneuvers, joint operations at sea,
comprehensive defense and comprehensive support.
In line with the strategic requirement of
building air-space capabilities and conducting offensive and defensive
operations, the PLA Air Force (PLAAF) will endeavor to shift its focus from
territorial air defense to both defense and offense, and build an air-space
defense force structure that can meet the requirements of informationized
operations. The PLAAF will boost its capabilities for strategic early warning,
air strike, air and missile defense, information countermeasures, airborne
operations, strategic projection and comprehensive support.
In line with the strategic requirement of
being lean and effective and possessing both nuclear and conventional missiles,
the PLA Second Artillery Force (PLASAF) will strive to transform itself in the
direction of informationization, press forward with independent innovations in
weaponry and equipment by reliance on science and technology, enhance the
safety, reliability and effectiveness of missile systems, and improve the force
structure featuring a combination of both nuclear and conventional
capabilities. The PLASAF will strengthen its capabilities for strategic
deterrence and nuclear counterattack, and medium- and long-range precision
strikes.
In line with the strategic requirement of
performing multiple functions and effectively maintaining social stability, the
PAPF will continue to develop its forces for guard and security, contingency
response, stability maintenance, counter-terrorism operations, emergency rescue
and disaster relief, emergency support and air support, and work to improve a
force structure which highlights guard duty, contingency response,
counter-terrorism and stability maintenance. The PAPF will enhance its
capabilities for performing diversified tasks centering on guard duty and
contingency response in informationized conditions.
…The seas and oceans bear on the enduring
peace, lasting stability and sustainable development of China. The traditional
mentality that land outweighs sea must be abandoned, and great importance has
to be attached to managing the seas and oceans and protecting maritime rights
and interests. It is necessary for China to develop a modern maritime military
force structure commensurate with its national security and development
interests, safeguard its national sovereignty and maritime rights and
interests, protect the security of strategic SLOCs and overseas interests, and
participate in international maritime cooperation, so as to provide strategic
support for building itself into a maritime power.
Outer space has become a commanding height
in international strategic competition. Countries concerned are developing
their space forces and instruments, and the first signs of weaponization of
outer space have appeared. China has all along advocated the peaceful use of
outer space, opposed the weaponization of and arms race in outer space, and
taken an active part in international space cooperation. China will keep
abreast of the dynamics of outer space, deal with security threats and
challenges in that domain, and secure its space assets to serve its national
economic and social development, and maintain outer space security.
Cyberspace has become a new pillar of
economic and social development, and a new domain of national security. As
international strategic competition in cyberspace has been turning increasingly
fiercer, quite a few countries are developing their cyber military forces.
Being one of the major victims of hacker attacks, China is confronted with
grave security threats to its cyber infrastructure. As cyberspace weighs more
in military security, China will expedite the development of a cyber force, and
enhance its capabilities of cyberspace situation awareness, cyber defense,
support for the country's endeavors in cyberspace and participation in
international cyber cooperation, so as to stem major cyber crises, ensure
national network and information security, and maintain national security and
social stability.
The nuclear force is a strategic
cornerstone for safeguarding national sovereignty and security. China has
always pursued the policy of no first use of nuclear weapons and adhered to a
self-defensive nuclear strategy that is defensive in nature. China will
unconditionally not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against
non-nuclear-weapon states or in nuclear-weapon-free zones, and will never enter
into a nuclear arms race with any other country. China has always kept its
nuclear capabilities at the minimum level required for maintaining its national
security. China will optimize its nuclear force structure, improve strategic
early warning, command and control, missile penetration, rapid reaction, and
survivability and protection, and deter other countries from using or
threatening to use nuclear weapons against China.
It is important to note, however, that
China’s rhetoric is very different from the potential conflict-oriented
rhetoric that shaped French and German relations and the Anglo-German naval
arms race before World War I. There also is none of the ideological extremism
that shaped rhetoric of Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union as they emerged as
major military powers. China does talk about the United States, but – at least
for now – it talks more in terms of competition than conflict even though it
does make the risk of some future war with the U.S. all too clear:
Profound changes are taking place in the
international situation, as manifested in the historic changes in the balance
of power, global governance structure, Asia-Pacific geostrategic landscape, and
international competition in the economic, scientific and technological, and
military fields. The forces for world peace are on the rise, so are the factors
against war. In the foreseeable future, a world war is unlikely, and the
international situation is expected to remain generally peaceful. There are,
however, new threats from hegemonism, power politics and neo-interventionism.
International competition for the redistribution of power, rights and interests
is tending to intensify. Terrorist activities are growing increasingly
worrisome. Hotspot issues, such as ethnic, religious, border and territorial
disputes, are complex and volatile. Small-scale wars, conflicts and crises are
recurrent in some regions. Therefore, the world still faces both immediate and
potential threats of local wars.
With a generally favorable external
environment, China will remain in an important period of strategic opportunities
for its development, a period in which much can be achieved. China's
comprehensive national strength, core competitiveness and risk-resistance
capacity are notably increasing, and China enjoys growing international
standing and influence. Domestically, the Chinese people's standard of living
has remarkably improved, and Chinese society remains stable. China, as a large
developing country, still faces multiple and complex security threats, as well
as increasing external impediments and challenges. Subsistence and development
security concerns, as well as traditional and non-traditional security threats
are interwoven. Therefore, China has an arduous task to safeguard its national
unification, territorial integrity and development interests.
As the world economic and strategic center
of gravity is shifting ever more rapidly to the Asia-Pacific region, the US
carries on its "rebalancing" strategy and enhances its military
presence and its military alliances in this region. Japan is sparing no effort
to dodge the post-war mechanism, overhauling its military and security
policies. Such development has caused grave concerns among other countries in
the region. On the issues concerning China's territorial sovereignty and
maritime rights and interests, some of its offshore neighbors take provocative
actions and reinforce their military presence on China's reefs and islands that
they have illegally occupied. Some external countries are also busy meddling in
South China Sea affairs; a tiny few maintain constant close-in air and sea
surveillance and reconnaissance against China. It is thus a long-standing task
for China to safeguard its maritime rights and interests. Certain disputes over
land territory are still smoldering. The Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia
are shrouded in instability and uncertainty. Regional terrorism, separatism and
extremism are rampant. All these have a negative impact on the security and
stability along China's periphery.
The Taiwan issue bears on China's
reunification and long-term development, and reunification is an inevitable
trend in the course of national rejuvenation. In recent years, cross-Taiwan
Straits relations have sustained a sound momentum of peaceful development, but
the root cause of instability has not yet been removed, and the "Taiwan
independence" separatist forces and their activities are still the biggest
threat to the peaceful development of cross-Straits relations. Further, China
faces a formidable task to maintain political security and social stability.
Separatist forces for "East Turkistan independence" and "Tibet
independence" have inflicted serious damage, particularly with escalating
violent terrorist activities by "East Turkistan independence" forces.
Besides, anti-China forces have never given up their attempt to instigate a
"color revolution" in this country. Consequently, China faces more
challenges in terms of national security and social stability. With the growth
of China's national interests, its national security is more vulnerable to
international and regional turmoil, terrorism, piracy, serious natural
disasters and epidemics, and the security of overseas interests concerning
energy and resources, strategic sea lines of communication (SLOCs), as well as
institutions, personnel and assets abroad, has become an imminent issue.
The world revolution in military affairs
(RMA) is proceeding to a new stage. Long-range, precise, smart, stealthy and
unmanned weapons and equipment are becoming increasingly sophisticated. Outer
space and cyber space have become new commanding heights in strategic
competition among all parties. The form of war is accelerating its evolution to
informationization. World major powers are actively adjusting their national
security strategies and defense policies, and speeding up their military
transformation and force restructuring. The aforementioned revolutionary
changes in military technologies and the form of war have not only had a
significant impact on the international political and military landscapes, but
also posed new and severe challenges to China's military security.
…The strategic concept of active defense
is the essence of the CPC's military strategic thought. From the long-term
practice of revolutionary wars, the people's armed forces have developed a
complete set of strategic concepts of active defense, which boils down to:
adherence to the unity of strategic defense and operational and tactical
offense; adherence to the principles of defense, self-defense and post-emptive
strike; and adherence to the stance that "We will not attack unless we are
attacked, but we will surely counterattack if attacked."
The U.S. and China’s major neighbors will
have to live with these realities. No credible options exist for halting
China’s steady emergence as at least the second most important military power
in the world. There is no reliable way to estimate China’s military spending,
but the IISS Military Balance for 2016 is probably conservative in estimating
that China spent $145.6 billion on military forces in 2015 – this is only 24%
of the $597.5 billion that the U.S. spent, but it is 2.2 times the $65.6
billion the IISS estimates that Russia spent, and 2.6 times the $56.2 billion
the U.K. – the largest European power spent.
It is also all too possible that SIPRI is
more correct than the IISS in estimating that China’s real spending was $215
billion, not $145.6 billion – and China has far lower personnel costs and only
one key region to deal with – Asia – while the U.S. must project power at far
longer distances to Europe and the Middle East as well as Asia.
The practical challenge for the U.S. and
China’s major neighbors is to find ways that both deter China from exercising
its growing power and give it clear incentives to seek cooperation where
competition poses the dangers of conflict. It is to make it clear to China that
the steady expansion of its military forces will be countered by a credible
collective reaction, and that China cannot win any local conflict in ways that
will not lead to a continuing military buildup by other states and an arms race
it cannot win nor afford if it is to bring a reasonable level of
development and wealth to its people.
This, however, requires forms of U.S.
leadership that presently are sadly lacking. The Obama Administration has
talked about a “rebalancing to Asia” without shaping or funding any clear path
to implementing it. Vague unfunded rhetoric is not a strategy, particularly
when China and the world are all too well aware of the near strategic paralysis
imposed by having to deal with Russia and the Middle East as well; as the
threat imposed by a Congress whose idea of strategy is the Budget Control Act.
It requires the kind of public U.S. debate
over options that neither party seems able to even begin to attempt in this election
year, in what seems doomed to become both the nastiest and shallowest campaign
in modern American history. It requires the U.S. to have longer-term force and
modernization plans tied to given strategic requirements rather than vague
global goals and a budget cycle that cannot look beyond a one fiscal year
future.
It requires a debate over the strategic meaning civil policies like the
Trans-Pacific Partnership, rather than focusing on promise of saving jobs that
are not really linked to the TPP and cannot be met. It also requires as much
focus on options to cooperate with China as to compete with, and deter it – a
kind of strategic vision that should be the other half of any coherent U.S.
strategy for the region. It also requires the U.S. to think hard about some of
its criticism of its allies. Our allies are scarcely without flaws, but no one
follows where no one leads.
For a more detailed discussion of China
strategy, see Anthony H. Cordesman and Joseph Kendall, Evolving Strategies In The China-U.S. Military
Balance, (Being added now) and Chinese Military Organization and Reform,
https://www.csis.org/analysis/chinese-military-organization-and-reform.
Anthony H. Cordesman holds the Arleigh A.
Burke Chair in Strategy at CSIS. His current projects include ongoing
analysis of the security situation in the Gulf, U.S. strategic competition with
Iran, the conflicts in Syria and Iraq, a net assessment of the Indian Ocean
region, Chinese military developments and U.S. and Asian assessments of these
developments, changes in the nature of modern war, and assessments of U.S.
defense strategy, programs, and budgets.
Image: Defense Department
No comments:
Post a Comment