China threat?

[buglerbilly]

Chinese Buildup Of Cyber, Space Tools Worries U.S.

By JOHN T. BENNETT

Published: 13 Jan 2010 16:29

Senior U.S. officials told a House panel on Jan. 13 that China continues modernizing its missile, naval and fighter aircraft arsenals at a rapid rate, but they raised new concerns about the Asian giant's efforts to develop new offensive cyber and space assets.

Wallace Gregson, assistant secretary of defense for Asian and Pacific security affairs, said the U.S. is seeing China emerge as an international space power. (AFP) "U.S. military and government networks and computer systems continue to be the target of intrusions that appear to have originated from within [the Peoples' Republic of China]," Adm. Robert Willard, U.S. Pacific Command chief, told the House Armed Services Committee. "Although most intrusions focus on exfiltrating data, the skills being demonstrated would also apply to wartime computer network attacks," he said.

Beijing shows no signs of slowing what Willard described as a decade-long "aggressive program of military modernization" tailored to "achieve campaign objectives across a broad spectrum of operations."

And increasingly, that includes new tools designed to project Chinese power across greater distances, striking American information networks, and developing what the Pentagon believes are offensive space systems, according to Willard and Wallace Gregson, assistant secretary of defense for Asian and Pacific security affairs.

China's Peoples' Liberation Army is making "significant strides" in developing cyberwarfare concepts that range from defending Chinese networks to conducting "offensive operations against adversary networks," Gregson told the committee.

The latter, he said, is seen by the Pentagon as part of a broader effort by Beijing "of developing an advanced information warfare capability to establish control of an adversary's information flow and maintain dominance of the battlespace."

While the officials testifying said it remains unclear if the Chinese military was behind attacks on U.S. networks that were launched from China, Gregson called such electronic strikes "consistent with authoritative PLA military writings on the subject." Beijing also is expanding its activities beyond the Earth's atmosphere, the U.S. officials told the lawmakers.

"We are seeing China's emergence as an international space power," Gregson said. "China is investing heavily in a broad range of military and dual-use space programs, including reconnaissance, navigation and timing, and communication satellites, as well as its manned program."

The PLA also is working on tools designed to deny potential foes the ability to use their own satellites, he said, via a "a robust and multidimensional counterspace program featuring direct ascent anti-satellite weapons, directed energy weapons and satellite communication jammers."

Gregson cited China's January 2007 satellite shot-down as an example of its "growing" ability to take out space systems.

The Asian power's cyber and space efforts are part of a broader military build-up Washington and the rest of the world contends remains behind Beijing's steel curtain of secrecy.

Gregson noted China's announced 2009 defense budget topped out at $70.6 billion. Pentagon brass think the number actually comes in around $150 billion, or more, Gregson said.

Willard added: "The PRC's stated goals of a defense-oriented military capability contributing to a 'peaceful and harmonious' Asia appear incompatible with the extent of sophisticated weaponry China produces today."

According to 2009 data the Pacific Command chief presented the House committee, that weaponry includes 27 destroyers, 48 frigates, more than 70 patrol crafts armed with missiles, 55 amphibious vessels, 40 mine warfare ships and 50 support crafts.

What's more, "modernization programs have included development of sophisticated shipboard air defense systems, as well as supersonic sea-skimming anti-ship cruise missiles," Willard said.

China also possesses what he called "the largest conventional submarine force in the world, totaling more than 60 boats" to go along with "a number of" nuclear-powered fast attack and ballistic missile subs. The PLA, Willard contended, is also developing a new submarine-launched ballistic missile, the JL-2, which is "capable of reaching the West Coast of the United States."

The U.S. officials told the lawmakers China could have an operational aircraft carrier by 2012. Gregson raised concerns that "China may be interested in building multiple operational aircraft carriers by 2020."

Bollox! Even IF China has much beyond nacent BASIC training abilities for Carrier Ops, they are a minimum of 5-7 years away from INITIAL sea-going capability. To get TRUE offensive Carrier capability, you are probably talking about 10-12 years away..................

The PLA also has a "growing number" of multimission fighter aircraft, Willard said, adding the Chinese are focused on improving pilot skills in "multiplane scenarios, including operations over water." He said China has put "considerable effort" into fielding air-to-air and anti-air systems, and has developed an anti-ship ballistic missile to target aircraft carriers.

A larger portion of the Chinese Air Force are its own F-10s and Russian-made aircraft. These fourth-generation fighters, as well as China's improved air defenses, "have reversed Taiwan's historic ability to maintain dominance of the airspace over the Taiwan Strait," Gregson said.

This reversal will be further bolstered in coming years, he said, when the PLA fields even more modern aerial combat assets, such as aerial tankers that can refuel its fighter jets.

Panel members voiced concerns about China's build-up, as well as the Pentagon's plans for combating the Asian powerhouse.

Several lawmakers questioned the executive branch officials on whether the Obama administration was taking the potential threat from China's military seriously enough. Others sounded alarms about Beijing's recent moves to purchase control of vast amounts of the resources key to America's economic might, including rare earth minerals and oil.

The witnesses did not directly answer many of those queries, taking several, including one on rare earths, for the record.

[buglerbilly]

US announces $6bn arms sales to Taiwan

President Barack Obama's administration has confirmed that it will approve a $6 billion (£3.4 billion) arm sales package to Taiwan in a move bound to add to tensions with Beijing.

By Alex Spillius in Washington

Published: 8:38PM GMT 29 Jan 2010


Two US-made CH-47 helicopters of the Taiwanese air force transport military jeeps Photo: GETTY

The Pentagon's Defence Security Cooperation Agency has proposed to sell Taiwan 60 Black Hawk helicopters, Patriot "Advanced Capability" missile defences known as PAC-3, and mine hunters, though it did not meet Taipei's request for F-16 fighter jets.

China regards self-ruled, democratic Taiwan as a wayward offshore province subject to unification with the communist-run mainland and had urged Washington not to sell more arms to the island.

CBI calls on Darling to hold back borrowingThe move is sure to complicate already difficult relations between Washington and Beijing amid discord over trade, human rights, Internet censorship and climate change policy.

Shortly after the sale was confirmed, He Yafei, China's deputy foreign minister said the sale would "seriously harm" China's national security. He added that the move would have a "serious negative impact" on cooperation between Beijing and Washington.

The United States, Taiwan's main arms supplier, is mandated by law to aid Taiwan's self-defence, despite switching diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing in 1979.

The arms package was approved in principle by George W. Bush late in his administration, prompting Beijing to temporarily suspend military relations with Washington.

Gen James Jones, Mr Obama's national security adviser, indicated that the Chinese government had been fully consulted on the deal.

"We all recognise that there are certain things that countries will do periodically that may not make everybody completely happy," he said.

"But we are bent towards a new relationship with China as a rising power in the world, with influence on a variety of issues that go beyond the arms sales and go beyond military confrontation," he added.

The arms sales announcement may contribute to a bumpy year ahead in bilateral ties. Washington and Beijing have tangled over trade, cyber hacking and censorship of Google, Tibet and human rights.

Though the two powers are mutually dependent economically, China continues to irk Washington by failing to clamp down on intellectual property theft, undervaluing its current in order to make its exports cheaper and promoting import substitution measures that disadvantage foreign manufacturers.

[buglerbilly]

U.S. QDR Uses Veiled Language on China

By wendell minnick

Published: 18 Feb 2010 12:46

TAIPEI - The Pentagon's Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) makes little overt reference to China's military buildup. Missing from the 2010 version are several concerns of the 2006 edition, such as China's cyberwarfare capabilities, nuclear arsenal, counterspace operations, and cruise and ballistic missiles.

Instead, there's a stated desire for more dialogue with Beijing - and prescriptions for countering the anti-access and area-denial capabilities of unnamed countries.

Analysts say the QDR attempts to address the threat posed by China without further enraging Beijing.

"If you look at the list of 'further enhancements to U.S. forces and capabilities' described in the section 'Deter and Defeat Aggression in Anti-Access Environments,' those are primarily capabilities needed for defeating China, not Iran, North Korea or Hizbollah," said Roger Cliff, a China military specialist at Rand. "So even though not a lot of time is spent naming China ... analysis of the China threat is nonetheless driving a lot of the modernization programs described in the QDR."

Among the QDR's recommendations: expand long-range strike capabilities; exploit advantages in subsurface operations; increase the resiliency of U.S. forward posture and base infrastructure; assure access to space and space assets; improve key intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities; defeat enemy sensors and engagement systems; and increase the presence and responsiveness of U.S. forces abroad.

All of these could respond to China's development of anti-ship and intercontinental ballistic missiles, ballistic missile defenses, anti-satellite weapons and submarines.

The report does offer concerns about transparency: "The nature of China's military development and decision-making processes raise legitimate questions about its future conduct and intentions within Asia and beyond."

It urges building a relationship with China that is "under-girded by a process of enhancing confidence and reducing mistrust in a manner that reinforces mutual interests."

The new emphasis on confidence-building measures (CBMs) and military dialogue is in tune with President Barack Obama's strategy of offering an "open hand rather than a clenched fist," said Dean Cheng, a Chinese security affairs specialist at the Heritage Foundation. "This includes, it would appear, a greater emphasis on CBMs, arms control proposals and the like toward the PRC [People's Republic of China]."

Compared with the 2006 QDR, the new report makes no reference to Taiwan, but the reasons might be more pragmatic. "The issue of Taiwan has receded since 2006, as cross-Strait tensions have distinctly declined," Cheng said. "The QDR is reflecting that change."

Still, Beijing reacted with unusual fury to Washington's Jan. 29 release to Taiwan of a $6.4 billion arms sale, including Black Hawk helicopters and Patriot missile defense systems.

China canceled military exchanges, threatened sanctions against U.S. defense companies and publicized calls by some People's Liberation Army officers to dump U.S. Treasury bonds.

China had already sold off $34.2 billion in U.S. securities in December, lowering its total holdings from $789.6 billion to $755.4 billion, but that appears unrelated to the arms sale.

E-mail: wminnick@defensenews.com.

[buglerbilly]

China PLA officer urges challenging U.S. dominance

Sun, Feb 28 23:11 PM EST

By Chris Buckley

BEIJING (Reuters) - China should build the world's strongest military and move swiftly to topple the United States as the global "champion," a senior Chinese PLA officer says in a new book reflecting swelling nationalist ambitions.

The call for China to abandon modesty about its global goals and "sprint to become world number one" comes from a People's Liberation Army (PLA) Senior Colonel, Liu Mingfu, who warns that his nation's ascent will alarm Washington, risking war despite Beijing's hopes for a "peaceful rise."

"China's big goal in the 21st century is to become world number one, the top power," Liu writes in his newly published Chinese-language book, "The China Dream."

"If China in the 21st century cannot become world number one, cannot become the top power, then inevitably it will become a straggler that is cast aside," writes Liu, a professor at the elite National Defense University, which trains rising officers.

His 303-page book stands out for its boldness even in a recent chorus of strident Chinese voices demanding a hard shove back against Washington over trade, Tibet, human rights, and arms sales to Taiwan, the self-ruled island Beijing claims as its own.

"As long as China seeks to rise to become world number one ... then even if China is even more capitalist than the U.S., the U.S. will still be determined to contain it," writes Liu.

Rivalry between the two powers is a "competition to be the leading country, a conflict over who rises and falls to dominate the world," says Liu. "To save itself, to save the world, China must prepare to become the (world's) helmsman."

"The China Dream" does not represent government policy, which has been far less strident about the nation's goals.

Liu's book testifies to the homegrown pressures on China's Communist Party leadership to show the country's fast economic growth is translating into greater sway against the West, still mired in an economic slowdown.

The next marker of how China's leaders are handling these swelling expectations may come later this week, when the government is likely to announce its defense budget for 2010, after a 14.9 percent rise last year on the one in 2008.

"This book represents my personal views, but I think it also reflects a tide of thought," Liu told Reuters in an interview. "We need a military rise as well as an economic rise."

Another PLA officer has said this year's defense budget should send a defiant signal to Washington after the Obama administration went ahead in January with long-known plans to sell $6.4 billion worth of arms to Taiwan.

"I think one part of 'public opinion' that the leadership pays attention to is elite opinion, and that includes the PLA," said Alan Romberg, an expert on China and Taiwan at the Henry L. Stimson Center, an institute in Washington D.C.

"I think the authorities are seeking to keep control of the reaction, even as they need to take (it) into account," Romberg said in an emailed response to questions.

Liu argues that China should use its growing revenues to become the world's biggest military power, so strong the United States "would not dare and would not be able to intervene in military conflict in the Taiwan Strait."

"If China's goal for military strength is not to pass the United States and Russia, then China is locking itself into being a third-rate military power," he writes. "Turn some money bags into bullet holders."

China's leaders do not want to jeopardize ties with the United States, a key trade partner and still by far the world's biggest economy and military power.

Yet Chinese public ire, echoed on the Internet, means policy-makers have to tread more carefully when handling rival domestic and foreign demands, said Jin Canrong, a professor of international relations at Renmin University in Beijing.

"Chinese society is changing, and you see that in all the domestic views now on what China should do about the United States," said Jin. "If society demands a stronger stance, ignoring that can bring a certain cost."

Liu's book was officially published in January, but is only now being sold in Beijing bookstores.

LIGHTING A FIRE IN AMERICA'S BACKYARD

In recent months, strains have widened between Beijing and Washington over trade, Internet controls, climate change, U.S. arms sales to Taiwan and President Barack Obama's meeting with Tibet's exiled leader, the Dalai Lama, who China reviles.

China has so far responded with angry words and a threat to sanction U.S. companies involved in the Taiwan arms sales. But it has not acted on that threat and has allowed a U.S. aircraft carrier to visit Hong Kong.

Over the weekend, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao said he wanted trade friction with the United States to ease. U.S. Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg is due to visit Beijing this week.

Liu and other PLA officers, however, say they see little chance of avoiding deepening rivalry with the United States, whether peaceful or warlike.

"I'm very pessimistic about the future," writes another PLA officer, Colonel Dai Xu, in another recently published book that claims China is largely surrounded by hostile or wary countries beholden to the United States.

"I believe that China cannot escape the calamity of war, and this calamity may come in the not-too-distant future, at most in 10 to 20 years," writes Dai.

"If the United States can light a fire in China's backyard, we can also light a fire in their backyard," warns Dai.

Liu said he hoped China and the United States could manage their rivalry through peaceful competition.

"In his State of the Union speech, Obama said the United States would never accept coming second-place, but if he reads my book he'll know China does not want to always be a runner-up," said Liu in the interview.

(Editing by Benjamin Kang Lim and Jeremy Laurence)

[Riđđu]

China prepares for an ice-free Arctic

SIPRI

For immediate release (Stockholm/Oslo) China is preparing for the Arctic being navigable during summer months. An ice-free Arctic would provide China shorter shipping routes, possible access to natural resources and the incentive for closer cooperation with Arctic nations, especially the Nordic countries. But it also raises the possibility of new international tensions, according to a new SIPRI study launched in Oslo today.

The report, entitled ‘China prepares for an ice-free Arctic’, is based on groundbreaking findings by a Western researcher on China’s evolving approach to the Arctic. The author, SIPRI’s Beijing-based Linda Jakobson, has used her unique access to Chinese officials, scholars and primary sources to assess China’s Arctic interests in: (a) shortened trade routes to European and North American markets, and (b) possible access to untapped natural resources to fuel China’s economy.

‘China is slowly but steadily recognizing the commercial and strategic opportunities that will arise from an ice-free Arctic’, explains Jakobson. ‘A few Chinese researchers already question China’s natural sciences-approach to Arctic research and encourage the Chinese Government to make comprehensive plans. These researchers are critical of China’s neutral position toward Arctic politics. But the government does not want to alarm the Arctic states and therefore is cautious in its Arctic policies.’

In China’s eyes the Northern Sea Route raises the value of Nordic countries

As China’s economy relies on foreign trade—with nearly half of its GDP dependent on shipping—there could be much to gain if the shipping route from Shanghai to Hamburg is shortened by 6400 km during the summer each year. With insurance costs on the traditional route via the Suez Canal having risen more than tenfold due to piracy, the Nordic countries could become China’s new gateway to Europe. From China’s viewpoint, an ice-free Arctic will increase the value of close ties with the Nordic countries.

China seeks a more active role in the Arctic Council

The Chinese Government has allocated extra resources to Arctic research and decided to build a new high-tech polar expedition ice-breaker. It also seeks a more active role in the Arctic Council. China emphasizes that it would like to see any disputes over sovereignty of continental shelves resolved peacefully and through dialogue. At the same time Beijing encourages Arctic states to consider the common interests of mankind in the Arctic. Beijing can be expected to stress this position in the future. Jakobson recommends that Arctic Council nations actively engage Chinese officials and academics on all aspects of the Arctic, from climate change and maritime rescue operations to commercial shipping routes and resource exploration.

Report: http://books.sipri.org/product_info?c_product_id=402

[buglerbilly]

China's military bluster camouflages toothless bite

Ben Blanchard - Analysis

BEIJING

Mon Mar 8, 2010 11:06pm EST

BEIJING (Reuters) - Big on spit and polish and parades but short on experience, new technology and force coordination, China's military has far to go before its bite begins to approach its increasingly loud, and for some fearsome, bark.

China

China has invested billions of dollars in its armed forces and is developing advanced fighters and missiles, considering building its first aircraft carrier and is trying to slim its bloated ranks down to a lean, high-tech military.

The 2010 Defense budget unveiled last week was 7.5 percent higher than last year, a modest rise by China's recent standards, but impressive compared to other big powers.

Those rises have raised alarm in Taiwan, the self-ruled island China claims as its own, the rest of the region, and especially in the United States, the world's only superpower with a military reach that far exceeds China's.

In a report to Congress published last month, the Pentagon said it was concerned by China's missile buildup and increasingly advanced capabilities in the Pacific region.

Yet while China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) looks increasingly fierce on paper, analysts -- and even Chinese army officers -- say it will be a long time before the country has the means to effectively challenge U.S. power, if ever.

"What is their readiness level? How effective are these things they've developed themselves?" said Drew Thompson, of the Nixon Center, a think tank in Washington.

"Is their indigenous technology really working, or does it simply exist like a lot of things in the Chinese system, on paper? I would posit it probably leans more toward the latter."

After a spike in tension that has stoked nationalist Chinese calls for a hard shove back against U.S. influence, some PLA officers are also trying to discourage chest-thumping.

"There's no way China can threaten the United States," Lt. Gen. Li Dianren, a professor at the National Defense University, told Reuters on the sidelines of the annual session of parliament.

"Anyone with even a bit of common sense knows that our capabilities do not come even close to matching those of the U.S. In terms of economics, technology and the military, the gap is huge. How can we threaten them?" he added.

A BIG PARADE

To be sure, China's military is becoming increasingly assertive, as seen by occasional tiffs at sea and in the air, notably in 2001 when a U.S. spy plane made an emergency landing on Hainan island after a collision with a Chinese fighter jet.

Last March, the Pentagon said five Chinese ships harassed the U.S. Navy Ship the Impeccable, an unarmed ocean surveillance vessel, in international waters off Hainan. China says the U.S. ship was carrying out an illegal survey.

PLA showmanship is also grand.

A military parade last October 1 marking 60 years since the founding of the People's Republic of China featured an array of new weapons, all domestically developed.

"China and the United States are rivals. That's a fact," said Liu Mingfu, author of a book calling for China to develop a military so powerful Washington will not dare challenge it.

"In the past, U.S. presidents didn't call China a rival, and Chinese presidents never have. But that's strategic hypocrisy, because each side knows the other is a rival," he said.

Many practical hurdles could hamper Liu's goal.

China is hardly renowned for producing high quality goods, as a series of product safety scandals in recent years has shown.

"If you go to the PLA and they show you some fantastic new missile on display at an air show, yes they have a missile system, but does it work? Does it work repeatedly and does it work in combat conditions?" Thompson said.

"Until you know that for sure you simply assume they've got one heck of an interesting platform that might do us some harm ... but the reality might be far different."

OTHER PROBLEMS

One problem is the U.S. and EU arms embargo against China following the 1989 military crackdown on the pro-democracy Tiananmen protests, and there is little sign they will lift it any time soon.

There's also inexperience.

Unlike the United States, currently engaged in two massive military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, China has not engaged in full battle for three decades.

China's last major confrontation was with Vietnam in 1979, and that was hardly a glorious victory. Chinese forces crossed the border to punish Hanoi for invading its ally Cambodia, but Vietnam's battle-hardened troops gave the Chinese a bloody nose.

China has made some impressive technological advances. The successful missile "kill" of an old satellite in 2007 represented a new level of ability. In January, China successfully tested emerging technology aimed at destroying missiles in mid-air.

Integrating such advances into the country's vast armed forces could be problematic though.

"The (Sichuan) earthquake in 2008 showed their weakness in joint operations," said Lin Chong-Pin, a strategic studies professor at Taipei's Tamkang University.

After the massive quake, Chinese soldiers involved in rescue efforts struggled with shortages and bottlenecks magnified by poor coordination between forces and units.

China's military edge over tech powerhouse Taiwan, a democratic island Beijing has threatened to eventually bring under its control, is growing though.

Even then, not everyone is convinced China could easily overpower Taiwan, despite its advancing weaponry.

"The point is to make the U.S. military stay at a distance," said Hsu Yung-ming, a political science professor at Taipei's Soochow University, referring to China's military modernization.

(Additional reporting by Chris Buckley in Beijing and Ralph Jennings in Taipei; Editing by Benjamin Kang Lim)

[buglerbilly]

Chinese defence budget prompts mixed market response

By Jon Grevatt

09 March 2010

China's defence budget rise was greeted with an indifferent response on the country's stock exchanges on 5 March as the value of the country's listed defence companies varied between modest gains and losses.

The reaction is notable because previous defence-related announcements and events in China - such as the publication of the defence White Paper in January 2009, the People's Liberation Army's 60th anniversary parade in September 2009, and previous double-digit budget increases - all saw high growth across the board.

The spending increase announced by Beijing on 4 March reached 7.5 per cent, or CNY532.1 billion (USD78 billion). Although still considerable by the standards of most Western nations over the past two years, the rise signifies a significant slowdown from the increases of 14.9 per cent, 17.6 per cent and 17.8 per cent over the past three fiscal years.

The spending increase, which has been proposed to the annual session of the National People's Congress (NPC) for expected approval, is also less than what was predicted within China. For example, Xinhua state news agency said on 3 March that it anticipated a defence spending increase of 15 to 18.6 per cent to around CNY550 billion or CNY570 billion. The lower-than-expected rise has contributed to investors' subdued response.

208 of 861 words
Copyright © IHS (Global) Limited, 2010

[buglerbilly]

CSBA paper on countering the Sea threat..............

http://www.csbaonline.org/4Publications/PubLibrary/R.20100219.Why_AirSea_Battle/R.20100219.Why_AirSea_Battle.pdf

[buglerbilly]

Imagining Smart Grid Adversaries, or "The Cascade Charade"

As most readers of the DOD Energy Blog can attest from direct experience, sometimes we manufacture enemies as placeholders for potential future enemies. Such was the case recently when a smart and well-intentioned student of Chinese origin, Wang Jianwei, published what he thought would be helpful findings for all students of complex, networked systems.

However, not long after, his work became known as a blueprint for Chinese attacks on the US power grid. How'd that happen? In order to understand who messed with the info and when, you have to follow the path of the information to detect when and by whom it got scrambled.

It begins with the the paper trail from Wang's article published in Safety Science: "Cascade based attack vulnerability on the US Power Grid" (which you can purchase in full for $31.50). The paper is found by a group called the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission and is presented as a threat brief to Congress. Ultimately, this reaches the New York Times with in the form of this article published on 20 March 2010.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/21/world/asia/21grid.html

My co-blogger on the Smart Grid Security blog, Jack Danahy bought the original paper and read the whole thing, before writing this post about the whole affair with a focus on the grid).

http://smartgridsecurity.blogspot.com/2010/03/grid-cascade-report-trap-or-training.html

Of course there are plenty of reasons to keep our eyes open and our guard up. Threats to our electrical insfrastructure can take many shapes, including, as RMI's Amory Lovins points out, squirrels.

http://dodenergy.blogspot.com/2010/03/lovins-on-dod-energy-opportunities-in.html

However, back to the paper that started this tempest. According to Wang and others:

We usually say ‘attack’ so you can see what would happen,” he said. “My emphasis is on how you can protect this. My goal is to find a solution to make the network safer and better protected.” And independent American scientists who read his paper said it was true: Mr. Wang’s work was a conventional technical exercise that in no way could be used to take down a power grid.
Assuming everything originating in China is a threat to the US ignores our current nearly inextricable economic inter-dependency. As it attempts to maintain its very rapid climb out of the third world, China's own energy challenges are staggering. And if climate change is one of your concerns, then the linkage goes even deeper. We have so much to work on; let's not let our insecurities get in the way of really improving our nation's energy security.

[buglerbilly]

Threat in Asia is anti-ship missiles

By Bill Gertz

The Obama administration's regional missile-defense strategy is designed to counter emerging threats like China's new anti-ship ballistic missile and other so-called anti-access weapons, a senior defense official said Monday.

Deputy Defense Secretary William J. Lynn III said during a speech outlining the administration's missile-defense priorities that "potential adversaries are planning to employ ballistic missiles in anti-access tactics."

Mr. Lynn did not name China, but the Pentagon has said Beijing's military is building a new 930-mile-range ballistic missile with a precision-guided, maneuvering warhead that will be accurate enough to hit aircraft carriers and other ships at sea.

The Pentagon has used the term anti-access weapons for missiles and other weapons that can keep U.S. forces away from China's coasts, and in particular to prevent the rapid deployment of U.S. naval forces in the Western Pacific to aid Taiwan in any future conflict with China.

The Pentagon's recent four-year strategy review said one of the main priorities for U.S. military forces in the coming years will be to prepare to fight in "anti-access environments" that defense officials have said is mainly directed at dealing with China's growing military power.

The Pentagon's 2009 report on China's military said that since 2000 Beijing has been building anti-ship ballistic missiles as part of "increasingly credible, layered offensive combat power across its borders and into the Western Pacific."

"Like asymmetric threats, anti-access tactics are designed to offset our conventional dominance," Mr. Lynn said. "The proliferation of short- and medium-range ballistic missiles will put U.S. forces on land and at sea at increasing risk of ballistic missile attack. This risk could push our forces further from the battlespace, compromising our ability to bring our conventional superiority to bear."

It was the first time the Pentagon has mentioned using sea-based and land-based mobile defenses against anti-access missile threats.

The deputy secretary stated that U.S. security guarantees to nations in East Asia and other states in the Middle East "depends on our ability to project power despite these threats."

"The reality is that we have entered a new and more complex era of hybrid threats, in which high-tech and low-tech weapons are being wielded by state and non-state actors alike," Mr. Lynn said.

[buglerbilly]

Gates says China's PLA may be trying to thwart ties

Adam Entous

SINGAPORE

Thu Jun 3, 2010 11:45am EDT


Defense Secretary Robert Gates speaks to the media aboard a military aircraft enroute to Singapore, June 3, 2010.
Credit: Reuters/Carolyn Kaster/Pool

SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on Thursday he believed the Chinese military was thwarting efforts to improve military-to-military relations in an apparent split with the country's political leadership.

China scaled back military ties with the United States after the Obama administration notified Congress in January of a plan to sell Taiwan up to $6.4 billion worth of arms.

In what some American officials took as a snub, China turned down a proposed visit by Gates aimed at mending fences during his trip to Asia this week.

U.S. officials have long described China as a "hard target" for intelligence-gathering. Gates, a former CIA director, acknowledged that the Pentagon was having difficulty reading the intentions of the People's Liberation Army (PLA).

"My opinion (is) that the PLA is significantly less interested in developing this relationship than the political leadership of the country," Gates told reporters on his plane as he arrived in Singapore to attend a major security conference.

"I'm disappointed that the PLA leadership has not seen the same potential benefits from this kind of a military-to-military relationship as their own leadership and the United States seemed to think would be a benefit," he said.

Gates is scheduled to meet his Japanese and South Korean counterparts but not a Chinese delegation, led by a general, at the summit in Singapore.

Some U.S. officials saw the friction with China as particularly worrisome given heightened tensions in the region after the United States and South Korea concluded that North Korea was behind the sinking of a South Korean warship in March.

Seoul wants the U.N. Security Council to censure North Korea for allegedly torpedoing the South Korean corvette Cheonan in March, killing 46 sailors. It was the deadliest military incident between the two Koreas since the 1950-1953 Korean War.

But Beijing, which is North Korea's only major ally and which fought alongside the North in the Korean War, has declined publicly to join international condemnation of Pyongyang, saying it is still assessing the evidence.

"UNPREDICTABLE"

Gates said his attendance at the Singapore summit was meant to convey the message that "we are a Pacific power and intend to remain a power in the Pacific."

He said Washington and Seoul were considering "shows of force," including anti-submarine exercises, to deter behavior by North Korea he termed "even more unpredictable than usual."

"I think having a conversation with the Chinese about North Korea would be helpful," Gates said. "But we're not interested if they're not interested."

Some U.S. military officials are concerned the international community's failure to respond in a forceful way to the sinking of the Cheonan will not only embolden North Korea but will undermine U.S.-led efforts to contain Iran's nuclear program.

"They can't be looked at in isolation," one U.S. military official said of North Korea and Iran.

In both cases, China has at times stood in the way of U.S. efforts to impose tougher penalties, officials said.

Gates and other senior U.S. officials have urged China to maintain military-to-military contacts partly as a hedge against misunderstandings or accidents that could lead to confrontations.

He said nearly all of the aspects of the relationship between Washington and Beijing were moving forward "with the sole exception of the military-to-military relationship."

The goal was a relationship that "doesn't move in fits and starts and isn't affected by every change in the political weather," Gates said. He described the PLA as "reluctant to engage with us in a broad level."

Gates acknowledged that arms sales to Taiwan may be part of the reason for the PLA's posture, but he said such sales went back decades and should not have an impact on ties.

"It has not inhibited the development of the political and economic relationship," Gates said of growing interdependence between the U.S. and Chinese economies.

"If they want to single out the military side of the relationship as the place where they want to play this out, then so be it," he said.

Some Pentagon strategists have voiced alarm at what they see as China's faster-than-expected military build-up, from powerful anti-ship missiles to an advanced combat jet that may rival the premier U.S. fighter, Lockheed Martin Corp's F-22 Raptor, within eight years.

Gates has sought to play down the risk, arguing that the U.S. military enjoys a lopsided advantage in fighters, warships and other big-ticket hardware. He described an open military dialogue between China and the United States as constructive and helpful.

"It helps to prevent miscalculations and misunderstandings and creates opportunities for cooperation," Gates said.

(Editing by Paul Tait)

[buglerbilly]

Gates: U.S.-China Military-to-Military Ties Need Work

(Source: U.S Department of Defence; issued June 3, 2010)

SINGAPORE --- The military-to-military aspect of U.S. relations with China has lagged behind progress in other areas and falls short of what the leaders of both countries have said they want, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said here today.

Shortly before arriving in Singapore to attend the “Shangri-La Dialogue” Asia security conference, Gates told reporters traveling with him that he had hoped to visit China while he was in the region, but that Chinese officials said it isn’t a good time.

He said he’d heard rumors for weeks that the potential visit wasn’t going to happen, but that he’d waited for formal word from the Chinese during the recent security and economic dialogue before the trip was removed from plans for his itinerary.

“I did not want to take a step that made it look like I was cancelling the visit,” he said, “and so I waited until we got something more official from the Chinese side.”

Gates said he believes a more-open dialogue with the Chinese about military modernization programs and about the two nations’ strategic views of the world would be constructive.

“We have had such a dialogue with Russia for over 30 years,” he said, “and I think it helps to prevent miscalculations and misunderstandings and creates opportunities for cooperation. So I’m disappointed that the [People’s Liberation Army] leadership has not seen the same potential benefits from this kind of a military-to-military relationship as their own leadership and the United States seem to think would be of benefit. So we’ll just wait and see.”

Asked whether he believes China is trying to make a point about U.S. arms sales to Taiwan, Gates pointed out that those arms sales have been going on for 30 years and were part of the process toward normalization of relations between the two countries.

“Central to our ability to go forward with normalization in 1979,” he said, “was the passage of the Taiwan Relations Act, which mandated that the United States maintain the defenses of Taiwan, and we have sold weapons to Taiwan ever since.

“This is not new news to the Chinese,” he continued. “And the sales under the Bush administration and under the Obama administration in both cases were carefully calibrated to keep them on the defensive side. So it depends on whether the Chinese want to make a big deal of it or not, but the reality is these arms sales go back to the beginning of the relationship, and were one of the conditions that came through the Congress as part of the normalization process.”

Gates said the arms sales have not inhibited development of the political and economic relationships between the United States and China.

“If they want to single out the military side of the relationship as the place where they want to play this out, then so be it,” the secretary said. “But it has not impeded the development of the relationship in other areas.”

Gates noted that President Barack Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao have advocated a “sustainable and reliable” relationship between their nations’ militaries.

“I think they mean a relationship that doesn’t move in fits and starts and isn’t affected by every change in the political weather,” he said, “and that’s where I would like to see this relationship go.”

The secretary said he believes the People’s Liberation Army could do more to advance its military-to-military relationship with the United States.

“I would just express it as my opinion that the PLA is significantly less interested in developing this relationship than the political leadership in the country,” he said.

-ends-

[buglerbilly]

At Shangri-La Dialogue, Gates Challenges China To Improve Military Relations

By WENDELL MINNICK

Published: 6 Jun 2010 10:19

SINGAPORE - U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has cautioned that China's continued refusal to restart military-to-military exchanges was counterproductive.


U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates walks to the podium June 5 to deliver a speech during the International Institute for Strategic Studies Asia Security Summit in Singapore. (ROSLAN RAHMAN / AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE)

China cancelled exchanges after the U.S. released a $6 billion arms package to Taiwan in January.

We need "sustained and reliable military-to-military contacts at all levels that reduce miscommunication, misunderstanding and miscalculation," he said. "There is a real cost to any absence of military-to-military relations."

Gates made the comments June 5 in a speech at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) 9th Asia Security Summit, the Shangri-La Dialogue.

In November, U.S. President Barack Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao made a "commitment to advance sustained and reliable military-to-military relations."

In October, during a visit to Washington by Chinese Gen. Xu Caihou, vice chairman of the Central Military Commission, Gates and Xu agreed to "seven points of consensus" on expanding and improving military cooperation and exchanges.

These included high-level mutual visits and exchanges of military officials, cooperation on humanitarian missions, broader communication on land forces and maritime security, and exchanges of junior officers. There was also an agreement to conduct a joint air-sea search and rescue exercise.

Regrettably, there has been no progress in recent months, Gates said. "Chinese officials have broken off interactions between our militaries, citing U.S. arms sales to Taiwan as the rationale," he said, adding that it made "little sense" to repeatedly interrupt dialogue and exchanges to the "vagaries of political weather."

Gates said arms sales to Taiwan "are nothing new" and the U.S. had "demonstrated in a very public way that we do not support independence for Taiwan."

"We strongly encourage the cross-Strait improvement in relations and perhaps a time will come when this issue will go away because of those improved relations, but we will maintain our obligations" under the Taiwan Relations Act, he said.

China and Taiwan are preparing for the signing of a major economic agreement, the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, allowing for greater trade and investment ties.

China has also done nothing to stop the military buildup "largely focused on Taiwan," Gates said, and that arms sales to Taiwan were in response to that threat.

Holding military-to-military relations "hostage" will not change U.S. policy toward Taiwan, he said.

Taking 'acquiescence' for granted?

"Too often times, American policy makers tend to take for granted Chinese acquiescence on U.S. arms sales to Taiwan," said one Chinese academic source, speaking on the condition of anonymity. "And that is something that has become increasingly counterproductive, if not dangerous, as the shifting balance of power, perceived or real, between China and the U.S. has unsettled the equilibrium of the game."

Defense analysts indicate China has roughly 1,300 short-range ballistic missiles aimed at Taiwan and is engaged in a major military build-up that includes new submarines, surface ships, fighter aircraft and long-range missiles.

Maj. Gen. Zhu Chenghu, director general, strategic studies department, National Defense University, directly challenged Gates, saying that arms sales to Taiwan "hurt China's core interests" and that the U.S. treated China an "enemy."

"I would like to state for the record that the U.S. does not consider China an enemy," Gates said in response.

"The irony is the odds of a conflict over Taiwan are declining due to improvements in cross-Strait ties between Beijing and Taipei," said Jonathan Pollack, a China specialist at the US Naval War College. "And as the Taiwan scenario goes away, the Chinese military is looking beyond Taiwan for new goals and missions."

Two schools of thought

Zhuang Jianzhong, vice director of the Center for National Strategy Studies at Shanghai Jiao Tong University, said Gates' speech indicated a strong desire for positive military relations between the two, but there are "two opposing voices in China, the hawks and the doves, debating the issue of military exchanges."

"It's not a generational debate, but a mix," he said. "Though I think that as time passes more reasonable voices will prevail sooner or later and military exchanges will be begin again."

There is clearly a division within the Chinese delegation visiting the Shangri-La Dialogue. A Chinese government official said military-to-military exchanges would "soon be back on track."

Pollack said China is "not set up for crisis management" and there has been no "real war" since the 1979 Chinese invasion of Vietnam.

"Many in the Chinese government see the risks, but the People's Liberation Army is a very conservative institution." On crisis management, Pollack said, "there is an absence of coordination in the system."

However, China's military has building up more experience dealing with other militaries recently during anti-piracy patrols in the Gulf of Aden. "With each deployment they become more confident," he said. But the "potential for trouble goes up as the lack of communication between each other drops," Pollack said.

Continued communication

Retired U.S. Adm. William Owens is a major advocate of improved military relations between China and the U.S.

"The military-to-military dialogue is not very good right now. A huge amount of goodness would come from continued dialogue," he said.

Owens, who served as vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the Clinton administration, created the Sanya Initiative to foster better understanding between the Chinese and U.S. defense community.

The initiative brings together retired Chinese and U.S. military officials for informal discussions on how to improve understanding.

Owens wants to "get past the talking points and build mutual friendships that last." It is the "personal interface that matters."

Owens said that the Hong Kong-based China-United States Exchange Foundation, a non-profit, non-government organization, backs the Sanya Initiative. The first meeting was on Hainan Island in 2008 and the second in Hawaii in 2009. A third is planned in China later this year, he said.

Critics of Owens have questioned his motives, but Chinese and U.S. delegates at the Shangri-La Dialogue said continued dialogue at any level might be needed to stop an incident from spinning out of control.

A U.S. government official at the Shangri-La Dialogue said China had not "answered the hot line" during previous crises.

The U.S. Defense Department and China's Ministry of National Defense installed a defense telephone link in 2008. During the late 1990s an executive-level hot line was installed between the White House and Zhongnanhai, the Beijing complex that serves as the Communist Party headquarters, in response to the 1996 Taiwan Strait missile crisis.

In 2009, Chinese ships in the South China Sea harassed two U.S. Navy survey ships, Impeccable and Victorious. In 2001, a U.S. intelligence aircraft, an EP-3 Aries, collided with a Chinese fighter and was forced to land at Hainan Island.

In both cases the Chinese did not answer the "hot line," said the U.S. government source. One Chinese delegate at the Shangri-La Dialogue said Beijing did not answer the phone because officials "were angry" and China "expressed its anger by not answering."

Chinese delegates at Shangri-La repeatedly stated the U.S. must discontinue surveillance missions in the South China Sea.

Gates said the South China Sea is an area of "growing concern."

"Our policy is clear: it is essential that stability, freedom of navigation, and free and unhindered economic development be maintained," he said. "We do not take sides on any competing sovereignty claims, but we oppose the use of force and action that hinder freedom of navigation."

Chronology

■ April 1, 2001: A Chinese J-8 fighter collides with a U.S. EP-3E Aries intelligence aircraft near Hainan Island. The 24-member crew was detained until April 11.

■ October 2006: A Chinese submarine surfaced near the USS Kitty Hawk carrier group during exercises near Okinawa.

■ March 4, 2009: Chinese fishing boats and maritime patrol vessels harassed the U.S. Navy survey ship Victorious. A second incident occurred in May with same vessel.

■ March 8, 2009: Chinese fishing boats and maritime patrol vessels near Hainan Island harassed the U.S. Navy survey ship Impeccable.

■ June 11, 2009: A Chinese submarine collided with a sonar array being towed by the USS John McCain near the Subic Bay, Philippines.

[buglerbilly]

In Chinese admiral's outburst, a lingering distrust of U.S.

By John Pomfret
Washington Post Staff Writer

Tuesday, June 8, 2010

BEIJING

On May 24 in a vast meeting room inside the grounds of the state guesthouse at Diaoyutai in Beijing, Rear Adm. Guan Youfei of the People's Liberation Army rose to speak.

Known among U.S. officials as a senior "barbarian handler," which means that his job is to deal with foreigners, not lead troops, Guan faced about 65 American officials, part of the biggest delegation the U.S. government has ever sent to China.

Everything, Guan said, that is going right in U.S. relations with China is because of China. Everything, he continued, that is going wrong is the fault of the United States. Guan accused the United States of being a "hegemon" and of plotting to encircle China with strategic alliances. The official saved the bulk of his bile for U.S. arms sales to China's nemesis, Taiwan -- Guan said these prove that the United States views China as an enemy.

U.S. officials have since depicted Guan's three-minute jeremiad as an anomaly. A senior U.S. official traveling on Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's plane back to the United States dismissed it, saying it was "out of step" with the rest of the two-day Strategic and Economic Dialogue. And last week in Singapore, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates sought to portray not just Guan, but the whole of the People's Liberation Army, as an outlier intent on blocking better ties with Washington while the rest of China's government moves ahead.

But interviews in China with a wide range of experts, Chinese officials and military officers indicate that Guan's rant -- for all its discomfiting bluster -- actually represents the mainstream views of the Chinese Communist Party, and that perhaps the real outliers might be those in China's government who want to side with the United States.

Guan's speech underscored that 31 years after the United States and China normalized relations, there remains a deep distrust in Beijing. That the United States is trying to keep China down is a central part of the party's catechism and a foundation of its claims to legitimacy.

More broadly, many Chinese security experts and officials view the Obama administration's policy of encouraging Chinese participation in solving the world's problems -- including climate change, the global financial crisis and the security challenges in Iran and North Korea -- not as attempts to elevate China into the ranks of global leadership but rather as a scheme to enmesh it in a paralyzing web of commitments.

"Admiral Guan was representing what all of us think about the United States in our hearts," a senior Chinese official, who deals with the United States regularly, said on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak with a reporter. "It may not have been politically correct, but it wasn't an accident."

"It's silly to talk about factions when it comes to relations with the United States," said a general in the PLA who also spoke on the condition of anonymity. "The army follows the party. Do you really think that Guan did this unilaterally?"

China's fear of the United States was very much on display this past weekend during the Shangri-La Dialogue, where Gates and his Chinese counterparts clashed repeatedly throughout the program.

Gates said it was unnecessary for the PLA to hold the military relationship hostage because U.S. arms sales to Taiwan are, "quite frankly, old news." The United States has provided military assistance to Taiwan since 1949, when the Nationalist government of China fled to the island after the Communist victory on the mainland; this assistance did not stop when Washington normalized relations with Beijing in 1979.

"You, the Americans, are taking China as the enemy," countered Maj. Gen. Zhu Chenghu. Zhu rose to prominence in China in 2005 after he warned that if the United States came to Taiwan's defense in a war with China, Beijing would abandon its "no first use" doctrine on nuclear weapons and attack the United States.

In January, Washington announced a $6.4 billion arms package for Taiwan, prompting China to downgrade its military ties with the United States. China's stance on the issue is part of a concerted campaign to change a foundation of U.S. policy in the region -- its security relationship with Taiwan. At the very least, Chinese officials said, they want the Obama administration to reiterate a commitment it made in a joint communique with China in 1982 to decrease arms sales to Taiwan.

The U.S. framing of Guan's speech and the entire PLA as being out of step with the times is significant, analysts said, because the Obama administration could fall into a trap of expecting more from China than it can deliver. On the plane back to the United States, for example, U.S. officials predicted that despite Guan's outburst, China would welcome Gates and that it would also begin to side with South Korea against North Korea following the release of a report in Seoul implicating the regime of Kim Jong Il in the deadly sinking of a South Korean warship on March 26. China did neither, and interviews with PLA officers indicate that the military is highly suspicious of the South Korean report.

U.S. officials have also expressed the hope that China would work harder to press Iran, for example, to engage in talks on its nuclear weapons program. The United States also wants China's cooperation on slapping new sanctions on Tehran. China has shown more flexibility on this issue, but it is still unclear whether it will ultimately support sanctions.

Chinese analysts say the Obama administration ignores what China calls its "core national interests" -- especially U.S. weapons sales to Taiwan -- at its peril.

"For years, China has opposed arms sales to Taiwan among other things, but we were never strong enough to do anything about it," said Cui Liru, the president of the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, a think tank run by the Ministry of State Security. "But our national strength has grown. And it is time that the United States pay attention."

"This is not just a talking point that can be dismissed by your government," he continued. "It is something that must be dealt with or it will seriously damage ties."

[buglerbilly]

The Limitations of China’s Defense Industry



I thought that Russian military official’s slapdown of the Chinese knock off of their Su-33 carried based fighter (Chinese designation J-15) was really interesting. Now, as I mentioned yesterday, this could all just be posturing for the global arms market, a bit of tainting the competition if you will.

Or, it could just be public griping over the Chinese stealing intellectual property from Russian aircraft builder Sukhoi. But then again, there is not much of a global market for carrier based fighters. Also, what the Russian official said about shortcomings in China’s aerospace industry resonates with what I’ve seen from other sources.

This 2005 RAND report, Modernizing China’s Military, though a bit dated, is one of the more analytically rigorous assessments of China’s defense industry that I’ve been able to find. Key sections:


“The limitations of China’s defense industries are reflected in the long production cycles for major defense systems. China’s JH-7 (FBC-1) fighter-bombers and J-10 (F-10) multirole aircraft, its most advanced indigenously produced military aircraft, were both under development for two decades. The JH-7 only recently entered into service for the PLA Navy (PLAN), even though it was first designed in the early 1970s. Despite the very long development times involved, the project is still dependent on jet engines imported from Britain—China has been unable to produce the engine on its own. The J-10 has just entered series production despite the fact that the program was initiated in the early 1980s, and the design is largely derived from Israel’s canceled Lavi fighter program (which in turn was based on U.S. F-16 technology).

Other sectors of China’s defense industry have exhibited similar, though perhaps not as acute, weaknesses as the aircraft industry. For most of the 1980s and 1990s, China produced no heavy naval cruisers or multirole destroyers with advanced air defense or antisubmarine systems. Until recently, China’s newest classes of surface ships were produced in very small numbers, showed few significant design innovations, and relied on imported equipment for critical subsystems, weapons, and sensor suites. Even China’s missile sector, which is often heralded as a “pocket of excellence,” does not inspire awe. The solid-fuel ballistic missiles and anti-ship cruise missiles for which it has made its reputation are comparable to systems fielded in the West in the 1960s and 1970s.”

If anybody out there knows of more recent assessments please do pass any and all along.

– Greg Grant

Read more: http://defensetech.org/#ixzz0qMskqDBH
Defense.org

[buglerbilly]

The Russian slapdown mentioned above is here.............

http://www.w54.biz/showthread.php?401-Chinas-Navy-Gets-Its-Act-Together-and-Gets-Aggressive

[buglerbilly]

Ratcheting Up Rhetoric Towards China; South China Sea Emerging Hot Spot



There has been mounting frustration among the Obama administration and the military’s top leadership over China’s failure to do something, anything, about the North Korean lunacy; that frustration is now publicly coming out in the wake of the North’s sinking of the South Korean ship Cheonan and the sound of crickets from Beijing.

Last night, speaking at the Asia Society dinner in Washington, DC, Joint Chiefs chair Adm. Mike Mullen said he was “dismayed” at Beijing’s failure to put any real pressure on North Korea.

Then Mullen went further, questioning the motives behind China’s military modernization:


“[T]heir heavy investments of late in modern, expeditionary maritime and air capabilities seems oddly out of step with their stated goal of territorial defense. Every nation has a right to defend itself, and to spend as it sees fit for that purpose. But a gap as wide as what seems to be forming between China’s stated intent and its military programs leaves me more than curious about the end result. Indeed, I have moved from being curious to being genuinely concerned.”

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has also upped the rhetoric on Chinese military adventurism in Asia. We linked to this International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) brief on recent, and aggressive, PLA Navy operations and exercises in the South China Sea which territorial and fishing disputes with Vietnam. On a number of occasions, PLA ships have seized Vietnamese fishermen.

Gates doesn’t like what he sees. Two years ago, while speaking at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in Singapore, Gates had this to say about freedom of movement in the South China Sea:


“[W]e welcomed back in the mid-1990s moves toward a “code of conduct” among states with competing territorial and resource claims in South China Sea. We stressed then, as we do today, that we do not favor one claim, or one claimant country, over another. We urged then, as we do today, the maintenance of a calm and non-assertive environment in which contending claims may be discussed and, if possible, resolved. All of us in Asia must ensure that our actions are not seen as pressure tactics, even when they coexist beside outward displays of cooperation.”

Compare those comments to what Gates said at the same venue, IISS, in the same locale, Singapore, just last week:


“[T]he South China Sea is an area of growing concern. This sea is not only vital to those directly bordering it, but to all nations with economic and security interests in Asia. Our policy is clear: it is essential that stability, freedom of navigation, and free and unhindered economic development be maintained. We do not take sides on any competing sovereignty claims, but we do oppose the use of force and actions that hinder freedom of navigation. We object to any effort to intimidate U.S. corporations or those of any nation engaged in legitimate economic activity.”

Might not seem like much, but in diplomatic messaging terms between great powers, there are lines being publicly drawn.

– Greg Grant

Read more: http://defensetech.org/2010/06/10/ratcheting-up-rhetoric-towards-china-south-china-sea-emerging-hot-spot/#more-7610#ixzz0qSTYOy35
Defense.org

[buglerbilly]

Taiwan Deploys Sky Bow Strike Missile on Dongyin

(Source: Forecast International; issued June 21, 2010)

TAIPEI, Taiwan --- Taiwan deployed a surface-to-surface version of its Sky Bow 2 air defense missile on Dongyin, an outlying island near mainland China. Taiwan has held several islands near the mainland since the end of the Chinese civil war in 1949.

Taipei has a Sky Bow (Tien Kung) missile battery on the island outfitted with Sky Bow IIB surface-to-surface missiles. These missiles have a range of 600 kilometers, enabling them to strike targets as far away as Shanghai. Now, Taiwanese legislators are considering withdrawing troops from Dongyin in an effort to improve relations with China. Taipei could withdraw these missiles to convince China to remove its own ballistic missile force within striking range of Taiwan.

In addition to the missiles, Taiwan maintains a military force of more than 3,000 servicemen on Dongyin. Taiwan also has land-based anti-ship missiles with a range of 150 kilometers deployed on the island.

-ends-

[buglerbilly]

China asks Taiwan leave Dongyin for missile pullout: report

Moving of Taiwan troops from the rocky island could be considered: lawmakers

Taiwan News, Staff Writer

2010-06-22 12:00 AM Fonts Size:

Lawmakers gave a cool response to reports yesterday that China would withdraw missiles targeted at Taiwan if Taipei decided to withdraw troops from the small island of Dongyin.

The rocky island, populated by about 1,000 residents, is situated just northeast of Matzu and is Taiwan's northernmost point. There are 3,000 Taiwanese troops stationed on Dongyin, according to the Chinese-language Liberty Times daily.

U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein brought a message from China during her recent visit from Taiwan, saying Beijing would consider repositioning its missiles if Taipei withdrew its troops from Dongyin, the paper said. China has more than 1,000 missiles pointing at Taiwan.

Some lawmakers said the proposal could be considered, while others insisted it was up to China to make the first move and show goodwill toward Taiwan.

Opposition Democratic Progressive Party lawmaker Huang Wei-cher said the reported Beijing offer might be acceptable because moving and restationing troops and missiles could both happen quite quickly. In addition, China was only asking for a partial withdrawal, and not for a complete evacuation of Dongyin, Huang said.

President Ma Ying-jeou mentioned the demilitarization of the outlying islands of Kinmen and Matzu, close to the coast of China's Fujian Province, before, Huang said, so leaving Dongyin could be a first step to show goodwill.

He mentioned that in 1994, then-DPP Chairman Shih Ming-te once mentioned the demilitarization of Kinmen and Matzu as an option to improve relations with China.

However, Huang also pointed out that Feinstein had never been friendly toward Taiwan, and that the honor of pushing for a breakthrough in cross-straits relations should therefore be given to more pro-Taiwanese U.S. politicians.

Ruling Kuomintang legislator Lin Yu-fang said China should be the first to make a gesture, since Taiwan only had a couple of thousand troops left on Kinmen and Matzu. It was not the time for Taiwan to continue and show more goodwill, he said.

Lin said he met many U.S. Defense and State Department officials each year but had never before heard the suggestion about leaving Dongyin in return for a cut in the number of Chinese missiles.

The Liberty Times quoted unnamed generals as saying the island was strategically too important to give up. Control over Dongyin could help with closing off the northern access to the Taiwan Straits, the paper said. China had failed to obtain the ending of U.S. arms sales to Taiwan, so instead it was now concentrating on more achievable aims, according to the paper.

The Liberty Times also said a number of highly sophisticated missiles were stationed on Dongyin, including ground-to-ground missiles which could reach Shanghai 550km away. During military exercises, it had been concluded that during a war, Taiwan's fighter jets would fail to reach Dongyin safely, so it was essential to enable the island to continue the resistance against China on its own, the paper said.

[buglerbilly]

INTERVIEW - Taiwan overdue for F-16 jets, ex U.S. official say

By Jim Wolf

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States is "way past due" to meet Taiwan's request for updated F-16 fighter jets to help plug a growing gap with China, said a former U.S. official overseeing Air Force programs designed to help the self-governing island keep up its defences.

"Acquiring new F-16s, in my view, is about maintaining the very same deterrent capability that we helped Taiwan achieve in the late 1990s," Bruce Lemkin told Reuters in an interview.

Lemkin, who resigned on June 19 after nearly seven years as the Air Force's deputy under secretary for international affairs, led Air Force efforts to build partnerships worldwide. These included programs in Taiwan in line with a law that has governed U.S. arms sales to the island since 1979, when U.S. diplomatic ties shifted from Taipei to Beijing.

China regards Taiwan as a rogue province, subject to unification with the mainland if necessary by force.

Beijing halted military exchanges with the United States after President Barack Obama's administration announced plans in January for a potential $6.4 billion arms package, all but clearing the books on sales committed to since 2001 by former President George W. Bush.

Lemkin said in an email exchange that Taiwan's ability to defend its skies had "degraded appreciably" as 145 U.S.-supplied F-16A/Bs and other fighters have aged.

Mike Hammer, a spokesman for the White House National Security Council, said the Obama administration was working with Taiwan to evaluate its defense needs.

"In accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act, the United States makes available to Taiwan defense articles and services necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defense capability," he said in an email.

Taiwan has sought to buy as many as 66 Lockheed Martin Corp-built F-16C/D Block 50/52 fighters from the United States since 2006 to supplement the A/B models sold in 1992.

The Taiwan Relations Act, adopted in 1979, stipulates that the U.S. president and Congress shall determine arms sales "based solely upon their judgment of the needs of Taiwan."

Lemkin was a chief of the Asia-Pacific Division on the U.S. military's Joint Staff in the late 1990s. He hedged his comments on Taiwan's defenses in testimony to a congressionally appointed panel on May 20.

He said then it was important to look at Taiwan's integrated capabilities, not just its fighters. At the time, he emphasized a Raytheon Co surveillance radar that he said would be fully linked with Lockheed- and Raytheon-built Patriot missile defenses.

But he told Reuters that, now that he was free to discuss it, he considered an F-16 deal "way past due," alluding to the normal 36-month delivery delay after an order is booked.

The timing is important because the production line may be nearing its end. Lockheed's F-16 backlog will continue the line through May 2013 absent any new orders in the next six months, company spokeswoman Laurie Quincy told Reuters last month.

The F-16 is to superseded by Lockheed's radar-evading F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, a higher-performing warplane that is in early production stages.

F-16C/D models are "capable, versatile and would sustain Taiwan's self-defense capabilities for many years," Lemkin said.

Dan Blumenthal, the Pentagon's country director for China and Taiwan in 2004 and a member of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, said there was only one reason that an F-16 sale had been held up: Obama, not unlike Bush before him, does "not want to anger China."

(Editing by Chris Wilson)

[buglerbilly]

PRC's preparations to attack Taiwan accelerate: report

By Hsu Shao-hsuan
Staff Reporter, Taipei Times

Monday, Jul 19, 2010, Page 1

Despite repeated displays of goodwill by the government of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) since it came to power in 2008, China’s military preparations for an attack on Taiwan continue to accelerate, a report by the Ministry of National Defense’s intelligence research branch says.

The report says China’s military preparedness for an attack on Taiwan has never been relaxed and that if the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) launched a missile attack on Taiwan, it would destroy more than 90 percent of the nation’s political, economic, military and civil infrastructure. It also predicts the number of Chinese missiles aimed at Taiwan could reach 2,000 by the end of the year.

Although the government’s pro-Beijing policies have been strongly criticized domestically, the ministry’s decision to post the internal research report on its official Web site has raised eyebrows.

Lin Cheng-yi (林正義), a researcher at the Institute of European and American Studies at Academia Sinica, said following Ma’s accession to power, China has moved its military exercises from the coastal areas of Fujian Province to other parts of the country and that it no longer uses Hong Kong media to attack Taiwan.

Lin said that while this was intended to create a more relaxed atmosphere, in reality China’s military threat is constantly growing. The ministry sees through the smokescreen, continues to keep track of China’s military posture and therefore is remaining true to its responsibilities, Lin said.

Although China has reduced the number of military exercises simulating an attack on Taiwan, its activities in the South China Sea and in the waters north and east of Taiwan have been increasing, Lin said.

The report said that a June 1993 meeting of China’s Central Military Commission readjusted its strategic goals, unambiguously making Taiwan its main potential adversary.

Despite Ma’s rapprochement policies, top PLA leaders continue to emphasize in internal meetings that the use of military force must remain an option, the report says.

The PLA’s short and mid-term missile production plans have not been affected by detente in the Taiwan Strait, the report says, adding that the PLA’s missile arsenal targeting Taiwan could reach 1,960 before the end of the year.

A large number of recently decommissioned fighter aircraft have been turned into pilotless drone planes to be used together with Harpy anti-radar unmanned aerial vehicles purchased from Israel. These could help China punch holes in Taiwan’s air defense systems and destroy key targets.

Que? Sounds a bit "the Aliens are coming"............HARPY most certainly is dangerous and very capable, but the decomm'd fighters? I suppose as a radar bluff BUT how good they would be at controlling, even minimally tens if not dozens of unmanned second or third generation fighters is VERY open to question in my opinion............

China is focusing resources on developing satellite technology, the report says, adding that the number of Chinese satellites would surpass 60 before the end of this year. Of these, 14 would be Jianbing (尖兵) and Leidian (雷電) military surveillance satellites. The total would also include 15 Shentong (神通) and Fenghuo (烽火) military communication satellites, Xinnuo (鑫諾) broadcasting satellites and 16 Beidou (北斗) navigation satellites. These satellites will help the PLA wage integrated warfare and improve weapon accuracy.

The strength of the PLA Navy is also increasing. Its regular amphibious abilities have also increased, with transport capa*city reaching a full division.

[buglerbilly]

China May Boost Missiles Aimed At Taiwan To 1,900

AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

Published: 21 Jul 2010 10:36

TAIPEI - China could raise the number of missiles aimed at Taiwan to 1,900 by the end of the year despite warming ties between the former bitter rivals, according to the island's deputy defence minister.

Military experts estimate that the PLA currently has more than 1,600 missiles aimed at the island.

But recent media reports have said the People's Liberation Army may boost the number of short-range ballistic and cruise missiles facing Taiwan to 1,960 before the year's end.

"Judging from their manufacturing capacities, the PLA could increase to that number of missiles targeting Taiwan before the year's end," said Andrew Yang, an academic-turned deputy defence minister.

Although tensions across the Taiwan Strait have eased since President Ma Ying-jeou's China-friendly administration came to power in 2008, "Beijing has never renounced the use of force against Taipei," Yang warned.

Beijing has repeatedly vowed to invade Taiwan should the island declare formal independence even though Taiwan has governed itself since the end of civil war in 1949.

Yang did not discuss possible evidence indicating a missile build-up by the PLA. The perceived military threat has prompted Taiwan to launch war games simulating an invasion by China.

Taiwan's president has also vowed to build stronger armed forces to serve as a deterrent against aggression from Beijing, while also promising to push for a peace treaty to end more than six decades of hostilities.

[buglerbilly]

U.S. Senators Demand DoD Release China Report

By WENDELL MINNICK

Published: 24 Jul 2010 09:19

TAIPEI – Five influential U.S. Congressmen raised suspicions of White House interference in the delayed release of the Pentagon's annual report on China's military in a July 23 letter addressed to U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

The Congressional mandated report on the "Military Power of the People's Republic of China," is nearly five months late and the "lengthy delay is puzzling," said the letter signed by Republican Senators John Cornyn, John McCain, James Risch, Pat Roberts and James Inhofe.

The letter reminds Gates the "responsibility for this report lies with the DoD alone. We ask for your assurance that White House political appointees at the National Security Council or other agencies have not been allowed to alter the substance of the report in an effort to avoid the prospect of angering China."

"Anything less would risk undermining its very credibility."

The annual report, due March 1, has become a political football in relations with China, which angrily denounces each release. Analysts dissect the report each year looking for new clues about China's military modernization.

Observers point out that the annual report has been late on a number of occasions due to fears it would anger Beijing.

"In the past, it's been the case that a delayed or, in one year (2001), never published DoD report reflects the administration wanting to tone down the import of what DoD writes," said a defense analyst specializing on China.

This makes logical sense for a White House wanting better ties with China in the hopes it will cooperate on Iran and North Korea, the analyst said.

The letter raises suspicions the report is being held up for political reasons due to the fact that a "draft of the report was completed by the DoD several months ago."

Placating China does not seem to be bearing fruit. Military relations between the U.S. and China were canceled by Beijing after a January arms sale to Taiwan. The $6 billion package included Patriot PAC-3 air defense missile systems, Osprey-class mine hunting ships and UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters.

A planned visit by Gates to China in June was canceled by Beijing without explanation, but most observers attribute the slight to the January arms deal.

A joint U.S.-South Korean military exercise in the Yellow Sea scheduled to begin July 25 has raised cackles from the state-controlled Chinese media. This despite the fact the exercises are a show of strength against North Korean aggression and not aimed at China.

Observers note that Chinese protests over U.S. naval exercises in the Yellow Sea appear to be an overall strategy of area denial.

The Congressional letter quotes a 2010 paper by the Washington-based Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, "AirSea Battle: A Point-of-Departure Operational Concept," by Jan van Tol. China "appears to be purposefully developing and fielding operational military capabilities that challenge U.S. freedom of action in all domains – space, cyberspace, at sea and in the air."

The letter also makes use of comments by Admiral Robert Willard, commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, before the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee on March 26.

"China's interest in a peaceful and stable environment that will support the country's developmental goals is difficult to reconcile with the evolving military capabilities that appear designed to challenge U.S. freedom of action in the region or exercise aggression or coercion of its neighbors, including U.S. treaty allies and partners," he said.

[buglerbilly]

U.S. takes a tougher tone with China


South Korean naval ships follow the USS George Washington during joint military drills in the East Sea, also known as the Sea of Japan. (Lee Jung-hoon/associated Press)

By John Pomfret
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, July 30, 2010

The Obama administration has adopted a tougher tone with China in recent weeks as part of a diplomatic balancing act in which the United States welcomes China's rise in some areas but also confronts Beijing when it butts up against American interests.

Faced with a Chinese government increasingly intent on testing U.S. strength and capabilities, the United States unveiled a new policy that rejected China's claims to sovereignty over the whole South China Sea. It rebuffed Chinese demands that the U.S. military end its longtime policy of conducting military exercises in the Yellow Sea. And it is putting new pressure on Beijing not to increase its energy investments in Iran as Western firms leave.

The U.S. maneuvers have prompted a backlash among Chinese officialdom and its state-run press, which has accused the United States of trying to contain China. Yang Jiechi, the minister of foreign affairs, issued a highly unusual statement Monday charging that the United States was ganging up with other countries against China. One prominent academic, Shen Dingli of Fudan University, compared the planned U.S. exercises in international waters of the Yellow Sea to the 1962 Russian deployment of nuclear-armed missiles in Cuba.

U.S. officials explained the moves as part of a broader strategy to acknowledge China's emergence as a world power but to also lay down markers when China's behavior infringes on U.S. interests. So at the same time that the administration has welcomed China into the Group of 20 major economies, held the biggest meeting ever between U.S. and Chinese officials, and backed China's push to increase its influence in the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, it is also seeking to limit what it thinks are China's expansionist impulses. To this end, the Obama administration has also intensified its diplomacy and outreach to other Asian and Oceanic nations, ending a 12-year ban on ties with Indonesia's special forces and strengthening its alliances from Tokyo and Seoul to Canberra, Australia.

The strategy has won rare acclaim in Washington among the generally fractious community of China watchers. James Mulvenon, director of Defense Group Inc.'s Center for Intelligence Research and Analysis, called it "a masterful piece of diplomacy" in dealing with China, which, he said, "continues to be this paradoxical combination of bluster, swagger and intense insecurity and caution."

The decision to confront China on the South China Sea dates back several months, after administration officials noticed that the sea -- an international waterway through which more than 50 percent of the world's merchant fleet tonnage passes each year -- had crept into the standard diplomatic pitter-patter about China's "core interests." In March, Assistant Minister of Foreign Affairs Cui Tiankai told two senior U.S. officials that China now views its claims to the 1.3 million-square-mile sea on par with its claims to Tibet and Taiwan, an island that China says belongs to Beijing.

In addition, Southeast Asian nations had informed the United States that they, too, were uncomfortable with China's pressure on countries and companies interested in exploring for gas and other minerals in the sea. China had warned Exxon Mobil and BP to stop explorations in offshore areas near Vietnam. It had also begun routinely arresting or harassing fishing vessels from other countries, according to sources from the region.

The U.S. response was unveiled July 23 in Hanoi when 12 nations -- Vietnam as the first and the United States as the last -- raised the issue of the South China Sea at an annual security forum of the Association of South East Asian Nations. Calling freedom of navigation on the sea a U.S. "national interest," Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton offered to facilitate moves to create a code of conduct in the region. And then she said: "Legitimate claims to maritime space in the South China Sea should be derived solely from legitimate claims to land features."

Translated, it meant that China's claims to the whole sea were "invalid," said a senior administration official, because it doesn't have any people living on the scores of rocks and atolls that it says belong to China.

Foreign Minister Yang reacted by leaving the meeting for an hour. When he returned, he gave a rambling 30-minute response in which he accused the United States of plotting against China on this issue, seemed to poke fun at Vietnam's socialist credentials and apparently threatened Singapore, according to U.S. and Asian officials in the room.

"China is a big country and other countries are small countries, and that's just a fact," he said, staring directly at Singapore's foreign minister, George Yeo, according to several participants at the meeting.

On Monday, Yang issued a statement on the Foreign Ministry's Web site saying that there was no need to internationalize the issue, that China was still intent on solving all of the disputes bilaterally and that China's view represented the interests of "fellow Asians."

"After the meeting, about a dozen Asian delegates expressed their congratulations to the Chinese side," the statement said, despite what many in the meeting thought were clear indications that most of the participants supported the U.S. view.

The Obama administration has also pushed back on statements, particularly from China's People's Liberation Army, over planned military exercises in the Yellow Sea -- thousands of miles to the north.

The United States and South Korea have been planning the exercises after the March 26 sinking of a South Korean warship that left 46 sailors dead. An international investigation of the incident pointed to North Korea as responsible for the attack.

But then China inserted itself into the debate, claiming that any military exercise in the Yellow Sea would be seen as threatening to Beijing -- something that struck U.S. officials as unnecessarily complicating what was supposed to be a simple message of U.S.-South Korean solidarity in the face of an attack by Pyongyang.

On July 3, Gen. Ma Xiaotian, the deputy chief of general staff of the People's Liberation Army, told the Phoenix TV channel that "as far as these exercises are conducted . . . in the close proximity to our territorial waters, we strongly protest." Yet in November, the USS George Washington, an aircraft carrier, had been in the Yellow Sea without eliciting criticism from China.

In an attempt to cool China's ire, the administration conducted its first exercise this week with the USS George Washington in the Sea of Japan (also known to Koreans as the East Sea) farther from China's coast. But partly because China made an issue of it, a second exercise is also being planned -- in the Yellow Sea. U.S. officials also predicted that the George Washington will soon be back in the region -- this time in the Yellow Sea.

Finally, the Obama administration continues to push China over Iran. The United States won Beijing's support for enhanced U.N. sanctions on Iran in June after Tehran's refusal to halt its program to enrich uranium. As part of the deal, the sanctions were kept relatively weak, and China, which has substantial investments in Iran's energy sector and is Iran's third-largest oil customer, was exempted from many of them.

But now U.S. officials are concerned that as Western countries enact additional sanctions on Iran -- the United States, Canada and the European Union have all slapped on more in recent weeks -- Chinese state-owned energy firms will step in as Western and Japanese investments dry up, negating any possible effect of the measures.

"We're not done on Iran," said the senior administration official. "We are looking for maximum Chinese restraint."

[buglerbilly]

China: Taiwan Military Trust a 'Long Way Off'

By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

Published: 2 Aug 2010 11:36

BEIJING - China and Taiwan have a "long way to go" to build up military trust, state media said Aug. 2, after Beijing reportedly offered to consider removing its missiles pointed at the self-ruled island.

Defense ministry spokesman Geng Yansheng said July 30 that Beijing would agree to talks with Taiwan on military security "at a proper time" with an eye on trust-building, according to an official press conference transcript.

"This can be pushed forward step-by-step - first on easy issues, and then hard ones," he said.

The spokesman was quoted by the Nanfang Daily as saying after the formal briefing that the issue of China's missile deployment could be included in the future talks.

Geng however cautioned that such an offer was conditional on Taiwan's acceptance of the "one-China principle". Beijing sees the island as part of its territory awaiting reunification, by force if necessary.

Taipei - for which the "one-China principle" means surrendering its sovereignty to Beijing - rejected the suggestion, with Premier Wu Den-yih quoted in the press as saying: "We cannot possibly agree to what he said."

Taiwan again called on Beijing to pursue peace through dialogue and remove the missiles.

"This is the government's established policy and we'll continue conveying the thought to Beijing," the Mainland Affairs Council, which handles relations with China, said in a statement.

Lo Chih-chiang, Taiwan's presidential office spokesman, blasted the missile deployment and demanded that they be removed.

"Despite the fast improved ties over the past two years, China still targets Taiwan with more than 1,000 missiles. This picture is incongruous, and those missiles have hurt the feelings of Taiwan's people," he said.

Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou has repeatedly urged Beijing to remove the ballistic missiles, insisting Taipei is unlikely to conduct talks on political relations under the perceived military threat from Beijing.

China's Global Times - which is published by the Communist Party mouthpiece the People's Daily - said in an editorial Aug. 2 that Taiwan's reaction was "not completely surprising".

"When it comes to building military trust, the somber reality is that there is still a long way to go," the newspaper said.

It said the new proposal was "meant to reassure the people in Taiwan of their growing security, and also to give another push toward warming up cross-Strait relations", but warned points of contention remained.

"The deployment of missiles is to deter those die-hard Taiwan separatists," it said.

Military experts estimate that China has more than 1,600 missiles aimed at Taiwan. The island's deputy defense ministry told AFP last month that the figure could rise to 1,900 by year's end.

Taiwan and China split at the end of a bloody civil war in 1949.

Ma's Kuomintang administration is more China-friendly than that of his predecessor Chen Shui-bian, and since he took office in 2008 relations between the two former arch-rivals have improved significantly.

In June, the two sides signed the historic Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA), their most sweeping accord to date.

[buglerbilly]

MND denies report on China weapons removal 'wish list'

2010/08/02 20:25:55

Taipei, Aug. 2 (CNA) The Ministry of National Defense (MND) dismissed a media report Monday that said the military has begun planning a confidence-building mechanism with China and would issue a "wish list" asking China to dismantle weapons targeting Taiwan.

The ministry was referring to an article carried in the Monday edition of the Taipei-based China Times daily that said Taiwan's national security and military authorities had in late June secretly started preparatory work for forging a confidence-building mechanism with China.

Citing "authoritative government sources, " the paper said the military would not only ask China to dismantle its missiles targeting Taiwan but also ask China to remove command, control, communications and intelligence systems, warships and military aircraft targeting Taiwan.

In future negotiations, the paper said, the military will come up with a wish list detailing weaponry that Taiwan would demand China dismantle or relocate.

The MND, however, said in a press statement that the report was not true.

The ministry said that crafting a cross-Taiwan Strait confidence-building mechanism is a national issue involving national security, and that the military will strictly follow government policy guidelines that prioritize economic topics over political issues, urgent trouble over less hasty issues, and easy problems over difficult topics.

The military will coordinate with the government in promoting cross-strait exchanges, the statement added.

Lawmakers were divided over the newspaper report. Shuai Hua-ming, a ruling Kuomintang (KMT) lawmaker who used to be a senior army officer, questioned the credibility of the report.

"I do not think that the military would prepare such a wish list because Taiwan has no clout to force China to accept such demands, " Shuai said.

As to when Taiwan and China would start political talks after signing a landmark economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) last month, Shuai said he believes such talks would not begin any time soon.

"Taiwan would be willing to address cross-strait political issues only after the ECFA generates substantial economic benefits, " Shuai said.

Another KMT lawmaker, Lin Yu-fang, said the "wish list" overture was an MND response to China's recent proposal that issues concerning the removal of missiles targeting Taiwan can be discussed under the "one China" precondition.

"The MND has conventionally been cool toward China's missile removal overture because such proposals are empty talk given the fact that missiles are highly mobile and could simply be redeployed very quickly at any time," Lin said.

By floating a "wish list" proposal, Lin said, the MND was tossing a hot potato back to China.

Legislator Ker Chien-ming of the opposition Democratic Progressive Party said Taiwan does not need to respond to China's missile withdrawal overture because Taiwan should never come into cross-strait talks under Beijing's "one

[buglerbilly]

DoD Releases Annual Report On China’s Military Modernization



DoD finally released its annual report to Congress on the little that’s known about the Chinese military today and like previous reports its largely an exercise in bean counting. It points to the “limited transparency” and “many uncertainties” regarding China’s military modernization and acknowledges that due to a paucity of sources, studying China’s military strategy is an “inexact science.” Since the report is mandated by Congress, its authors go ahead and “make some generalizations.”

With those significant caveats in mind, I’m going to make some quick generalizations of my own about the report, titled “Military and Security Developments in the People’s Republic of China,” and provide additional analysis as I get a chance to read it more thoroughly as there’s a lot to digest.

First off, what is China’s military/security strategy? “China’s current strategy remains one of managing the external environment to ensure conditions are conducive to its own economic development,” the report says. There are internal debates, particularly in Chinese academic circles, on the best way to go about that, the report says. Some argue for a play it cool approach while others urge Chinese policymakers to be more aggressive on the world stage.

What is certain: China’s voracious raw material consumption is forcing the country to focus on securing its sea-lines of communication–up to 40% of crude oil destined for China transits the Straits of Hormuz and 80% transited the Straits of Malacca. While one eye focuses on the SLOCs, the other remains fixed on Taiwan, the PLA’s primary mission, the report says; although there is the occasional glance at U.S. carrier battle groups steaming around WestPac.

The report’s authors put Chinese military spending at $150 billion in 2009; in percentage terms, increases in Chinese military spending have closely tracked China’s GDP growth. Unlike the Cold War era Soviet Union, China is not bankrupting itself through huge defense expenditures.

The report points up China’s lack of operational experience, “the PLA remains untested in modern combat.” That absence of combat experience may explain some of the lack of sophistication in China’s doctrine and strategy vice what was seen in Soviet military doctrine during Cold War days (the Soviets had a very rich and innovative doctrinal heritage upon which to draw).


“China’s civilian leaders must rely upon the advice of commanders lacking direct experience in modern combat or upon “scientific” combat models divorced from the realities of the modern battlefield… Despite significant improvements, the PLA continues to face deficiencies in inter-service cooperation and actual experience in joint exercises and combat operations. Recognizing these shortcomings, China’s leaders continue to stress asymmetric strategies to leverage China’s advantages while exploiting the perceived vulnerabilities of potential opponents.”

Chinese military doctrine and strategy is still heavy influenced by 1991’s Desert Storm, the report says, which implies that the revolution in military affairs (RMA) line of thinking is a major driver. That certainly jibes with the PLA’s heavy investment in long-range precision strike. China is amassing a formidable guided missile arsenal with much of it aimed at Taiwan, although Beijing is looking beyond that scenario as it builds out its military.

– Greg Grant

Read more: http://defensetech.org/2010/08/16/dod-releases-annual-report-on-chinas-military-modernization/#more-8691#ixzz0wpCIrxR0
Defense.org

[buglerbilly]

Defense News report on the same subject.............

Pentagon: China Bolsters Projection, Anti-Access Systems

By JOHN T. BENNETT

Published: 16 Aug 2010 16:35

China's military build-up is increasingly giving Beijing the ability to strike targets at greater ranges and keep potential foes from entering its sphere of influence, a new Pentagon report says.


People's Liberation Army Navy sailors stand on the deck of China's Task Force 525 flagship missile frigate Ma'Anshan on April 13 in Manila, Philippines. (AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE FILE PHOTO)

"China's long-term, comprehensive transformation of its military forces is improving its capacity for force projection and anti-access/ area-denial," states the Pentagon's annual report on Chinese military power. Its ability to sustain such a move, however, remains limited, DoD notes.

"Consistent with a near term focus on preparing for Taiwan Strait contingencies, China continues to deploy many of its most advanced systems to the military regions … opposite Taiwan," according to the report, released Aug. 16.

Beijing's relationship with Taiwan is improving - but so is China's rapid military build-up.

"Cross-strait economic and cultural ties continued to make important progress in 2009. Despite these positive trends, China's military build-up opposite the island continued unabated," states the DoD report.

"The PLA is developing the capability to deter Taiwan independence or influence Taiwan to settle the dispute on Beijing's terms while simultaneously attempting to deter, delay, or deny any possible U.S. support for the island in case of conflict," according to the report. "The balance of cross-Strait military forces continues to shift in the mainland's favor."

As far as Washington and Beijing, the report stresses the importance of military-to-military relations. It also includes a quote from U.S. President Obama stating his belief that it is not "predestined" that America and China ever become adversaries.

The People's Liberation Army (PLA) possesses the "most active land-based ballistic and cruise missile program in the world," according to the Pentagon.

The PLA is working on new classes of missiles, setting up new missile units and upgrading existing weapons. That includes highly accurate land- and sea-based cruise missiles. Several of these designs were acquired from Russia, states the U.S. Defense Department report.

The Pentagon was several months late releasing the report, which typically hits the streets in early spring. Lawmakers in recent weeks have questioned the delay. DoD released the study in the middle of Congress' annual August recess; lawmakers will not return to Washington for several more weeks.

Some in Congress, especially defense-minded Republicans, have for years pointed to the Chinese build-up as the main reason to keep U.S. defense spending high enough to build the kind of robust force needed for a conflict with the Asian powerhouse.

In an Aug. 16 statement, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., did not go that far. But he did raise concerns about several aspects of the build-up, including the proliferation of Chinese missile systems so close to Taiwan.

"Conflict between our nations remains a possibility, and we must remain prepared for whatever the future holds in the U.S.-China security relationship," Skelton said. "At the same time, we must each be mindful that our actions can produce unintended consequences, and although cooperation is a difficult path, it is ultimately the path that is in both nations' best interest."

Meantime, the Pentagon said China also is working on new ways to counter enemy ballistic missile launches.

The PLA currently has more than 1,100 CCS-6 and CCS-7 short-range ballistic missiles positioned to counter Taiwan, some with "improved ranges, accuracies, and payloads," according to DoD.

The Pentagon also said China is working on an anti-ship ballistic missile, based on the CSS-5, with a range of more than 1,500 kilometers that is intended to counter enemy ships in the western Pacific Ocean.

Its DF-31 and DF-31A nuclear-armed ICBMs are live, and the latter "can reach most locations within the continental United States."

Beijing also is continuing its aircraft carrier program.

"China is interested in building multiple operational aircraft carriers with support ships in the next decade," the report states.

The PLA has "reportedly" launched an aircraft carrier pilot training program. DoD presumes it would begin with land-based instruction and "be followed in about four years by ship-borne training involving the ex-VARYAG - a former Soviet Kuznetsov-class aircraft carrier - which was purchased by China from Ukraine in 1998 and is being renovated at a shipyard in Dalian, China."

China's naval forces include some 75 principal combatants, more than 60 submarines, 55 medium and large amphibious ships, and roughly 85 missile-equipped patrol craft.

It also is developing systems, like advanced radars, to allow it to detect and track enemy platforms beyond the horizon, according to DoD.

The report says Beijing may eventually put to sea five of its "newest IN-class (Type 094)" nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine (SSBN).

The PLA Navy also has 13 Song-class diesel-powered attack submarines, and may field up to 19 Yuan-class attack submarines, the follow-on to the Songs.

China's surface combatant fleet, including the systems fitted on its ships, "reflect[s] the leadership's priority on an advanced anti-air warfare capability for China's naval forces, which has historically been a weakness of the fleet."

The PLA's air fleet is composed of nearly 500 combat aircraft, all of which are positioned to strike Taiwan without refueling, with "airfield capacity to expand that number by hundreds," states the report.

Beijing also is upgrading its B-6 bomber fleet, eyeing a new model that "will be armed with a new long-range cruise missile," DoD concludes.

The PLA Air Force also "has continued to expand its inventory of long-range, advanced SAM systems and now possesses one of the largest such forces in the world," according to DoD.

On the ground, China has nearly 400,000 troops stationed near Taiwan. The PLA is upgrading its land forces, too, adding more advanced tanks, armored personnel carriers and artillery systems, DoD concludes.

"Among the new capabilities acquired by, or under development for, PLA ground forces are Type 99 third-generation main battle tanks, a new-generation amphibious assault vehicle (AAV), and 200-mm, 300-mm, and 400-mm multiple rocket launch systems," the report states.

[buglerbilly]

Ares

A Defense Technology Blog

China's military growth not without hurdles

Posted by Robert Wall at 8/17/2010 3:15 AM CDT

When the Pentagon unveils its annual, congressionally mandated report on China’s military developments, as it did yesterday in the report found here, there is often much attention about advances the country has made in improving its military might, and particularly how it may have affected the balance across the Taiwan Strait.

But the report is equally interesting to see where China is encountering problems in building up its prowess. One is in the realm of strategic lift. The Chinese air force has “encountered difficulty expanding its fleet of long-range heavy transport aircraf,” the report states. The finding is not new to the 2010 report, but there appears no progress in addressing this shortfall.

Similarly, it is interesting to see the Pentagon's reaction to problems China has suffered in development of the JL-2 submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM). The missile, with a planned range of more than 7,000 km, has had several notable test failures, leading the Pentagon to conclude that “the date when the JIN-class SSBN/JL-2 SLBM combination will be operational is uncertain.” The submarine itself, the JIN-Class Type 094, “appears ready.”

Also uncertain is the operational status of the combination of the XIA-class ballistic missile submarinewith the JL-1 ballistic missile. China has one XIA-class SSBN.

Similarly, although China may start buildings an indigenous aircraft carrier already this year, the U.S. Defense Dept. estimates that “China will not have an operational, domestically produced carrier and associated ships before 2015.” That isn’t stopping China from hoping to have multiple carriers operational by 2020.

That said, there are also a few interesting advances to note. For instance, the Pentagon now puts the number of DF-31 and DF-31A intercontinental ballistic missiles at 30 units, having previously not put a specific figure on the inventory. It also notes that the number will grow by 2015.

The ballistic missile inventory for China has remained largely flat, although the number of CSS-5s has crept up slightly. That is also the missile the Pentagon is perhaps most concerned about, right now, because of efforts to turn it into a weapon to attack aircraft carriers. Although the Pentagon is watching the development it also notes that China will be challenged with providing such a weapons system the proper command and control backbone.

Overall, as a Pentagon official says in releasing the report: “there aren’t any new surprises or game changers.”

[buglerbilly]

Taiwan, Japan Vow To Keep Close Eye On China

By PETER HARMSEN, AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

Published: 17 Aug 2010 08:56

TAIPEI - Taiwan renewed its call Aug. 17 on the U.S. to sell it advanced weaponry as it joined Japan in vowing to keep a close eye on China's rising military power.

Taipei and Tokyo were reacting to the release of a U.S. Defense Department report which warned that China's expanding capabilities are changing the strategic balance in East Asia.

"We hope the U.S. can continue to supply Taiwan with defensive weapons in accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act, including F16 C/Ds, diesel submarines and other items we have requested," Taiwan defense ministry spokesman Yu Sy-tue said.

Taiwan has repeatedly stated its wish to acquire the F16 C/Ds - an upgraded version of the F16 fleet currently deployed by the island - and the diesel submarines, but the U.S. government has so far been non-committal.

Earlier this year, Beijing reacted angrily to an arms deal between Washington and Taiwan, saying it would cut military and security contacts with the U.S.

"China has not given up the use of force against Taiwan and we are closely monitoring China's military developments. We ask the public to rest assured," Yu said.

Using similar wording, Japan said it would "keep paying attention to China's military trend."

"It will have a significant impact on security in the region, including Japan, and on the international community," a defense ministry spokeswoman in Tokyo said.

"China is activating its navy in the East China Sea and in the Pacific," the spokeswoman said.

She said the defense ministry thought Beijing was extending its activities far offshore with the aim of protecting its territory, pre-empting Taiwan's possible independence and safeguarding its economic sea lanes.

China considers Taiwan, where the mainland's defeated nationalists fled in 1949, to be territory awaiting reunification, by force if necessary.

In April, Tokyo protested after a Chinese naval helicopter made a close fly-by of one of its destroyers on the high seas off a southern Japanese island chain during exercises Japan considered provocative.

A similar incident took place near the Okinawan islands in the same month when 10 Chinese naval vessels, including two submarines, were seen sailing through international waters between Japan's southernmost islands.

In its annual report to Congress, the U.S. Defense Department said Monday that China was ramping up investment in an array of areas including nuclear weapons, long-range missiles, submarines, aircraft carriers and cyber warfare.

The Pentagon paper estimated that China's overall military-related spending was more than $150 billion in 2009, including areas that do not figure in the publicly released budget.

[buglerbilly]

GDP Rank Leads To Pricklier PRC

By Dean Cheng Tuesday, August 17th, 2010 12:32 pm



With the announcement that the PRC has officially overtaken Japan as the world’s second largest economy, there is once again a perception that the People’s Republic of China is on the verge of matching, if not overtaking, the United States in terms of security.

While there are plenty of reasons to be concerned with China’s national security trajectory, the simple growth of the Chinese economy is not necessarily one of them. As ever, it is essential to keep in mind that China’s impressive economic gains occurs across a population that is still the world’s most populous (although India is rapidly catching up). Raw, general numbers of GDP size, as with population size, can be misleading.

Which is not to say that China’s economy is unimportant. As Chinese civilian and military leaders have long emphasized, military capabilities and the broader economy are inextricably linked. In recent years, the formulation “rich nation, strong army (fuguo, qiang jun)” has often been invoked.

The relationship, however, is a complex one. From the Chinese view, a strong, vibrant economy provides the wherewithal for a powerful military. Not only does it generate the financial wherewithal to supply a large military, but such an economy will almost always embody substantial industrial and technological capabilities. These are essential in order to sustain the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in the event of “Local Wars Under Informationalized Conditions.” Only an advanced economy can build the kinds of weapons systems necessary to fight and win such wars—systems equipped with advanced sensors, precision guidance systems, a variety of warheads, supported by unmanned aerial vehicles, space-based surveillance capabilities, and networked communications and data channels.

At the same time, however, the days when the PLA enjoyed automatic priority in the allocation of national resources are long past. Today’s PLA faces resource constraints, despite long enjoying double-digit budgetary increases. The priority, as Chinese decision-makers regularly emphasize, is on “national economic development (guojia jingji jianshe).” Military production is important, but it cannot come at the expense of improving the national economy. The implicit bargain is the construction of ever greater potential military power (as embodied in the national economy and the attendant scientific and technological base), while maintaining some limits on actual military power.

The ability to transition from potential to actual power has been boosted over the years, both through the growth of the economy, as well as such measures as the recent enactment of a National Defense Mobilization Law, which provides the legal and administrative underpinning for converting the civilian economy to military ends, should that need arise.

What this highlights is a fundamental tension in how the PLA, and the Chinese leadership writ large, conceives of future wars. Is the PRC expecting to fight short-duration (albeit violent) limited wars, as its doctrinal writings on “local wars” suggest? Or is the PRC planning for large-scale, sustained wars, in which case, it will have the time (and the need) for massive mobilization? Or might it be preparing for both?

For the United States and its allies, this is an essential question to consider. While it has become almost an article of faith among the literati and the intelligentsia that major conventional wars are inconceivable, the reality, especially in Asia, is that many of the basic reasons for past wars continue to cast a baleful shadow. Territorial disputes, ethnic tensions, unresolved historical animosities regularly roil Asian inter-state relations. The PRC is elemental to many of these (e.g., the territorial disputes over the South China Sea, longstanding historical problems with Japan). Similarly, due to its alliance structures, the US, too, has at least an interest in many of these issues. It is the overlap between Beijing and Washington’s concerns that have led to the sharp exchange of words regarding South China Sea dispute resolution and the Yellow Sea naval exercises.

China’s burgeoning potential military power, as embodied within its growing economy, is likely to affect Chinese perceptions of their own capabilities, and the degree of deference it feels it should be accorded by its neighbors. [Eds note: Remember the USNS Impeccable, pictured?] Insofar as Beijing feels it can apply economic and diplomatic pressure against its neighbors (consistent with its views of strategic deterrence or zhanlue weishe), its new rank is likely to increase its assertiveness.

From Washington, what is needed, but is unfortunately sorely lacking, is a consistent message to Beijing. The ongoing Yellow Sea naval exercises involving the USS George Washington carrier battlegroup, for example, occurs only after flip-flopping on whether the flat-top would operate in the Yellow Sea at all. Where the Chinese would likely have issued only pro forma protests in response to the original plan, the current exercises have aroused apoplectic responses from Beijing, in no small part because the Administration gave the Chinese the impression that it would not deploy the battle group to the Yellow Sea at all (by ordering it withdrawn to the Sea of Japan). Nor is such zig-zagging likely to reassure American allies.

In dealing with the second largest economy, it is to be hoped that American decision-makers can reach a consensus among themselves about what policy should be followed, and then adhere to it. It is what our allies, neutrals, and even the PRC would prefer to see.

Dean Cheng is an expert on the Chinese military at the Heritage Foundation.

Read more: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/08/17/gdp-rank-leads-to-pricklier-prc/#ixzz0wua1hoDz

[buglerbilly]

DoD’s 2010 Report on China’s PLA Military Modernization (II)



DoD’s new report on China’s People Liberation Army (PLA), “Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China,” says that the pace and scope of China’s military modernization has changed over the last decade. Given China’s blistering economic growth over at least the past two decades, it would be highly unusual if the “pace” of military modernization had not increased. What we should focus on is the “scope” of that modernization; those areas where China is putting the most resources in terms of modernization.

The PLA’s primary mission remains deterring moves toward Taiwan independence. China’s massive buildup of missiles and other forces opposite Taiwan is as much a political as military move; a classic strategy of coercion.

The more interesting initiatives are those aimed at bolstering China’s regional and global ambitions. Chinese decision-makers remain heavily influenced by the 1995–1996 Taiwan Strait crisis when the U.S. sailed two carrier strike groups into the area. Much of China’s force modernization is intended to make sure that doesn’t happen again; hence, the much discussed anti-access capabilities the PLA is buying, or, to put it another way, China is buying stand-off.

The PLA’s emphasis on long-range precision strike is consistent with another dominant strain in Chinese military thinking: the revolution in military affairs. Whereas, the RMA crowd has taken a hit in U.S. defense circles because of actual combat experience in recent low-intensity wars, much of China’s thinking remains lodged in the theoretical. An important point to keep in mind is that the RMA has its roots in the maritime domain and that remains the one area where many of the RMA precepts still make the most sense.

“The PLA is attempting the concurrent pursuit of “mechanization” (application of late 20th-Century industrial technology to military operations) and “informatization” (application of information technology to military operations). As a consequence, and in recognition of the high costs of force-wide refitting with state-of-the-art weapons systems, the PLA is selectively acquiring new generation technologies in some areas, while deferring new acquisitions in others in favor of upgrading older, but capable, systems for networked operations.”

That line of thinking can be seen in China’s 2008 defense white paper which emphasized military strategic “guidelines” which include: “fighting and winning local wars under conditions of informatization”; bettering joint operations; and asymmetric warfare, attacking an enemy’s weak points.

Two of the smartest analysts I know, the Navy department’s Frank Hoffman and CSBA’s Jim Thomas, both make the point that China will not try to match the U.S. military force on force in the canonical big theater war scenario. Rather, they’ll seek out seams and weak points in an asymmetric fashion. For example, lots of folks focus on the PLA Navy’s dragging carrier project while not giving adequate attention to its deployment of 60 plus new Houbei class fast-attack craft, each armed with eight YJ-83 anti-ship cruise missiles.

– Greg Grant

Read more: http://defensetech.org/2010/08/17/dods-2010-report-on-chinas-pla-military-modernization-ii/#more-8700#ixzz0wucn6BWR
Defense.org

[buglerbilly]

U.S., Vietnam Hold Talks Amid China Concerns

AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

Published: 17 Aug 2010 15:51

HANOI - Former foes Vietnam and the United States on Aug. 17 stepped up cooperation by holding their first high-level defense dialogue, amid concerns over China's military build-up.

Robert Scher, the U.S. deputy assistant secretary of defense for South and Southeast Asia, met Lieutenant General Nguyen Chi Vinh, Vietnam's deputy minister of defense, for talks in Hanoi on ways to enhance cooperation by the two sides, they said.

The talks - 15 years after normalization of diplomatic relations - represented "the next significant historic step in our increasingly robust defense relationship which is based on mutual trust, understanding and respect for independence and sovereignty," Scher told reporters.

Previous security talks, which started in 2008, were held at the foreign ministry and State Department level.

"I did share at the meeting our impressions of Chinese military modernization," Scher told reporters at a joint news conference with Vinh.

On Aug. 16, the U.S. Defense Department, in an annual report to Congress, said China was ramping up investment in an array of areas including nuclear weapons, long-range missiles, submarines, aircraft carriers and cyber warfare.

The report predicted China may step up patrols in the South China Sea, an area where Vietnam and China have conflicting territorial claims.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton last month said resolution of those territorial disputes - which also involve other nations - was "pivotal" to regional stability.

Vinh said Vietnam supported China's development, "in the belief and the expectation that the rise of China does not infringe other nations' sovereignty and interests" and will contribute to regional security.

Vinh and Scher emphasized, however, that their dialogue focused on bilateral issues, including unexploded ordnance and herbicides left over from the Vietnam War as well as servicemen listed as missing in action.

Other areas where they hoped to step up cooperation included search and rescue, humanitarian and disaster-relief operations and language training.

Vinh stressed that the co-operation between the U.S. and Vietnam "does not do any harm to any other countries."

A U.S. Navy destroyer last week became the latest U.S. warship to dock in Vietnam since the war ended in 1975.

[buglerbilly]

Pentagon demands on Chinese military impossible, warn scholars

US says secrecy raises potential for 'miscalculation' but experts say China cannot reach desired level of transparency

Tania Branigan in Beijing and agencies guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 17 August 2010 19.18 BST


Soldiers from China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) at a training camp in Yangcun. Photograph: Goh Chai Hin/AFP/Getty Images

China's military cannot meet Washington's expectations of transparency, scholars in Beijing warned today, after a report from the US defence department said the secrecy of the People's Liberation Army was increasing the potential for "misunderstanding and miscalculation".

The annual Pentagon report was published amid frictions between the countries over US arms sales to Taiwan, US naval drills with South Korea and China's growing confidence in the South China Seas. It argues that despite modest improvements in the PLA's openness, "the limited transparency in China's military and security affairs enhances uncertainty and increases the potential for misunderstanding and miscalculation."

The PLA has issued reports on its work and attempted to improve links with other militaries in recent years, engaging in more joint exercises and taking part in peacekeeping missions. But Shi Yinhong, an expert on Sino-US relations at Renmin University, said: "Although China has steadily increased its military transparency over the past few years, it's currently impossible for China to reach the level that the US demands."

This year China announced that the military budget would rise by 7.5% to 532.11bn yuan (£51.7bn), after two decades of double-digit annual increases. Experts suggested the slowdown reflected Chinese concerns about the way it was perceived, as well as financial constraints. China argues that spending remains well below US levels and that US capabilities remain far superior.

The Pentagon believes that China's actual military spending is roughly double the stated level. Its report says China has the most active land-based ballistic and cruise missile programme in the world and that it is developing an anti-ship ballistic missile with a range of more than 1,500km, capable of attacking aircraft carriers in the western Pacific.

It adds that analysts believe China will not have a domestically produced aircraft carrier and associated ships for another five years, although foreign assistance could speed that process up. It also predicts: "It is unlikely ... that China will be able to project and sustain large forces in high-intensity combat operations far from China until well into the following decade."

Beijing suspended military-to-military ties between the countries in January, in retaliation for US arms sales to Taiwan. The report notes that while Beijing has improved economic and cultural ties with Taiwan, it has continued the build-up of missiles opposite the island and expanded its military advantage.

Last month Beiing reacted angrily when the US secretary of state waded into the territorial dispute over the South China Sea between China and several regional powers including Vietnam and the Philippines. Hillary Clinton said resolving the row was a diplomatic priority and was in the national interest of the US.

Other countries complain that China is taking a tougher line on the dispute. It recently began describing rights over the strategic waterway – which is also potentially rich in natural resources – as a "core interest".

China has also complained about US plans to hold joint drills with South Korea in the Yellow Sea, between China and the Korean peninsula. "The United States appears to want to declare to the world: 'The Asia-Pacific and the oceans remain under the United States'," said a commentary in the Communist party's official People's Daily newspaper.

Zhu Feng, of Peking University's School of International Studies, said the combination of issues had led to an "unprecedented surge" in tensions but that the prospect of conflict remained low.

Drew Thompson, a China expert at the Nixon Centre in Washington, warned: "The US military and the Chinese military don't have a common understanding, a rules of the road, for navigation. That's a major cause for concern."

[buglerbilly]

China Lashes Out At Pentagon Military Report

(Source: Radio Netherlands; published August 18, 2010)

China hit out Wednesday at a Pentagon report on its expanding military capabilities as other Asian nations said they would be keeping a wary eye on their giant neighbour's growing might.

Beijing said the US Defence Department report was "not beneficial" for military ties between the two major powers, while state media branded the dossier "aggressive" and said it exaggerated the power of China's armed forces.

Geng Yansheng, spokesman for China's defence ministry, insisted the country was on a "path of peaceful development".

"Issuing this report is not beneficial for the improvement and development of Sino-US military ties," he said in a statement.

The Pentagon report to the US Congress said China's military strategists were looking to extend their reach to be able to hit targets as far away as mainland Japan, the Philippines and the US territory of Guam.

Beijing was ramping up investment in a range of areas including nuclear weapons, long-range missiles, submarines, aircraft carriers and cyber warfare, according to the report published Monday.

Taiwan responded on Tuesday by renewing its call for the United States to sell it advanced weaponry, and joined Japan in vowing to keep a close eye on China's rising military strength.

But China demanded that Washington stop issuing such reports. "China... firmly abides by a defensive national defence policy, does not take part in military confrontation and does not pose a military threat to any country," Geng said.

"We ask the United States... to stop remarks and behaviour that are not beneficial for mutual trust between the two militaries and Sino-US relations."

China's state-run media carried a barrage of comments from experts on the issue, blasting what they called an "aggressive" Pentagon report.

Meng Xiangqing, a professor at the National Defence University, told the Global Times: "The interfering nature of the report remains unchanged. It will surely draw discontent from China over its exaggeration of its military power."

China's military expa as the world's second largest economy in the second quarter and the international community has been pushing China to take a more active role in addressing issues such as climate change and trade imbalances.

The Pentagon said China's military build-up in the Taiwan Strait had "continued unabated", despite better ties with the China-friendly government in Taipei which has been in power since 2008.

Taiwan on Tuesday repeated its call for the United States to sell it advanced F16 jet fighters and diesel submarines in the face of China's much stronger military.

Earlier this year, Beijing reacted angrily to an arms deal between Washington and Taiwan, saying it would cut military and security contacts with the United States.

"China has not given up the use of force against Taiwan and we are closely monitoring China's military developments. We ask the public to rest assured," Taiwan defence ministry spokesman Yu Sy-tue said.

Beijing considers Taiwan, where the mainland's defeated nationalists fled in 1949 at the end of a bloody civil war, to be part of its territory awaiting reunification, by force if necessary.

Following the report, Tokyo said it would "keep paying attention to China's military trend".

"It will have a significant impact on security in the region, including Japan, and on the international community," a Japanese defence ministry spokeswoman said.

Japan and Vietnam, which both have historic tensions with China, have reported incidents with China's military in recent months and the Pentagon predicted Beijing may step up patrols in the South China Sea.

Against this backdrop, the United States and Vietnam -- former foes who only normalised diplomatic ties 15 years ago -- held their first high-level defence dialogue on Tuesday.

Hanoi and Beijing are involved in a territorial dispute over islands in the South China Sea.

Last month China reacted angrily after US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said resolution of those territorial rows -- which also involve other nations -- was "pivotal" to regional stability.

-ends-

[buglerbilly]

DoD’s 2010 Report on China’s PLA Modernization (III)



No DoD assessment of Chinese military power would be complete without an update on the People’s Liberation Army’s ongoing effort to build an anti-ship ballistic missile; a weapon some hyperbolically claim could change the balance of power in the Western Pacific. We’ll set aside for the moment the issue of whether an individual weapon can dramatically alter the power balance between the U.S. military and any country x, and look at what the report says.

China has the “most active” land based ballistic missile and cruise missile program in the world, the DoD report says. The PLA is building a huge missile arsenal for precision conventional strike because it lacks, so far anyway, a stealthy strike aircraft. The vast majority of China’s ballistic missiles are of the short range (under 600km) SCUD type and lack “true precision strike capability.” And the vast majority of those missiles are aimed at Taiwan.

In the anti-access arena, China is building or buying medium-range ballistic missiles (1,000–3,000km): “to increase the range at which it can conduct precision strikes against land targets and naval ships, including aircraft carriers, operating far from China’s shores out to the first island chain.”

Regrettably, the report doesn’t tell us much about where the anti-ship ballistic missile is in terms of development progress:

“China is developing an anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) based on a variant of the CSS-5 medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM). The missile has a range in excess of 1,500 km, is armed with a maneuverable warhead, and when integrated with appropriate command and control systems, is intended to provide the PLA the capability to attack ships, including aircraft carriers, in the western Pacific Ocean.”

The maneuverable warhead and an over the horizon tracking and targeting system are the key components as the missile must have terminal guidance to hit a moving ship. Geoffrey Forden discusses some of the technical challenges in fine tuning the warheads guidance in an excellent post here; the comments section is very much worth reading as well.

As Forden notes, between the time an ASBM is launched and it arrives over a patch of sea in the Western Pacific a carrier could have moved 8 miles; the missile’s warhead must be maneuverable after the end of the boost phase and he discusses various options. China would be pushing the envelope technology wise and the missile would require extensive testing before was proven, he writes.

As for an advanced targeting system, which we’ve discussed before, the DoD report says:

“Over the long term, improvements in China’s C4ISR, including space-based and over-the-horizon sensors, could enable Beijing to identify, track, and target military activities deep into the western Pacific Ocean.”

– Greg Grant

Read more: http://defensetech.org/2010/08/18/dods-2010-report-on-chinas-pla-modernization-iii/#more-8727#ixzz0x0RmdHwm
Defense.org

[buglerbilly]

China Defense Ministry refutes Pentagon's China report

English.news.cn 2010-08-18 19:25:14

BEIJING, Aug. 18 (Xinhua) -- China on Wednesday voiced its firm opposition to a recent Pentagon report on China's military development, saying it "ignored objective facts".

The Pentagon report is "not beneficial to the improvement and development of Sino-U.S. military ties," said Geng Yansheng, a newly appointed spokesman of China's Defense Ministry.

According to Geng, the U.S. report ignored the facts while "criticizing China's normal national defense and military build-up, exaggerating the so-called Chinese mainland's 'military threats' to Taiwan, and condemning China for suspending Sino-U.S. military exchanges thus compromising the two countries' military cooperation."

China resolutely opposed such a report, Geng said.

He said China has and will always adhered to the path of peaceful development and has pursued a defensive national defense policy.

The country will neither enter an arms race nor use its military to threaten any other country, he said.

"China's military development is reasonable and appropriate, and is aimed to protect its national sovereignty, security and territorial integrity, as well as keep apace with the rapid military development in the world," the spokesman said.

He added that Chinese military forces had actively carried out exchanges and cooperation with their foreign counterparts, in order to protect world peace and regional stability.

Geng said China has always attached great importance to Sino-U.S. military ties and has made great efforts to improve the ties.

"We ask the U.S. side to view China's national defense and military build-up from an objective and just perspective, put an end to comments and conduct that might compromise mutual trust between Chinese and U.S. military forces, and stop issuing the so-called Chinese military and security development report, so to create a favorable environment for the improvement and development of Sino-U.S. military relations," Geng said.

[buglerbilly]

China Calls For End to Pentagon’s Annual PLA Military Assessment



Yesterday, the newly appointed spokesman for China’s Defense Ministry, Geng Yansheng, said the Pentagon’s annual report on Chinese military modernization “ignored objective facts,” exaggerated the Chinese threat to Taiwan and was not beneficial to improved Sino-U.S. ties.


“China’s military development is reasonable and appropriate, and is aimed to protect its national sovereignty, security and territorial integrity, as well as keep apace with the rapid military development in the world.

“We ask the U.S. side to view China’s national defense and military build-up from an objective and just perspective, put an end to comments and conduct that might compromise mutual trust between Chinese and U.S. military forces, and stop issuing the so-called Chinese military and security development report, so to create a favorable environment for the improvement and development of Sino-U.S. military relations,” Geng said.

The spokesman said China’s modernization is normal for a country of its size and that it pursues a purely defensive security policy and will neither enter into an arms race nor threaten militarily another country.

– Greg Grant

Read more: http://defensetech.org/#ixzz0x3xBXWV2
Defense.org

[buglerbilly]

DoD’s 2010 Report on China’s PLA Modernization (IV)



What does the above chart pulled from DoD’s annual assessment of China’s military modernization tell us? It illustrates the maximum range of the various missiles in the PLA arsenal; the “strike” component of a “reconnaissance strike complex.”

What’s missing is the reconnaissance piece. Smart weapons require a smart reconnaissance and targeting network otherwise they’re useless. The overlays on the map above are misleading in that we do not know whether China can accurately target those areas that fall within various missile envelopes.

So far anyway, the U.S. is the only country to have built a truly global reconnaissance strike complex. Cold War exigencies and nearly limitless defense spending enabled the U.S. to build both the reconnaissance and the strike components, something other nations were unable to do.

As CSBA’s Barry Watts writes in his excellent study, “Six Decades of Guided Munitions and Battle Networks,” there is little indication any nation, including China, will replicate that complex in the “foreseeable future”:

“The reason for this unusual situation is, of course, the enormous resource burden of independently reproducing such a capability. Electro-optical reconnaissance satellites, the GPS constellation, B-2 bombers, Joint STARS and other air-breathing reconnaissance platforms, F-22s, TLAMs, and CALCMs illustrate both the up-front costs of developing a robust capacity for near-real-time global strike, and the ongoing costs of sustaining it.”

We know China isn’t sitting on its hands and is developing a reconnaissance strike complex of its own; it’s just that it’s focused on the Western Pacific. The DoD China report says:

“Over the long term, improvements in China’s C4ISR, including space-based and over-the-horizon sensors, could enable Beijing to identify, track, and target military activities deep into the western Pacific Ocean.”

When China will develop that capability, the report doesn’t say; “long-term” could mean a decade or it could mean far longer. At a Pentagon press briefing this week announcing the release of the China report, a senior defense official told reporters the DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile remains a notional capability as the Chinese struggle with assembling the reconnaissance strike complex piece parts:

“[W]here we see them still facing roadblocks is in integrating the missile system with the C4-ISR. And they still have a ways to go before they manage to get that integrated so that they have an operational and effective system.”

As far as the reconnaissance piece, the report says:

“China is planning eight satellites in the Huanjing program that are capable of visible, infrared, multi-spectral, and synthetic aperture radar imaging.”

China currently uses the U.S. GPS constellation but is building its own, the Bei-Dou-2/Compass system:

“The initial BeiDou-2 constellation will become part of a more advanced BeiDou-2/Compass system with global coverage, expected in the 2015–2020 timeframe.”

Would China to finally begin actual tests of its DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile, we probably could gain a pretty good understanding of how far the PLA has progressed in building a WestPac focused reconnaissance strike network that places at risk carrier battle groups and fixed installations such as Guam.

How long the U.S. will maintain its reconnaissance strike network monopoly in WestPac is anybody’s guess. Regrettably, the DoD report didn’t provide much clarity on the matter.

– Greg Grant

Read more: http://defensetech.org/2010/08/20/dods-2010-report-on-chinas-pla-modernization-iv/#more-8756#ixzz0xC9LfvPv
Defense.org

[buglerbilly]

China Holding 4-Day Naval Exercise in Yellow Sea

AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

Published: 29 Aug 2010 09:52

BEIJING - China will hold live-fire naval exercises in the Yellow Sea in the coming days, state media reported Aug. 29, after voicing opposition to similar war games to be staged there by the United States and South Korea.


The Chinese destroyer Wuhan is shown in January 2009 on an anti-piracy mission in the Gulf of Aden. The People’s Liberation Army Navy said Aug. 29 that it would soon conduct live-fire drills in the Yellow Sea. (FILE PHOTO / AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE)

The Beihai fleet of the People's Liberation Army Navy will conduct a "live ammunition drill" from Sept. 1 to Sept. 4 off the coast of eastern China's Qingdao city, Xinhua news agency reported.

"This is an annual routine training, mainly involving the shooting of shipboard artillery," said the report, citing China's defense ministry.

The United States and South Korea are planning a new round of joint drills in the Yellow Sea in September in another show of force against North Korea following the sinking of a South Korean warship in March.

Any military drills involving the United States in the Yellow Sea are a sensitive issue because of the area's proximity to China, and the disputed maritime boundary between South and North Korea.

China has bristled at the idea of a U.S. aircraft carrier group patrolling waters near its coast, although the U.S. military has said the planned anti-submarine exercise in September would not involve a carrier.

"This would be a fresh provocation following a series of joint U.S.-[South Korean] activities that have caused tensions in East Asia," Chinese Rear Adm. Yang Yi said in an Aug. 13 commentary in the China Daily.

"Offending Chinese people is not in the fundamental interest of the U.S. ... Any activity aimed at pushing a country with a 1.3-billion populace with enormous potential would be inadvisable."

The United States and South Korea have staged massive joint naval and air exercises in the nearby Sea of Japan that were opposed by Beijing.

The drills followed the sinking of the corvette Cheonan in March, which Seoul and its allies say was caused by a North Korean torpedo attack.

China is North Korea's closest ally and trade partner, and Beijing has refused to join in international condemnation of Pyongyang for the incident.

China staged naval, air and artillery exercises late last month, although it was not clear if the drills had been pre-planned or were in response to the U.S.-South Korea exercises.

[buglerbilly]

U.S. Concerned About Taiwan Ex-Generals' China Visits: Report

AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

Published: 30 Aug 2010 10:50

TAIPEI - Closer contacts between retired Taiwanese generals and the Chinese authorities have sparked concerns in Washington, the island's major arms supplier, media and an official said Aug. 30.

The former generals started visiting China years ago, but with Taiwan's mainland ties improving rapidly since 2008, the trips have become so frequent that they have drawn U.S. attention, the Taipei-based China Times said.

"The United States has voiced its concerns to (Taiwan's de facto ambassador) Jason Yuan and voiced the hope that Taiwan can come up with an explanation," the paper said, without naming the source.

It said Washington was especially concerned if such contacts may endanger long-standing military cooperation projects with Taiwan.

Washington is also wondering if the visits mark the beginning of discussion about military exchanges and the establishment of confidence-building measures between the two former cross-Strait rivals, it said.

"It would be understandable if the United States voices such concerns, given the fast improving ties between Taipei and Beijing," said Chen Wen-yi, deputy chief of the foreign ministry's North American Affairs Department.

But he said the concerns were unnecessary as the visits were not authorized by the government.

Beijing still regards Taiwan as part of its territory awaiting reunification, by force if necessary, although the island has ruled itself since the end of a civil war in 1949.

Despite the underlying tension, relations have improved markedly since 2008 when Ma Ying-jeou of the China-friendly Kuomintang party became president, pledging to boost trade links and allowing in more Chinese tourists.

[buglerbilly]

China Intensifies Build-Up Against Taiwan: Reports

AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

Published: 1 Sep 2010 09:12

TAIPEI - China is ramping-up its military presence facing Taiwan despite the easing of hostilities across the Strait, a defense ministry report cited by local media warned Sept. 1.

"Although the cross-Strait ties have improved significantly in recent years, the Chinese communists' military have not slowed at all their pace of build-up aimed at Taiwan," the United Daily News said, citing the ministry report.

In a report to the U.S. Congress last month, the Pentagon also warned that China's military build-up against the island has "continued unabated" despite improving political relations across the Taiwan Strait.

China's military spending for 2010 rose 7.5 percent last year, despite the global economic downturn, according to the report, which was sent to parliament last week.

Looking ahead, the defense report said Beijing may offer concessions to Taipei on minor issues but will not budge on the decades-old dispute over the island's sovereignty.

Ties between Taiwan and the mainland have improved markedly since 2008, when Ma Ying-jeou of the Beijing-friendly Kuomintang party came to power.

But despite the fast-warming ties, Beijing still refuses to renounce the use of force against the island, saying it was aimed at preventing the independence movement gathering ground on the island.

The People's Liberation Army may also attack the island "should the military tip the balance seriously towards Beijing," the defense report was quoted as saying.

It also cautioned of the likelihood of Chinese military action should Taipei push for a referendum on independence, or if it amends the constitution in favor of independence.

Last month's Pentagon report said China is investing in nuclear weapons, long-range missiles, submarines, aircraft carriers and cyber warfare.

"The balance of cross-Strait military forces continues to shift in the mainland's favor," the report said.

Beijing still considers Taiwan part of its territory awaiting reunification - by force if necessary - even though the island has ruled itself since 1949 at the end of a civil war.

[buglerbilly]

Analysis: Japan dilemma as economic dependence on China grows

TOKYO | Thu Sep 2, 2010 12:27am EDT

TOKYO (Reuters) - Japan's growing dependence on China for growth grates with concerns over its expanding military reach, deepening a dilemma over how to engage with its giant neighbor even as the two trade places in economic rankings.

But while the interdependence raises the risks for the world's second- and third-biggest economies if relations sour, it also boosts incentives to keep ties on track.

"It raises the stakes," said Jeffrey Kingston, director of Asian studies at Temple University's Tokyo campus.

"But ... Japan has a clear interest in developing better political and diplomatic relations precisely because of the greater economic interdependence."

News that China had surpassed Japan as the world's second-biggest economy in the second quarter grabbed global headlines in August, underscoring China's rise and deepening pessimism over whether Japan can even keep third place.

Even more telling is Japan's deepening dependence on China's dynamism for growth in a mature economy plagued with an aging, shrinking population and a shortage of policy solutions.

Japan's exports to China topped those to the United States last year, accounting for nearly 20 percent of all its exports.

That figure will probably rise to 35 percent by 2026, when China will likely oust America from the top global spot, said Chi Hung Kwan at Nomura Institute of Capital Markets Research.

Japan's direct investment in China has also soared, exceeding 70 percent of its investment in North America last year, with more and more goods being made for local sale, not export.

"For Japanese companies, China is becoming more and more important, not just as the workshop of the world, but as the market of the world," Kwan said at a luncheon with reporters.

Sino-Japanese relations, long plagued by China's memories of Tokyo's wartime aggression and present rivalry over resources and territory, have warmed since a deep chill in 2001-2006, when then-premier Junichiro Koizumi visited the Yasukuni Shrine, seen by Beijing as a symbol of Japanese militarism.

Last weekend, a delegation of Japanese cabinet ministers met their Chinese counterparts in Beijing for high-level economic talks -- the third such annual dialogue -- and agreed on the need to work together for global growth.

WARY

But even as economic ties deepen, Japan is increasingly wary of China's intentions as it spends more of its wealth on defense and shows growing willingness to project military power.

A survey by the China Daily in August showed that 52.7 percent of Chinese respondents saw Japan as a military threat, while 70.8 percent of Japanese felt the same about China.

"Japan's military budget has been stable for 20 years and China's military budget has grown 20 times in the past 20 years," said Shinichi Kitaoka, University of Tokyo professor who advised the conservative Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) government that was ousted last year by the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ).

"The big gap may create some imbalances and is already creating imbalances in the East China Sea and South China Sea."

While a panel of experts advising the government as it undertakes a major review of defense policies gave a nod to such concerns, the wording was restrained, a reflection of Japan's dilemma as it balances economic interests with security worries.

"Japan's security position requires an extremely delicate policy. On the one hand, it is important to make sure that the cost of unfriendly, non-peaceful behavior is very costly ... and there has to be a very robust defense posture together with the United States," said Chikako Kawakatsu Ueki, a Waseda University professor.

"At the same time, if you are talking about China, everyone knows that China's well-being as an economic power is important to Japan, to the United States, the region and the globe."

The dilemma is a delicate one for Japan's ruling Democratic Party, which swept to power for the first time a year ago, ousting the LDP after more than 50 years of almost non-stop rule.

The party pledged in its campaign last year to forge a more equal relationship with security ally Washington while improving ties with Asian neighbors including China, sparking concerns in some U.S. circles that it was tilting toward Beijing.

"China is becoming more and more important to Japan year in and year out. Everyone accepts that. The debate is how best to handle this -- engagement or constraint," said Phil Deans, a professor of international affairs at Temple in Tokyo.

"The pressure to pursue both strategies is increasing which is making the contradictions more obvious."

Experts say Japan, distracted by its own economic woes and internecine strife in the ruling party, will likely respond with a mix of reliance on the U.S. military deterrence and beefing up its own forces within the elastic constraints of a pacifist constitution, while pursuing better diplomatic ties with Beijing.

"There are three decisions they can make: contain China, engage China or ... just live in a really uncomfortable situation and hope they don't end with the worst of both worlds," Deans said. "I think maybe they can live in this very difficult place."

(Editing by Sugita Katyal)

[buglerbilly]

Japan FM Voices Concern On China Defense Spending

AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

Published: 17 Sep 2010 11:49

TOKYO - Japan's new Foreign Minister Seiji Maehara on Sept. 17 voiced concern over the level of China's defense spending, speaking hours after he was appointed and amid a tense territorial fight with China.

"It is important to further promote strategic mutually beneficial Japan-China relations," Maehara, considered a security affairs specialist and a hawk on China, said at his first press conference in the post.

"But on the other hand, I am concerned about China's build-up of defense spending by more than 10 percent annually for the past 20 years. I would like China to firmly meet its responsibility of explaining this."

Japan, along with the United States and Australia, has voiced concern over China's military spending, which has grown in double digits for many years and by 7.5 percent most recently, according to figures Beijing released in March.

A week ago, Japan voiced its concern over China's growing military muscle in its annual Defense of Japan report and urged Beijing to "disclose a clear, specific future vision of its military modernization."

"The lack of transparency of its national defense policies and the military activities are a matter of concern for the region and the international community, including Japan, which require prudent analysis," the report said.

Maehara assumed the post in a cabinet reshuffle as Japan and its Asian rival are embroiled in their worst diplomatic spat for years over the arrest of a Chinese fishing captain accused of ramming two Japanese coastguard ships.

China says the islands, called Senkaku by Japan and Diaoyu by China, are part of its ancient territory and has demanded the release of the captain.

Beijing has launched a series of diplomatic protests, summoned Japan's ambassador five times, canceled official visits to Tokyo, scrapped energy cooperation talks, and condemned the move in its state-controlled press.

Maehara said on Sept. 16 - when he was still transport minister, in charge of the Japanese coastguard - that the islands are administered by Japan and that Tokyo believes "no territorial dispute exists" over them.

[Exsandgroper]

..Geoffrey Garrett From: The Australian September 18, 2010 12:00AM Australia doesn't need to choose between the US and China, but it has a vital role to play in the region

AFTER being invisible during the election campaign, the prospect of a Rudd-Gillard rematch has put Australian foreign policy back in the news.

All the more so because the new Prime Minister's principal initiative thus far has been the domestically driven small target of an East Timor solution to asylum-seekers, a policy Rudd warned against on the eve of his ouster by his new boss.

There may or may not be a personalities crisis brewing over Australian diplomacy. After all, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have been an effective foreign policy team in the US even though they were bitter and sometimes nasty rivals on the presidential campaign trail.

But according to Hugh White, Australian foreign policy itself is in crisis. In his recent Quarterly Essay, White says that after 60 years of nailing itself firmly to the American mast, "[Australia] should try to persuade America that it would be in everyone's best interests for it to relinquish primacy in Asia" to accommodate China's rise, and then to agree to a 19th-century Concert of Europe-style sharing of power with China.

The Australian's Greg Sheridan has called White's essay "the single stupidest strategic document ever prepared in Australian history". Michael Danby, Carl Ungerer and Peter Khalil have labelled White a Munich-style appeaser in these pages.

Instead of giving up on the alliance in the name of accommodating China, Sheridan says Australia should double down on the alliance by offering Darwin for the US's largest military base in Asia.
Danby, Ungerer and Khalil propose that Australia commits to a campaign to transform China from a country that "summarily jails Catholic bishops and HIV activists" into a liberal democracy.

All this comes on top of last year's defence policy white paper arguing for a large-scale Australian military build-up over the next 20 years. The glib but not unfair rendering of the underlying reasoning is Australia can no longer rely on the US for its security and it cannot trust China to remain peaceful, so the time for more self defence is now.

These analyses of the US and China and what they mean for Australia cover the waterfront of policy options: side even more with the US, sidle up to China, or go it more alone.

However, they share one key assumption, namely that Australia's greatest international achievement of the past several decades -- getting closer to both China and the US at the same time -- is no longer possible.

The world is no doubt changing. But the sky is not falling.

Australia does not have to and should not want to choose between its alliance with the US and its economic ties with China. The most important foreign policy move the government can make is to ensure that it stays that way.

To paraphrase Mark Twain, news of America's demise is exaggerated. The resilience and innovation of the American economy should never be underestimated. The markets certainly don't underestimate it, if the willingness of foreigners to lend the US as much money as it wants at low interest rates is any indication.

The US economy has taken a series of body blows in the past decade. But it isn't on the precipice of a Greece-style economic tragedy. Outside Australia, it isn't obvious that any big Western economy is better placed to get through today's prolonged downturn than is the US.

Nonetheless, unless something goes horribly wrong with China's three decades and counting economic miracle, the irresistible twin forces of demography and development will result in China passing the US as the world's biggest economy in the mid-2020s.

But if and when that happens, China will still be a poor country with domestic challenges. The US's military, political and cultural power will still dwarf it.

Almost 15 years ago, former US secretary of state Madeleine Albright's description of the US as the "indispensable nation" was spot on. There is little reason to think it will be less accurate 15 years from now.

There is no denying that the US and China have real disagreements over principles and policies. But it is equally clear that they are committed to managing them down in the name of the greater good, which is increasingly closer economic ties between two countries that are already joined at the economic hip.

It is better to think of the tensions that will continue to flare up between the countries over issues as diverse as trade and Taiwan more as useful pressure-release valves than as brushfires that threaten to burn out of control.

Australia re-enters the picture because of the fundamental similarities between the US's approach to China and its own, not to mention those of Japan and South Korea, America's other leading Asian allies and Australia's closest friends in the region.

At its core, America seeks to maximise the economic benefits of China's rise and minimise the chances that it will have malign geopolitical consequences. This approach is surely at least as true for Australia.

Obama may in general be the anti-George W. Bush. But like Bush, Obama has been steadfast in resisting powerful domestic pressures to bash China, while devoting considerable resources to high-level, behind-closed-doors diplomacy with Beijing.

Indeed, economic engagement has been the core of Washington's China policy for at least two decades. US presidents of both parties have pushed economic engagement not only because of the cheap goods and big new market China provides for consumers and producers. They have also long believed economic engagement reduces the risk of military conflict and increases the prospects for political change in China.

At the same time, the US knows it must insure against the chance that China's rise is not benign, even as it works hard to minimise the probability of this dire outcome. This is less about overt military build-up and power balancing than it is about building ever stronger and more integrated relationships with the leading pro-market democracies in Asia and encouraging China to join the group. Bush emphasised the US's alliances with Australia and Japan and forged a new strategic partnership with India. Obama wants to bring South Korea back into the alliance and to develop a new strategic partnership with Indonesia.

Obama wants to be much more active in regionalism than Bush was. Rather than being a late joiner in existing Asia-only institutions developed in the US's absence over the past decade, Obama wants to be a prime mover in new arrangements connecting both sides of the Pacific.

The US's agenda for the Asia-Pacific century seeks to engage and socialise China rather than isolate and chastise it. This creates considerable opportunities for Australia and the region's other market democracies to work with the US on an agenda that is of common interest.

Pushing the Asia-Pacific community further and faster than the US and Australia's Asian friends want would be unwise for Australia. Moving the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation forum beyond a talking shop seems unlikely.

But helping Obama and the US become more involved in the East Asia Summit, and making it a less ASEAN-centred and, indeed, Asian-centred grouping in the process, seems an obvious first step for Canberra. Helping the US transform its hub-and-spokes alliances with Australia, Japan and South Korea into a more integrated system is also important.

Active Australian participation in negotiating the Trans Pacific Partnership, the proposed new Asia-Pacific free trading group in which Australia is the US's main partner, should also be high on the new government's priority list.

The US's aim is to build a high-quality regional free trade group that South Korea, Japan and ultimately China might join. The fact that Australia is in on the ground floor is an advantage to be exploited.

The bottom line seems clear. Australia doesn't need to choose between China and the US because Washington doesn't view its relations with Beijing as a zero sum game. Rather than a fundamental foreign policy rethink, the new Australian government should roll up its sleeves to work with the US on a shared strategy for making the most of the Asia-Pacific century.

Geoffrey Garrett is chief executive of the US Studies Centre at the University of Sydney, and author of the latest Asialink Essay, Strategic Choices: Australia, China and the US in Asia, at www.asialink.unimelb.edu.au.

Bold and underline by Exsandgroper
Cheers

[buglerbilly]

The Australian's Greg Sheridan has called White's essay "the single stupidest strategic document ever prepared in Australian history". Michael Danby, Carl Ungerer and Peter Khalil have labelled White a Munich-style appeaser in these pages.

Nah, stop pissing around, tell us what you REALLY think.........!!! :rofl :rofl :rofl

[Weasel]

However, they share one key assumption, namely that Australia's greatest international achievement of the past several decades -- getting closer to both China and the US at the same time -- is no longer possible.

Since when has Australia lost the ability to reason objectively? You have two opposing polar views that in turn is reviewed by another bi-polar (them or us) analyst that gives you a report that is full of whale jism. Each of them make an assumption based upon an assumption; put 3 of them together and you may as well call your friends at Air Power Australia for a 4th opinion.

The International arena is far more complicated then "with us or against us" mentality that appears to be steering White & Garrett et al.

Perhaps it is a symptom of being whelped on the milk of a two-party system? As (honestly) you get the same crap in the USA.

Objectivity is the ability to look at the whole and make a reasoned assessment. I don't see any of that baseline for analysis being displayed here.

cheers

w

[buglerbilly]

Since when has Australia lost the ability to reason objectively? You have two opposing polar views that in turn is reviewed by another bi-polar (them or us) analyst that gives you a report that is full of whale jism. Each of them make an assumption based upon an assumption; put 3 of them together and you may as well call your friends at Air Power Australia for a 4th opinion.

The International arena is far more complicated then "with us or against us" mentality that appears to be steering White & Garrett et al.

Perhaps it is a symptom of being whelped on the milk of a two-party system? As (honestly) you get the same crap in the USA.

Objectivity is the ability to look at the whole and make a reasoned assessment. I don't see any of that baseline for analysis being displayed here.

cheers

w

Big W, don't you understand that everything is black and white? No? Good, I'm glad that you so eloquently identify that!

Putting aside my malicious hilarity at some of the comments in the article, the whole subject of China is a convoluted and complex one, not least because even within China there are contradictory and opposing views about what should or shouldn't be done with regards to almost anything. The assumption that China talks with a unified voice is plain ridiculous, same as the assumption that the West does the same is equally silly.

What is happening in China is a complex and developing matter that requires patience and maturity if Peace is to be maintained not just in the Military sense (the way we usually look at it) but also in the sense of Industrial and Economic peace and equanimity. The ever-increasing close Commercial links between Australia and China (and the existing close links with the USA) that are being reinforced through various Natural Gas and Resource projects here in WA in particular provide, to a large extent, the basis for good/great relationships in the Tripartite group, inter-linked interests more or less ensure that.

"Traditional" views of choosing one Party over the other belie the fact that ultimately commercial interests will largely dictate what happens when or has history in Asia been forgotten? Perceived or Actual threats to a Nation's strategic commercial interests have led to more than one war in the last 50-60 years.

Potentially, the bigger threat to all lies within the arena of Religious facism where the supposed "superiority" of one religion over every one else, has led to and continues to lead to, an assymetric threat NOT along geographic and/or nationalistic lines.

Random thoughts, comments welcome....

[Unicorn]

Indeed. I am awaiting the day China wakes up and discovers that its local Islamic component has turned radical and we start seeing suicide bombings in Urmqai and elsewhere.

I understand that China is increasingly concerned at the radicalism that is starting to manifest itself amongst it's non-Han minorities.

If they think they have a problem with some monks in Tibet, they don't know what is going to hit them when they run into people for whom martyrdom by Semtex is a standard military tactic

The Chinese military has never struck me as a particularly sensitive instrument. If the Americans and their allies had real difficulties with the Islamic insurgency in Iran without alienating everyone they came into contact with, how will the PLA handle it in their provinces, let alone in their teeming cities?

Unicorn

[Weasel]

Indeed. I am awaiting the day China wakes up and discovers that its local Islamic component has turned radical and we start seeing suicide bombings in Urmqai and elsewhere.

I understand that China is increasingly concerned at the radicalism that is starting to manifest itself amongst it's non-Han minorities.

If they think they have a problem with some monks in Tibet, they don't know what is going to hit them when they run into people for whom martyrdom by Semtex is a standard military tactic

The Chinese military has never struck me as a particularly sensitive instrument. If the Americans and their allies had real difficulties with the Islamic insurgency in Iran without alienating everyone they came into contact with, how will the PLA handle it in their provinces, let alone in their teeming cities?

Unicorn

And isn't China fast becoming (read: replacing) the USA as the Middle East's largest player? As I recall there is a small but common border between China and Afghanistan, so its not as if China is untouchable and correct me if I am wrong, but don't radical islamists hate heathens more then they hate Christians?

The political clout that the PLA occassionally voices is also one of many causes for concern that needs to be high-lighted, as I don't see China being able to take up the mantle of "World Police" if it already has unstable centers of gravity within its own makeup. At least with the USA you have an ideology that honestly likes to think it has a moral compass, even if it's checks and balances (like the media) are slightly dysfunctional at the moment.

In other words, say what you like about USA and the pendulum of public opinion, but at least it is somewhat self-correcting. With China, their internal structure is such that you don't have that "anti-group-think" self correction. Which leads to a good ol' debate about how large does a quorum need to be to be truly self regulating. As a result, if (and when) they get it wrong they will get it wrong in spectacular fashion.

There are voices here that have suggested letting China do the heavy lifting. Back off and let them have at it, but even then you come back to interdependency. Maybe 9 years ago, "Yes", but today? I would argue
caution, as can we can we afford a collapsed China?

Think about it. China is behaving like a business. A real business, you know, like Enron or GE and it's leadership practices reflect a lot of capitalist organizations. So would you want a Blackwater controlling Iraq? No. But why? Because it is not accountable. If they frack it up it would re-define the word "mess". Same goes with China.



cheers

w

[buglerbilly]

Boat collision sparks anger, breakdown in China-Japan talks


Anti-Japan protesters burn a rising sun flag of former Imperial Japanese military, during a demonstration in Hong Kong on Saturday, Sept. 18, 2010. Protesters in several cities across China marked a politically sensitive anniversary Saturday with anti-Japan chants and banners, as authorities tried to stop anger over a diplomatic spat between the Asian giants from getting out of control. Ever-present anti-Japanese sentiment in China has been inflamed in recent weeks by Japan's arrest of a Chinese captain after his fishing boat collided with two Japanese coast guard vessels in waters near an island group claimed by both Tokyo and Beijing. Japan has returned the boat and its crew but holds the captain. China has demanded his release. (AP Photo/Kin Cheung) (Kin Cheung - AP)

By William Wan
Washington Post Foreign Service

Monday, September 20, 2010; 5:45 AM

BEIJING - The Chinese government suspended high-level exchanges with Japan on Sunday after weeks of heated arguments between the two countries, triggered when a Chinese fishing boat collided with Japanese Coast Guard ships in disputed waters.

The diplomatic wrangling is over custody of the Chinese boat captain, who is under arrest in Japan. But fueling the abundance of strong posturing is a struggle between China and Japan for regional dominance as well as long-standing disputes over territory.

And the angry rhetoric, which has come more from the Chinese side than the Japanese side, is the latest indication that a newly assertive China is looking to flex its muscles on an international stage.

Since the boat collision, several other disputes have flared up, ranging from serious (threats on both sides to start drilling for gas in the East China Sea) to bizarre (Chinese investigators were sent to look into the death of a Chinese panda at a Japanese zoo).

The tensions caused Chinese students this weekend to protest outside the Japanese Embassy in Beijing- a relatively small showing but significant nonetheless as an indication of the Chinese government's approval of anti-Japanese sentiment. Chinese state media have reported a large number of Chinese tourists canceling trips to Japan.

In recent weeks, the Japanese ambassador in China has been called in repeatedly, including one early-morning summons that Japan considered highly insulting. At the most recent talking-to, on Sunday, the Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Wang Guangya made "solemn representations" to the Japanese ambassador, Wang told reporters.

"The incident created by the Japanese side has severely damaged China-Japan relations," Wang said afterward to state-owned media Xinhua News Agency. The subsequent suspension of all exchanges, from the provincial level up to the Chinese central government, has scuttled planned talks with Japan over expanding aviation rights and working together on coal issues.

The incident that launched the standoff occurred Sept. 7, when the fishing boat of Captain Zhan Qixiong, 41, collided with two Japanese Coast Guard vessels. The area where the collision took place is near a group of uninhabited but disputed islands - called Diaoyu by the Chinese and Senkaku by the Japanese. Initially, Japanese authorities took into custody the entire crew of the Chinese ship. All members except for the captain have since been released. On Sunday, a Japanese court extended the captain's pretrial detention until Sept. 29, against the protestations of Chinese officials.

"China demands that Japan immediately release the captain without any preconditions," Foreign Ministry spokesman Ma Zhaoxu said in statement of reply, adding that Beijing views the captain's detention as illegal and invalid.

There are signs that the rift is carrying over other spheres between the two countries. The Nikkei business daily in Japan reported on Sunday that Japan may start drilling for gas in the East China Sea - another disputed area that is rich with natural gas - if China tries to do the same.

And after Xing Xing, a giant panda on loan from China, died recently at a Japanese zoo after being sedated so semen could be collected for artificial insemination, China immediately sent investigators. Chinese online commentators posted conspiracy theories connecting the panda's death to the boat captain's arrest, alleging a Japanese campaign to insult China.

The intensity of the recent flareups points to China and Japan's complicated and antagonistic history. Even today, many Chinese harbor a long-simmering anger toward Japanese that stems from Japan's occupation of Manchuria in 1931 and full-scale invasion of Chian in 1937 to launch the Second Sino-Japanese War.

As many people attending the protests in China noted, the backdrop for all the recent tensions is the passing this weekend of the 79th anniversary of the Japanese invasion of Manchuria. At one anti-Japanese protest outside the Japanese consulate in Shanghai on Saturday, Chinese youths shouted slogans urging their government to take even stronger actions: "Set the captain free! Chinese should stand up and fight! How can we get the Diaoyu Islands back if we continue to act like cowards?"

In a phone interview, Zhou Jianming, a researcher at the Shanghai Academy of Social Science, similarly justified China's sharp reaction. "The real motivation of Japan using their domestic system to handle the captain's case is because that way they can make a case to claim the Diaoyu Islands," he said. "The cards are in Japan's hands now. And whether the incident will escalate depends on what they do next, because it seems certain that China will take counter measures."

Staff writer Chico Harlan and researchers Wang Juan and Liu Liu contributed to this report.

[buglerbilly]

China's premier ratchets up pressure on Japan in diplomatic dispute

Wen Jiabao, China's premier, has stepped up the war of words with Japan, warning Tokyo that it will "bear all the consequences" of a row over the detention of a Chinese trawler skipper.

By Peter Foster in Beijing

Published: 12:32PM BST 22 Sep 2010


Wen Jiabao urged Japan immediately to release the Chinese trawler captain Photo: EPA

Mr Wen, speaking in New York ahead of the UN General Assembly, urged Japan "immediately and unconditionally" to release the captain who was detained on September 8 after a run-in with two Japanese coastguard cutters in disputed waters in the East China Sea.

Tokyo "bears full responsibility for the situation, and it will bear all consequences," Mr Wen said to a gathering of overseas Chinese nationals hours after China's foreign ministry made clear that he would not meet his Japanese counterpart on the sidelines of the New York meeting.

Relations between China and Japan are now at their lowest point since long-running tensions flared in 2005, with China issuing an increasingly angry series of rebukes to Japan and cancelling several high-level cultural and business exchanges in protest at the captain's detention.

Japan made an apparently conciliatory gesture on Wednesday, calling for high-level talks to prevent the dispute from spiralling any further. "If possible, it would be good to quickly hold high-level talks, including broad, strategic discussions," said Yoshito Sengoku, Japan's chief cabinet secretary.

In New York, Seiji Maehara, Japan's foreign minister, said that no meetings had been set up with his Chinese counterparts in New York and gave no hint of any concessions even as he pledged that Japan hoped to build a "solid, strategic partnership" with China. He added that the detention of the Chinese boat captain was a "legal issue" and rejected any Chinese territorial claims over the disputed chain of islands – known as Senkaku by Japan and Diaoyu or Diaoyutai in Chinese – where the incident took place.

"The Senkaku islands are Japan's own territory, and there is no territorial issue," Mr Maehara said. "If something happens, we deal with it in accordance with domestic laws."

China has rejected any legal action against the boat captain – who faces up to three years in Jail if convicted on possible charges of obstructing Japanese authorities – as "illegal and unfounded".

Analysts say that China, which does not recognise Japan's jurisdiction over the islands, fears the Japan is trying to set a legal precedent by any prosecution it might mount over the incident.

The current row is the most serious since 2005 when a series of anti-Japanese demonstrations swept China in protest at a Japanese history textbook and a proposal to grant Japan a UN Security Council seat.

[buglerbilly]

China stops rare earths exports to Japan

September 23, 2010 - 2:34PM

China has blocked all exports of rare earths to Japan, stepping up the pressure on Tokyo to release a Chinese boat captain detained in disputed waters, a report said on Thursday.

China has halted all shipments to Japan of the chemical elements, essential for the making of iPods, electric cars, missiles and a range of other products, the New York Times reported, citing unnamed industry sources.

Calls to China's commerce and foreign ministries for comment on the report went unanswered.

Japan and China are embroiled in their worst diplomatic row in years, sparked by the captain's arrest following the September 7 collision of his trawler with two Japanese coastguard vessels in the East China Sea.

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao this week threatened "further actions" if the captain was not released. Beijing has already suspended high-level contacts with Tokyo and called off several official visits.

China supplies at least 95 per cent of the world's rare earths. It had previously cut its export limit for the minerals, sending market prices soaring and sparking concerns among foreign governments and companies.

Last month, before the row erupted, Japan had urged China to expand, not restrict, its exports of rare earths.

© 2010 AFP

[buglerbilly]

Chindia - you ain't seen nuthin' yet

September 23, 2010 - 1:11PM

China's Premier Wen Jiabao arrives to speak during the Millennium Development Goals Summit at UN headquarters in New York yesterday. Photo: Reuters

Even if you think you know the “Chindia” story, odds are you don't really know the Chindia story. And if you're still caught up in China “housing bubble” and US-consumer-dependency yarns, you're blinded by Western conceit and actually don't have a clue.

To put it simply in Bachman Turner Overdrive's 1974 words, baby, you just ain't seen nothin' yet.

That's been rammed home by four serendipitous speeches and papers in the past week, each reinforcing the other. They started with an article on Indian economic change in the RBA Bulletin, expanded by RBA assistant governor Philip Lowe's NatStats paper on the development of Asia and was rounded off last night at an Investec clients briefing with speeches by visiting Investec Asset Management strategist Michael Power and BHP's former China senior executive, Clinton Dines.

Combine those four and what emerges very clearly is that this week's or month's or year's passing concerns about whether China is growing at 8 or 11 per cent are irrelevant. As Dr Power frames it, China is just finishing its labour-intensive growth phase and starting its capital-intensive phase while India is about to enter labour-intensive growth. Never mind the boom that's already occurred, look to what is coming.

Spare me the usual myopic line born of American xenophobia and ignorance about China being dependent on exports to the USA. There is neither time nor space here to go into the detail of these four presentations, but Dines quickly dispatches such nonsense, pointing out that net exports' contribution to China's growth over the past decade has averaged just 1.5 per cent. And the United States' share of China's exports is 20 per cent so the much ballyhooed American consumer is only good for 0.3 per cent of China's GDP growth - growth that runs along in double digits or close to it even in the Great Recession.

That's only part of it. The stuff China exports to the US is mainly low value-added – clothing, toys, electronic gadgets. About half of China's exports now go to the developing world and that half has higher value-added content – power stations, mining machinery and the like.

Dines, an old China hand at just 53 thanks to starting in 1978, professes dismay at the West's conceit in its dealings with China. We just don't get it, don't understand how fundamentally the game has changed, how little China needs of us.

The real export story echoes a Power point (I know, it's a cheap line, but I couldn't resist it) that Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has been visiting Beijing to investigate buying high-speed trains for California.

Even the low-value export story to the west is changing, but the domestic demand story is so very much bigger. Michael Power is a seasoned performer on the economic big picture stage – he could pass for Michael Gambon's younger brother with the actor's talent for phrasing – and tells the story well with the pertinent illustrations.

An example of his examples: if you've been half tuned-in to the state of the world, you'd know that more cars are sold in China now than the US. That's already history. The insight that's worth thinking about is that car ownership penetration in China is only 3 per cent, 80 per cent of buyers are purchasing their first-ever car and 90 per cent pay cash. Not only is it a massive market, it's ungeared and untapped.

(Power passes on advice he was given before visiting China: you have to learn to handle BFNs. The B stands for Big and the N stands for Numbers. The numbers on everything are huge. If you're nice to Investec, they might let you have a copy of his 75 slides from last night's show with lots of BFNs, or you can get the gist of what he's on about from his blog.)

RBA assistant governor economic, Dr Philip Lowe, also is a dab hand at telling a telling example. There were several in his Asian growth implications speech last October that helped make it compulsory reading for anyone who wants to understand where we are and where we could be going, instead of just fluffing around with transient headlines. His NatStats speech last Thursday was something of an update on the October job.

We have a family saying that everyone tends to value opinions that agree with their own. Thus I'll happily quote Lowe:

“At a general level, the importance of Asia to Australia is now well understood. Despite this, it remains the case that the financial news from the United States and Europe dominates our newspapers and our airwaves. With this constant flow of information about the North Atlantic, it is sometimes easy to forget just how profound – and important to Australia – are the structural changes taking place in Asia.”

I think the good doctor is being kind. Among the illustrative snapshots on offer this time:

Over the past 30 years, nearly 400 million Chinese have moved to the cities. There are some 170 Chinese cities now with more than one million residents compared with only 35 in all of Europe. The urbanisation process has a long way to run with another 300 to 400 million people expected to move from the country to the city over the next 20 years. A typical 90 square-metre apartment in China requires about six tonnes of steel. Every tonne of steel requires around 1.7 tonnes of iron ore and more than half a tonne of coking coal. You can work it out from there.

And that's just high-rise apartments. China is building railways like no-one ever has and every 10km of metropolitan subway requires about 75,000 tonnes of steel. And so on.

To state what should be obvious to us: “These developments in China are being closely observed in Australia, including at the Reserve Bank. A decade or so ago, we spent a lot of time puzzling over why quarterly movements in Australian GDP were so highly correlated with quarterly movements in US GDP. We don't puzzle over this anymore – not because we solved the puzzle, but because the correlation has fallen. At the same time, the correlation between quarterly movements in Australian and Chinese GDP has steadily increased. Clearly what happens in the Australian economy is now more dependent upon what happens in China than has been the case at any time in our past.”

Emerging Asia is our economy now and will continue to be, as regular visitors to this column are probably sick of reading. But on top of the changing relative importance of the US to us is the declining absolute importance of the US. (This is me postulating now, echoing some of Power, not the more circumspect RBA.)

Wall Street still calls the sentiment tune, but with the threat of more quantitative easing (ie printing money), the US is undermining its claim to the baseline of global capitalism – the “risk free” US government bond. It's not risk free when its value is being eroded. The idea of the greenback being the safe haven currency is simply bemusing, it's so last century.

It takes time for the massive changes we are witnessing to work their way through the systems, with plenty of disruptions along the way, but it takes even longer for most of us to comprehend that it's happening.

The current India headlines are very reasonably about the Commonwealth Games fiasco. Governments of all kinds need a crisis from time to time to be kicked into action – maybe an extremely embarrassing Commonwealth Games crisis will be good for India if it results in the smashing of walls of inefficiency, red tape and corruption, lifting the nation with 30 per cent of the world's children into the next stage of growth.

But in the meantime it would be foolish to let a few hastily and shoddily built sporting facilities overshadow the existing importance of the nation to us, let alone the future. A final quick reminder from the RBA Bulletin: Everyone knows China is our biggest trade partner now, most don't know that we have a bigger trade surplus with India.

A factoid from an Economist magazine cover story last month: In 1990 two-trade between India and China was just $US270 million. It's expected to be more than $US60 billion this year.

Think you know the Chindia story? Betcha don't – no-one really does because it's simply too big to fully grasp and it's still being written. Besides, “Chindia” is only part of the story with the rest of emerging Asia deserving fat volumes as well.

Here's something you never gonna forget,
B-b-b-baby, you just ain't seen nuthin' yet.

Michael Pascoe is a BusinessDay contributing editor.

[buglerbilly]

Japanese quizzed in China as maritime row escalates

September 24, 2010 - 11:44AM

More "my dick is bigger than your dick" stuff from China............

China is investigating four Japanese nationals over claims they filmed sensitive military installations, in an escalation of a damaging row between the two countries.

The move came as US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton urged dialogue over the arrest by Japan of a Chinese fisherman earlier this month, which sent relations between the neighbours into a tailspin.

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao on Tuesday threatened retaliation over Japan's "mistake" as Beijing ramped up the pressure on Tokyo.

In a short report on Thursday, the state-run Xinhua news agency said: "Four Japanese are being investigated for having entered a military zone without authorisation and illegally videotaped military targets in northern Heibei province."

Japan's Kyodo news agency on Friday said the Japanese embassy in Beijing had confirmed four of the country's nationals were being questioned.

Chinese state security authorities have "taken measures against the four people according to the law after receiving a report about their illegal activities," Xinhua said.

The report gave scant details, other than to name one of the four as Sada Takahashi.

Japanese news agency Jiji Press said contractor Fujita Corp. "had information that four of its employees had been detained by Chinese authorities".

The report, citing a spokesman, said the company had not been in touch with the four since "at least Wednesday".

Kyodo said the four were on a visit to prepare for a bid on a scheme to dispose of chemical weapons left over by Japanese forces in World War II.

The move will likely worsen the row between Tokyo and Beijing that erupted with the arrest of the Chinese trawlerman following a collision near islands claimed by both countries in the East China Sea.

Beijing has made repeated angry demands for his release, which Tokyo has rebuffed, saying he is subject to domestic law having deliberately rammed coast guard boats with his trawler.

In a meeting with Japanese Foreign Minister Seiji Maehara on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York, Clinton said Washington wanted to see a negotiated settlement to the dispute, the worst between the two countries in a number of years.

Clinton sought to "encourage dialogue and (voiced) hope that the issue can be resolved soon", her spokesman Philip Crowley said, adding Japan-China ties "are vitally important to regional stability".

Crowley said Maehara told Clinton that his government was trying to resolve the dispute based on its legal process and international law.

Wen weighed in on the dispute shortly after arriving in New York on Tuesday, threatening "further actions" if Japan does not release the trawler captain.

"I strongly urge the Japanese side to release the skipper immediately and unconditionally," he said.

"If Japan clings to its mistake, China will take further actions and the Japanese side shall bear all the consequences that arise," he said, urging Tokyo to "correct its mistakes to bring relations back on track".

Wen told the UN General Assembly Thursday his country would not threaten another nation but would not yield in disputes over its national interests.

Without specifically mentioning the ongoing dispute, he said: "When it comes to sovereignty, national unity and territorial integrity, China will not yield or compromise."

Beijing has already suspended high-level contacts with Tokyo and called off several official visits.

Tokyo's ambassador has been called in for a dressing down by various officials in the Chinese foreign ministry on six occasions, once in the small hours of the morning.

The trawlerman, Zhan Qixiong, has been in custody since September 7 following the incident near a group of islands with rich fishing and mineral resources known as Senkaku by Japan and Diaoyu by China.

His detention has been extended until Wednesday, when, under Japanese law, he must be either indicted or released.

The dispute has caused anger in China, where resentment of Japan and its brutal occupation of parts of the country during the 1930s and 1940s still simmers.

At the weekend, small groups of anti-Japan demonstrators rallied in three Chinese cities, but the protests were brief and peaceful.

Sino-Japanese relations have gradually warmed in recent years as successive Japanese prime ministers have begun to engage more with their emerging neighbour.

© 2010 AFP
This story is sourced direct from an overseas news agency as an additional service to readers. Spelling follows North American usage, along with foreign currency and measurement units.

[buglerbilly]

Dispute with Japan highlights China's foreign-policy power struggle

By John Pomfret
Washington Post Staff Writer

Friday, September 24, 2010; 1:54 AM

The increasingly bitter dispute between China and Japan over a small group of islands in the Pacific is heightening concerns in capitals across the globe over who controls China's foreign policy.

A new generation of officials in the military, key government ministries and state-owned companies has begun to define how China deals with the rest of the world. Emboldened by China's economic expansion, these officials are taking advantage of a weakened leadership at the top of the Communist Party to assert their interests in ways that would have been impossible even a decade ago.

It used to be that Chinese officials complained about the Byzantine decision-making process in the United States. Today, from Washington to Tokyo, the talk is about how difficult it is to contend with the explosion of special interests shaping China's worldview.

"Now we have to deal across agencies and departments and ministries," said a U.S. official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss ties with China. "The relationship is extraordinarily complex."

Said a senior Japanese diplomat: "We, too, are often confused about China's intentions and who is calling the shots."

Japanese officials said the People's Liberation Army is responsible for the friction over the disputed island chain, known as the Senkakus in Japan and the Diaoyu islands in China. In early September, Japan's coast guard detained the captain of a Chinese fishing trawler, accusing him of ramming a Japanese coast guard vessel. In previous crises, China's Foreign Ministry has acted as a calming influence, but this time, Japanese diplomats said, the military led the charge.

China responded by demanding the captain's release, suspending talks, canceling the visits of Japanese schoolchildren and on Thursday arresting four Japanese who allegedly were taking photographs near a Chinese military installation.

Washington signaled to Beijing on Thursday that it would back Japan in the territorial dispute. Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters: "Obviously we're very, very strongly in support of . . . our ally in that region, Japan."

Other examples

The island dispute is the latest instance of players other than the party's central leadership driving China's engagement with the outside world.

Throughout this year, officials from the Ministry of Commerce, who represent China's exporters, have lobbied vociferously against revaluing China's currency, the yuan, despite calls to the contrary from the People's Bank of China and the Ministry of Finance.

In Iran, China's state-owned oil companies are pushing to do more business, even though Beijing backed enhanced U.N. sanctions against Tehran because of its alleged nuclear weapons program. The China National Offshore Oil Co. is in talks to ramp up its investment in the massive Azadegan oil field just as Japanese companies are backing out, senior diplomatic sources said. The move by CNOOC would have the effect of "gutting" the new sanctions, one diplomat said. U.S. officials have stressed to China that they do not want to see China's oil companies "filling in" as other oil companies leave, a senior U.S. official said.

China's main nuclear power corporation wants to build a one-gigawatt nuclear power plant in Pakistan even though it appears to be a violation of international guidelines forbidding nuclear exports to countries that have not signed onto the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty or do not have international safeguards on reactors. Pakistan has not signed the treaty.

"We have never had this situation before," said Huang Ping, the director of the Institute for American Studies at China's Academy of Social Sciences. "And it is troubling. We need more coordination among all agencies, including the military."

U.S. reaction

The U.S. government is trying to adapt to this new China with a mixture of honey and vinegar.

In July, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton talked tough with China about its claims to the whole of the South China Sea, joining with Vietnam and 10 other Southeast Asian nations to criticize China's recent aggressive behavior in that strategic waterway.

That message - that China should ensure freedom of the seas and negotiate disputed claims peacefully - is expected to be reinforced Friday when President Obama meets in New York with leaders from Southeast Asian nations. Several U.S. officials said the People's Liberation Army and China's state-owned oil companies had been driving China's more forceful claims to the sea.

U.S. officials have also moved to establish more personal connections with Chinese officials. Last month, Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg, the second-highest-ranking U.S. diplomat, spent a full day with Cui Tiankai, one of 12 assistant Chinese foreign ministers, taking him to the Inn at Little Washington, a restaurant in Virginia. The entourage proceeded to a 30-acre farm belonging to a senior State Department official, where Cui took a ride on a tractor. And in an attempt to engage more Chinese stakeholders than in the past, Clinton and Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner led the largest-ever delegation of U.S. officials to Beijing in May.

Several factors account for the rise of competing interests. President Hu Jintao has led the Communist Party for eight years, but it is not clear that he has ever been fully in control. After Hu took power in 2002, his predecessor, Jiang Zemin, stayed on as chief of China's military for two years. And Hu was the top man in a nine-member Politburo standing committee, but at least five of the seats were occupied by Jiang's allies.

"This is a time when the Chinese government is weak," said Shen Dingli, the executive dean of the Center for American Studies at Fudan University in Shanghai. "As a result, different interest groups have been unleashed in a less coordinated and less centralized way."

Simultaneously, the influence of China's Foreign Ministry is waning. Dai Bingguo, the current foreign policy supremo has no seat on the powerful 25-member Politburo; the military has two, and the state-owned sector has at least one.

While there is competition across ministries in China, U.S. officials have focused on the gap between the civilian side of the government and the People's Liberation Army.

In recent months, military officers have begun to air their views on foreign policy matters, seeking to define China's interests in the seas around the country.

Gen. Ma Xiaotian, deputy chief of the army's general staff, has blasted the United States for its involvement in the South China Sea. And in August, Maj. Gen. Luo Yuan lashed out at the United States for reportedly planning to deploy the aircraft carrier USS George Washington in the Yellow Sea for joint exercises with South Korea. (The George Washington was subsequently sent to the Sea of Japan, farther away from China.)

Pushback vs. military

Not all of the military statements went over well in China. In recent weeks, the Foreign Ministry has begun to push back against the military. In recent interviews in Beijing, officials and senior advisers to the government excoriated the military for making policy pronouncements.

"For me it is surprising that I'm seeing a general from the People's Liberation Army making a public statement regarding foreign policy, but this is China today," said Wu Jianmin, a former ambassador who helps run a think tank and advises China's leadership on foreign policy.

"This is not something the military should do," said Chu Shulong, professor of international relations at Tsinghua University. "These people don't represent the government, but it creates international repercussions when they speak out."

China's media is another factor in the fracturing of China's foreign policy. Another foreign policy player, the Ministry of Propaganda, has allowed the state-run press to criticize foreign governments as a way to bolster the Communist Party's position at home. As a result, China's newer publications, such as the mass-circulation Global Times, cover international affairs - in particular its relations with the United States and Japan - with all the verve that People magazine pours into the adventures of Paris Hilton.

"We are not happy about many of the stories published today," Wu said. "We Foreign Ministry people have told them you shouldn't do that, but they say, 'So what? Let the Americans hear a different voice.' "

Shen, the American-studies scholar, said some in China's leadership may support the idea of sending mixed messages on foreign policy as a way of testing the United States or Japan.

"The civilian government may think it does no harm," he said. "After all, if they succeed, it may advance China's interests."

[buglerbilly]

Japan releases Chinese fishing boat captain

Arrest after collision with coastguard ships in disputed waters sparked row between Japan and China

Tania Branigan in Beijing, Justin McCurry in Osaka and agencies guardian.co.uk,

Friday 24 September 2010 09.54 BST


Zhan Qixiong, seen being led away by Japanese coastguard personnel, was arrested after a collision in disputed waters. Photograph: Karii Matayoshi/AP

Japanese prosecutors have released the captain of a Chinese fishing boat, two weeks after a collision in disputed waters sparked a dramatic deterioration in ties between Beijing and Tokyo.

Zhan Qixiong was arrested on 8 September, a day after his ship collided with two Japanese coastguard vessels near the Senkakus, a group of uninhabited islands in the East China Sea that are claimed by both countries.

Prosecutors on the southern Japanese island of Okinawa, where Zhan was detained, said they would monitor both governments' response to their decision before deciding whether to indict him, but that course of action is looking increasingly unlikely.

They said the row caused by Zhan's detention and the possible impact on Japan-China ties had been a factor in their decision.

They accepted that Zhan had not intended to damage the Japanese vessels, but said he had been to blame by ignoring repeated requests to leave the area.

"We have decided that further investigation while keeping the captain in custody would not be appropriate, considering the impact on the people of our country as well as Japan-China relations in the future," the district's vice-prosecutor, Toru Suzuki, said.

The Senkakus, which are controlled by Japan, are surrounded by rich fishing grounds and near potentially huge undersea oil and gas deposits. Analysts say that underlying the dispute is rivalry between the countries over control of the East China Sea for strategic reasons and for control of the area's natural resources.

Japanese officials had earlier warned that the swift deterioration in bilateral ties posed a threat to the economies of both countries.

China was Japan's largest trading partner last year and Japan was China's third largest. Bilateral trade reached $147bn (£93.6bn) in the first half of this year – a jump of 34.5% over the same time last year, Japanese figures show.

"A cooling of relations between Japan and China over the Senkaku problem would be bad for Japan's economy, but it would also be a minus for China," Japan's finance minister, Yoshihiko Noda, said.

"It's desirable that both sides respond in a calm manner."

Liu Jiangyong, an expert on China-Japan relations at Tsinghua University in Beijing, said the prosecutors' decision could go some way towards repairing the damage to bilateral ties.

[buglerbilly]

China hints missiles targeting Taiwan 'could be axed'

(AFP) – 1 day ago

TAIPEI — Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao has suggested that mainland missiles pointing at Taiwan could one day be removed, Taipei-based media reported Friday.

"I believe the issue you mention will eventually be realised," Wen said according to the United Daily News and other newspapers, when asked about withdrawing Chinese missiles targeting Taiwan.

Wen made the remarks in New York while meeting Chinese-language media, the paper said.

Taiwanese experts estimate that the Chinese military has more than 1,600 missiles aimed at the island.

But recent reports in the island's media have said the People's Liberation Army may boost the number of short-range ballistic and cruise missiles facing Taiwan to 1,960 before the year's end.

Wen was also quoted by the United Daily News as saying China and Taiwan had reached a consensus on how to approach their delicate relationship, addressing relatively easy issues such as economic matters first.

China and Taiwan have been governed separately since the end of a civil war in 1949, but Beijing views the island as part of its territory awaiting reunification, by force if necessary.

The Pentagon said in an annual report to Congress in August that China's military build-up against Taiwan has "continued unabated" despite improving political relations.

China has repeatedly threatened to invade Taiwan should the island declare formal independence.

However, tensions across the Taiwan Strait have eased since Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou took office on a Beijing-friendly platform in 2008.

Copyright © 2010 AFP. All rights reserved.

[buglerbilly]

Japan considers sending troops to disputed islands

Japan is considering sending troops to be stationed near the disputed island chain that is at the heart of on-going tensions with China.

By Danielle Demetriou in Tokyo for the UK Daily Telegraph

Published: 7:00AM BST 29 Sep 2010


Chinese fishing boat captain Zhan Qixiong returns to China from Japan Photo: AP

The defence ministry was reported to have asked for a budget to study the possibility of stationing troops in Japan's southwestern island chains, which include the islands at the centre of the recent row with China.

Such a move is unlikely to improve increasingly tense relations between Japan and China since the arrest of a Chinese fishing captain earlier this month in the East China Sea region.

During the 17 days that the captain was detained by Japanese officials after allegedly colliding with coastguards, China expressed its anger by halting high-level government ties, cancelling top level talks and threatening further retaliation unless he was released.

Japan's new defence plans, reported by the business daily Nikkei, involve calls for members of the Self-Defence Forces to be stationed on its Yonaguni Islands which are government by Okinawa prefecture.

The only Japanese troops currently stationed permanently in the region are on the main Okinawa island which is also a major hub for US troops in Japan.

There have been calls from some Japanese politicians to consider stationing troops and building a hub for Japanese fishermen on the disputed islands, but the government has reacted cautiously to such proposals.

Since the fishing boat captain's release last week, it has been clear that it will take time for relations between Asia's two most powerful nations to get back onto a more comfortable footing.

At the height of tensions last week, there were reports – which were denied by Beijing – that China had halted exports of rare earth elements in further protest at Japan's stance in the dispute.

The move sparked concerns surrounding China's current monopoly of rare earth elements – vital components in high-tech products from iPods to electric cars – and its potential political exploitation of such resources.

Today, there were reports that China had ended the halt to rare earth export licences to Japan although delivery delays were still expected.

[Gubler, A.]

You think Japan would have learnt last time around that basing troops on isolated islands in the Pacific is not their best strength.

[Raven22]

Ah, but that is what's so brilliant about it. Doing precisely what they've done eighteen times before is exactly the last thing they'll expect them to do this time.

[Milne Bay]

Ah, but that is what's so brilliant about it. Doing precisely what they've done eighteen times before is exactly the last thing they'll expect them to do this time.

Thank you Melchett.
Actually, in this case they have little option.
Going to be interesting to watch this develop.
MB

[buglerbilly]

Will China keep rising or succumb to its paranoia?

By David Ignatius
Monday, October 25, 2010

SHANGHAI

"Warmly welcome to Sino-Century," says an electronic display at the entrance to a private-equity fund here. That's the name of the firm, but it's also a good description of the rising China that could dominate the next 100 years as the United States did the previous century.

So an American visitor here inevitably wonders: What will this Sino-century be like, for China and the world? Can the country's opaque and autocratic political system cope with the economic forces it has unleashed, or is a time bomb ticking under the gaudy prosperity? And perhaps most worrying: Is this ascendant China heading toward a collision with an America that instinctively thinks of itself as the world's leading power?

After a weeklong visit here, I come away more perplexed by these questions than when I arrived. The new wealth of the coastal cities is stunning, and it justifies all the hype you've read. But China's political fragility is also evident; uncertainty about the future is clear among members of the elite who are investing abroad and obtaining foreign passports as hedges, at the same time they are harvesting fortunes in renminbi.

This new China is at once cocky and scared -- anxiously looking over its shoulder even as it races ahead. Chinese officials keep reminding you how poor the country is, while also boasting of its success. They're increasingly pushy with neighboring countries but insist that China doesn't want enemies.

The ambivalence is clear when Chinese talk about the United States. America is a favorite destination for students and tourists, and there's a deep affinity for our rollicking, acquisitive capitalist ways. But Victor Yuan, a Chinese pollster, says that America has topped the public's list of China's "most dangerous enemies" for nine of the past 10 years.

The contrast between a rising China and a flagging America is reinforced by the Shanghai Expo, a festival of national self-congratulation spread along the banks of the Huangpu River. The Chinese pavilion features a film that compresses into a few minutes the astounding story of China's economic growth over the past 30 years. The dazzling images are interwoven with a saying of Confucius -- "Follow your heart's desire without overstepping the line" -- and I suspect every Chinese viewer understands the message: Be careful; obey the party; don't blow a good thing.

Over at the modest American pavilion, the welcoming film features self-satisfied Americans botching simple phrases in Chinese. It's an unwittingly apt national self-portrait.

The blessings of China's prosperity, and its limits, come through in a series of conversations arranged by the Committee of 100, a group of Chinese Americans that organized the tour I joined. A Jamaican American expatriate raves about the system's "utilitarian" virtues but concedes it is also "soulless." A Chinese analyst fears that a crisis of legitimacy will produce external war or domestic strife. A Chinese student bemoans China's "lack of confidence" and worries that "people now only believe in money."

Perhaps to help fill the spiritual void, the government encourages national fervor. In Nanjing, there's a powerful memorial to the Japanese plunder of the city in 1937, with graphic exhibits that must outrage Chinese visitors. China's reservoir of anti-Japanese feeling burst open with riots in several cities after a recent naval confrontation.

The prospect of a Chinese-American showdown is the trickiest problem of all. Jianyou Guo, a graduate student at Beijing's Tsinghua University who has served in the military, argues that his country must develop "more powerful naval forces" to protect its interests. And the 19th-century American apostle of sea power, Alfred Thayer Mahan, is very popular with the Chinese military. But Beijing is more focused on future spheres of warfare -- in space and cyberspace.

Dingli Shen, a prominent military analyst at Fudan University here, argues that Mahan's theories are outmoded. "China needs to go to space," he says. With a laser from space, "any ship will be burned." Rather than competing with the United States to build ships or tanks, China should develop more advanced weapons "to make other command systems fail to work."

"You eat steak. We eat rice congee. How can we have the same opinions?" Jokes a Chinese stand-up comedian named Libo Zhou. Translation: Let us be Chinese.

A week previewing life in the Sino-century left me with this thought: Paradoxically, perhaps, America has a big stake in China's success. And though Chinese leaders don't like hearing it, that means pushing them to achieve the genuine stability that can come only with a more democratic, less paranoid political system. The alternative is the anarchic crack-up that nobody talks about, but everybody fears.

davidignatius@washpost.com

[Exsandgroper]

Australia could be a martyr,
says Brigadier General John Frewen Michael Sainsbury, China correspondent From: The Australian November 16, 2010 12:00AM

AUSTRALIA runs the risk of "martyrdom" in the case of any China-US conflict.
ONE of Australia's most senior military officers has warned that the appearance of the first Chinese aircraft carrier within the next five years poses the "greatest risk" to regional harmony.

He adds that Australia runs the risk of "martyrdom" in the case of any China-US conflict.

The warnings come amid unease across Asia about China's growing military power - particularly the rapidly expanding People's Liberation Navy - and its new-found aggression in territorial disputes with neighbours such as Japan and Vietnam.

"Each of the Pacific nations will manage China's carrier ambitions differently, but the US response will set the regional tone," Brigadier General John Frewen wrote in an essay published in the US's Joint Force Quarterly's third-quarter edition.

The essay won the US Secretary of Defence's National Security Essay Competition for this year, the first time the award has been given to a non-US officer.

The paper has emerged as Australia's most senior military officers prepare to travel to China for the annual Defence Strategic Dialogue.

Australia upset China last year with the release of its defence white paper, which effectively said China was a potential threat in the region and made the surprise call for 12 new submarines to be added to the fleet.

"The unintended consequences of Chinese carriers pose the greatest threat to regional harmony in the decades ahead," General Frewen states. He noted that China did not have an Incident At Sea agreement with the US, similar to one that existed to defuse incidents between the US and Russia from 1972.

"Without an agreement to moderate sea incidents, it may be impossible to realise a 'harmonious ocean' between a Chinese carrier-capable navy and other regional navies in the South China Sea and Pacific."

The Defence Department said Brigadier Frewen's views did not represent the government's.

Last week, Australia promised to strengthen military ties with the US during high-level Ausmin talks with US Secretary of Defence Robert Gates. "It's entirely right that the Americans, ourselves and others talk about how these rising (regional) powers, including India, contribute to a regional and global rules-based order," Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd said after the talks.

Cheers

[Milne Bay]

Defence Aerospace is reporting:
The Uninvited Guest: Chinese Sub Pops Up In Middle of U.S. Navy Exercise, Leaving Military Chiefs Red-Faced


(Source: Daily Mail; issued Nov. 10, 2010)



When the U.S. Navy deploys a battle fleet on exercises, it takes the security of its aircraft carriers very seriously indeed.

At least a dozen warships provide a physical guard while the technical wizardry of the world's only military superpower offers an invisible shield to detect and deter any intruders.

That is the theory. Or, rather, was the theory.

American military chiefs have been left dumbstruck by an undetected Chinese submarine popping up at the heart of a recent Pacific exercise and close to the vast U.S.S. Kitty Hawk - a 1,000ft supercarrier with 4,500 personnel on board.

By the time it surfaced the 160ft Song Class diesel-electric attack submarine is understood to have sailed within viable range for launching torpedoes or missiles at the carrier.

According to senior Nato officials the incident caused consternation in the U.S. Navy.

The Americans had no idea China's fast-growing submarine fleet had reached such a level of sophistication, or that it posed such a threat.

One Nato figure said the effect was "as big a shock as the Russians launching Sputnik" - a reference to the Soviet Union's first orbiting satellite in 1957 which marked the start of the space age.

The incident, which took place in the ocean between southern Japan and Taiwan, is a major embarrassment for the Pentagon. (end of excerpt)

The lone Chinese vessel slipped past at least a dozen other American warships which were supposed to protect the carrier from hostile aircraft or submarines. And the rest of the costly defensive screen, which usually includes at least two U.S. submarines, was also apparently unable to detect it.


Is this another incident or does it refer to quite old news previously reported

[buglerbilly]

It almost certainly refers to news YEARS old, about up to par for the Daily Mail when it comes to Defence matters..............

[buglerbilly]

Ties with China of "Great Importance" to India: Indian Defence Minister

18:05 GMT, November 12, 2010

The Indian Defence Minister Shri AK Antony has said that India attaches great importance to its relations with China. Addressing a function here today after presenting the K. Subrahmanyam Award to Dr. Srikant Kondapalli, a noted scholar on Chinese Studies, Shri Antony hoped the award would encourage others to undertake intensive research on the rise of China as a superpower. Following is the text of the address delivered by Shri Antony on the occasion, to mark the 45th Foundation day of the Institute for defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA):

“It is a real pleasure to be in your midst for the 45th Foundation Day of IDSA. I express my warm greetings to all of you on the occasion. Our gratitude is also due to Professor Kaushik Basu, a renowned economist, for delivering the Foundation Day address today. I hope that the ideas expressed in his address will generate greater interest among our scholars on various issues and also in using other disciplines in their research. His ideas are thought-provoking. They will be useful to all of us.

One problem plaguing our institutes, think-tanks and universities is that they often work within the narrow confines of their respective disciplines. Real life problems, as complex as security and its various dimensions require a multi-disciplinary approach. It calls for a thorough understanding of a wide array of disciplines like Political Science, Economics, Sociology, Geography, History, Psychology and Natural Sciences. The security challenges of today are far more complex than at any time in the past. These challenges are both - global and local and nearly always, interlinked. Mankind needs to grasp facts clearly and understand issues in the proper perspective to facilitate better and quicker policy making. In this context, Indian think-tanks will have to discharge an important responsibility by way of rigorous policy research to support more-informed policy making.

I also take this opportunity to heartily congratulate Dr. Srikant Kondapalli for winning this year’s K. Subrahmanyam Award. This is the fourth award in the series and its conferment recognizes Dr. Kondapalli’s outstanding work on China, especially, its Armed Forces. We attach great importance to our relations with China. I hope that this award will provide impetus to other researchers to go in for more intensive research work on China. I also wish to compliment the winners of this year’s President Awards for their noteworthy contributions in journals of repute. I wish to strongly urge the younger scholars of IDSA to draw inspiration from such researchers and excel in their fields of study.

I am told that for the third year in succession, IDSA has been ranked amongst Asia’s top ten and the world’s top fifty think-tanks. In fact, IDSA is the only think-tank from India to have been included in this list. That way it is a satisfactory thing. You should not be satisfied with the 10th rank. You must aim to become No. 1, if not No. 1, then No 2. Even at the recent Commonwealth Games, India stood at No 2. So, IDSA too should aim to become at least No. 2. Coupled with the rising popularity of the Institute’s Visiting Scholars’ Programme, this reflects its growing national and international stature.

Despite these satisfactory developments, we cannot afford to relax and be complacent. There is still a lot of hard work ahead for all of us, if we really want to fructify the vision of becoming a ‘centre of excellence’. As I have said on earlier occasions, IDSA has to intensify its efforts to make the Institute’s work more relevant and useful to the policy-makers. You must be able to foresee the future challenges the country faces. You must strive tirelessly to continuously improve the quality and quantity of research work. IDSA scholars particularly need to increasingly tap the primary sources and field visits to add quality to your work. Original sources alone will provide new insights that are in touch with the ground reality. Last but not the least, research must not remain confined to being published in journals. You must make your research work more transparent and accessible to our policy makers, parliamentarians, the media, and to the general people. IDSA scholars need to reach out to as wide cross-section of the society, as possible. The ideas and findings need to be communicated in a substantial measure.

Let me share some thoughts on the issues that in my view the Institute needs to focus on. You must utilize the available human resources to turn the focus on key areas for deeper research, rather than scattering them on a large number of issues. You must focus only on key issues.

Among other things, your research work must factor in the rapidly changing geopolitical equations, geo-strategic developments and their implications for India’s security. You must pay special, critical attention to the developments in our immediate neighbourhood and beyond.

Today, the security scenario is constantly evolving due to the changing nature of conflicts. You must focus your energy on the strategy and force structures needed to face these unconventional threats and asymmetric conflicts. There are other issues that merit attention like defence reforms focusing on jointness, acquisition, offsets, development of India’s defence industrial base, terrorism, climate change and energy security. The challenge lies in producing original, high quality research studies with in a form that is useful for the policy makers.

Before I conclude, I wish to strongly emphasise the urgent need for high quality, analytical research work capable of anticipating threats, arriving at better-informed policy decisions and for defending India’s vital security interests.

Five years from now, IDSA will be celebrating the 50th Foundation Day. You must set your sights on becoming not only the best in Asia, but also in the world by 2015. I assure you my full support to your endeavours and hope that you will take IDSA to even greater heights."

[buglerbilly]

China is making some serious strides to get noticed and gain influence, see the following...............

Jordanian and Chinese senior military officials hold talks on ties

18:03 GMT, November 12, 2010

AMMAN | As Xinhua reports, Jordanian Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Lt. General Meshal Al Zaben on Thursday met with Xu Caihou, vice-chairman of China's Central Military Commission, to strengthen cooperation between the two countries.

Xu's visit shows the great importance China attaches to the bilateral ties, Zaben said.

Zaben thanked China for its support to Jordan's social development and to the just cause of the Arab states to maintain national interests, adding that Jordan will firmly support the one- China policy and any efforts made by China to safeguard its national sovereignty and territorial integrity.

He also expressed his hope for the two parties to continue to support each other on issues of common interests.

For his part, Xu said, China-Jordan relations have developed steadily since the two countries established diplomatic relations 33 years ago.

The military relation is an important part of the bilateral ties, and China is willing to strengthen cooperation with the Jordanian military forces in the future to strengthen friendship between the two, Xu said.

Xu also thanked Jordan for its supports on issues related to Taiwan, Tibet and Xinjiang.

Xu arrived in Amman on Wednesday for a three-day visit. Jordan is the last leg of his Middle East trip that also includes United Arab Emirates and Syria. (Xinhua)

Romanian Defence Minister Meets Chinese Counterpart

17:54 GMT, November 12, 2010

During his visit to the People?s Republic of China, defence minister Gabriel Oprea had a meeting with his Chinese counterpart, Mr. Liang Guanglie, on Thursday, November 11. The two ministers had talks on military bilateral cooperation, on the ways to strengthen military cooperation in common training of troops and political and military related issues, on the developments of the international security environment.

"The friendly relations our countries have traditionally known over many years translated into cooperation at political, economic, cultural and scientific levels. Good bilateral cooperation relations between of our military hint to the opportunity we have to work together on the transformation of our armed forces, to identify the best solutions in meeting the challenges of the present, to be contributors to global security", minister Gabriel Oprea stated.

In talking of the practical aspects of military bilateral cooperation, the Romanian defence minister said he was especially pleased with the establishment of a Chinese language lab in Bucharest, the first of its kind in Europe. The lab, a donation of the Chinese military, is intended to become a Regional Center in the near future.

Common training exercises conducted by Land Forces units, extended cooperation of military institutes for strategic studies, experience exchanges in aspects concerning the developments of the international security environment were some of the fields the two ministers identified with a view to improving Romanian-Chinese military relations.

During the official talks, the Romanian defence minister highlighted the Romanian experience in the theater of operations in Afghanistan, stressing that the participation in ISAF is a national operational priority despite existing financial constraints.

Minister Liang Guanglie in his turn expressed his satisfaction with the evolution of political and military relations between Romania and the People's Republic of China over their 61-year long history of diplomatic relations, that have always been based on mutual trust. The Chinese defence minister was highly interested in the military experience Romanian has acquired and emphasized the importance of bilateral cooperation, including the common troops training as in this second edition of exercise "Friendship Action 2010" conducted these days with Romanian mountain troops.

That same day, Thursday November 11, Minister Gabriel Oprea had a meeting with General Guo Boxiong, Vice President of the Central Military Committee at the defence ministry location. The officials discussed aspects concerning bilateral relations of the two countries with an emphasis on military ones.

Mr. Oprea also visited Sergeant (R) Daniel Porumb, at present under treatment at the Neurological Institute "Hongtianji". Minister Gabriel Oprea discussed with the soldier and his mother, encouraging them to have confidence in the treatment he is given at this neurological clinic. "You have the power of a symbol and you have earned the respect your comrades in Romania have for you, for the courage and sacrifice you put into your duty. Have confidence that we will always be by your side ", defence minister Gabriel Oprea told Sergeant (R) Porumb.

The minister also spoke with the Chinese doctors thanking them for the care they offer to the Romanian soldier. Daniel Porumb told the minister that he could feel a slight health improvement ever since the first medical procedures had been implemented and that he was optimistic. He thanked the minister for his visit and for the support he got in order to be admitted to such a famous clinic. On October 25, on the Day of the Romanian Armed Forces, the defence minister awarded Daniel Porumb the highest military medal, ?Emblema Onoarea Armatei României". At the end of his stay in the People?s Republic of China, the defence minister will pay a new visit to Sergeant (R) Porumb.

On November 12 and 13, defence minister Gabriel Oprea will be present at the Romanian-Chinese common training exercise "Friendship Action 2010", conducted in Kunming, Yunnan Province; he will discuss with the Romanian soldiers of the training programme conducted alongside their Chinese partners.

Chinese Chief of General Staff visits Ecuador, Venezuela and Peru

18:02 GMT, November 12, 2010

At the invitation of the militaries of Ecuador, Venezuela and Peru, Chen Bingde, member of the Central Military Commission and chief of general staff of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA), and his party left Beijing on November 11 for the three countries to pay an official goodwill visit.

The principal entourage including Zhu Jinlin, commander of the PLA Xinjiang Military Area Command (MAC) , Hou Jizhen, chief of staff of the PLA Shenyang MAC, Jia Xiaowei, chief of staff of the PLA Guangzhou MAC, Lin Jianchao, director of the General Office of the PLA General Staff Headquarters, Liu Zheng, chief of staff of the Headquarters of the PLA General Logistics Department, Ci Guowei, deputy director-general of the Foreign Affair Office of the Ministry of National Defense of the People’s Republic of China, and others left Beijing on board the same plane with Chen Bingde.

----
Lv Desheng / PLA Daily

[buglerbilly]

Taiwan envoy: China wants no sovereignty

November 16, 2010 - 7:24PM

A Taiwanese envoy says Chinese President Hu Jintao told him the two sides should establish better communications to avoid "internal strife" over Beijing's claim to the island.

Tuesday's statement by Lien Chan came three weeks after China's delegation at a Japanese film festival demanded that Taiwan participate under the name "China Taiwan". Taiwan refused because the name would suggest it was under China's sway, though the sides split in 1949.

Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou warned on Tuesday that further efforts by China to undermine Taiwan's sovereignty could harm the reconciliation efforts that have been at the heart of his two-and-a-half-year-old administration.

Lien met Hu at the recently concluded Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation forum in Japan.

© 2010 AP

[buglerbilly]

Production of indigenous missile systems going smoothly: official

2010/12/08 21:23:03



Taipei, Dec. 8 (CNA) The mass production of two missile systems developed by Taiwan has been proceeding smoothly, Deputy Defense Minister Chao Shih-chang said Wednesday.

Chao was referring to the Hsiungfeng IIE (HF-2E) surface-to-surface cruise missile system and Hsingfeng III supersonic anti-ship missile, both of which were developed by the military-run Chungshan Institute of Science and Technology.

During a meeting of the Legislative Yuan's Foreign and Defense Committee, Legislator Lin Yu-fang of the ruling Kuomintang asked Chao about the production of several indigenous weapon systems which is scheduled to peak in 2011.

In response, Chao said the problems of acquiring key components for the indigenous missile systems have been resolved and production is now going smoothly as scheduled.

Moreover, mass production of several new indigenous weapon systems, such as the Leiting 2000 multiple rocket launcher, an unmanned aerial vehicle and the Yunpao (Cloud Leopard) armored vehicle

[buglerbilly]

Military strength eludes China, which looks overseas for arms

By John Pomfret
Washington Post Staff Writer

Saturday, December 25, 2010; 12:00 AM

MOSCOW - The Moscow Machine-Building Enterprise Salyut on the east side of town has put up a massive Soviet-style poster advertising its need for skilled workers. The New Year's party at the Chernyshev plant in a northwest suburb featured ballet dancers twirling on the stage of its Soviet-era Palace of Culture.

The reason for the economic and seasonal cheer is that these factories produce fighter-jet engines for a wealthy and voracious customer: China. After years of trying, Chinese engineers still can't make a reliable engine for a military plane.

The country's demands for weapons systems go much further. Chinese officials last month told Russian Defense Minister Anatoly E. Serdyukov that they may resume buying major Russian weapons systems after a several-year break. On their wish list are the Su-35 fighter, for a planned Chinese aircraft carrier; IL-476 military transport planes; IL-478 air refueling tankers and the S-400 air defense system, according to Russian news reports and weapons experts.

This persistent dependence on Russian arms suppliers demonstrates a central truth about the Chinese military: The bluster about the emergence of a superpower is undermined by national defense industries that can't produce what China needs. Although the United States is making changes in response to China's growing military power, experts and officials believe it will be years, if not decades, before China will be able to produce a much-feared ballistic missile capable of striking a warship or overcome weaknesses that keep it from projecting power far from its shores.

"They've made remarkable progress in the development of their arms industry, but this progress shouldn't be overstated," said Vasily Kashin, a Beijing-based expert on China's defense industry. "They have a long tradition of overestimating their capabilities."

Ruslan Pukhov, the director of the Center for Analysis of Strategic Technologies and an adviser to Russia's ministry of defense, predicted that China would need a decade to perfect a jet engine, among other key weapons technologies. "China is still dependent on us and will stay that way for some time to come," he said.

Indeed, China has ordered scores of engines from the Salyut and Chernyshev factories for three of its new fighters - the J11B, a Chinese knock-off of the Russian Su-27; the J10, which China is believed to have developed with Israeli help; and the FC1, which China modeled on an aborted Soviet design. It also told Russia that it wants a third engine from another factory for the Su-35.

How China's military is modernizing is important for the United States and the world. Apart from the conflict with radical Islamism, the United States views China's growing military strength as the most serious potential threat to U.S. interests around the world.

Speaking in 2009, Liang Guanglie, China's minister of defense, laid out a hugely ambitious plan to modernize the People's Liberation Army, committing China to forging a navy that would push past the islands that ring China's coasts, an air force capable of "a combination of offensive and defensive operations," and rocket forces of both "nuclear and conventional striking power."

The Pentagon, in a report to Congress this year, said that that the pace and scale of China's military reform "are broad and sweeping." But, the report noted, "the PLA remains untested in modern combat," thus making transformation difficult to assess.

'Could be sitting ducks'

One area in which China is thought to have made the greatest advances is in its submarines, part of what is now the largest fleet of naval vessels in Asia. In October 2006, a Chinese Song-class diesel-powered attack submarine reportedly shadowed the USS Kitty Hawk aircraft carrier and surfaced undetected four miles from the ship. Although the Pentagon never confirmed the report, it sparked concern that China could threaten the carriers that are at the heart of the U.S. Navy's ability to project power.

China tried to buy Russian nuclear submarines but was rebuffed, so it launched a program to make its own. Over the past two years, it has deployed at least one of a new type of nuclear-powered ballistic-missile submarine called the Jin class and it may deploy as many as five more.

The Office of Naval Intelligence said the Jin gives China's navy its first credible second-strike nuclear capability; its missiles have a range of 4,000 miles. But in a report last year, the ONI also noted that the Jin is noisier than nuclear submarines built by the Soviets 30 years ago, leading experts to conclude that it would be detected as soon as it left port.

"There's a tendency to talk about China as a great new military threat that's coming," said Hans M. Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists. But, when it comes to Chinese submarines carrying ballistic missiles, he said, "they could be sitting ducks."

Another problem is that China's submariners don't train very much.

China's entire fleet of 63 subs conducted only a dozen patrols in 2009, according to U.S. Navy data Kristensen obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, about a tenth of the U.S. Navy's pace. In addition, Kristensen said there is no record of a Chinese ballistic-missile sub going out on patrol. "You learn how to use your systems on patrol," he said. "If you don't patrol, how can you fight?"

Anti-ship capabilities

China's missile technology has always been the pointy edge of its spear, ever since Qian Xuesen, the gifted rocket scientist who was kicked out of the United States during the McCarthy period in the 1950s, returned to China.

U.S. government scientists have been impressed by China's capabilities. On Jan. 11, 2007, a Chinese missile traveling at more than four miles a second hit a satellite that was basically a box with three-foot sides, one U.S. government weapons expert said. Over the past several years, China has put into orbit 11 of what are believed to be its first military-only satellites, called Yaogan, which could provide China with the ability to track targets for its rockets.

China is also trying to fashion an anti-ship ballistic missile by taking a short-range rocket, the DF-21, and turning it into what could become an aircraft-carrier killing weapon.

Even though it has yet to be deployed, the system has already sparked changes in the United States. In September, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said China's "investments in anti-ship weaponry and ballistic missiles could threaten America's primary way to project power and help allies in the Pacific - particularly our forward bases and carrier strike groups." The U.S. Navy in 2008 cut the DDG-1000 destroyer program from eight ships to three because the vessels lack a missile-defense capability.

But the challenge for China is that an anti-ship ballistic missile is extremely hard to make. The Russians worked on one for decades and failed. The United States never tried, preferring to rely on cruise missiles and attack submarines to do the job of threatening an opposing navy.

U.S. satellites would detect an ASBM as soon as it was launched, providing a carrier enough warning to move several miles before the missile could reach its target. To hit a moving carrier, a U.S. government weapons specialist said, China's targeting systems would have to be "better than world-class."

Wu Riqiang, who worked for six years at the China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation as a missile designer, said that while he could not confirm that such a missile existed, he believed weapons such as these were essentially "political chips," the mere mention of which had already achieved the goal of making U.S. warships think twice about operating near China's shores.

"It's an open question how these missiles will do in a conflict situation," said Wu, who is now studying in the United States. "But the threat - that's what's most important about them."

Morale trouble

The deployment of a naval task force to the Gulf of Aden last year as part of the international operation against pirates was seen as a huge step forward for China. The implication was that China's military doctrine had shifted from defending China's borders to protecting China's interests, which span the globe. But the expeditionary force has also provided a window into weaknesses of the People's Liberation Army, according to a new report by Christopher Yung, a former Pentagon official now at the National Defense University.

China's lack of foreign military bases - it has insisted that it won't station troops abroad - limits its capacity to maintain its ships on long-term missions. A shortage of helicopters - the workhorses of a naval expeditionary force - makes it hard for the ships to operate with one another. China's tiny fleet of replenishment ships - it has only three - doesn't give it enough capacity to do more than one such operation at a time.

China's navy, according to Yung, also has difficulty maintaining a fresh water supply for its sailors. And poor refrigeration on its ships makes it hard to preserve fruit and vegetables, something that makes for griping on board.

"The sailors during the first deployment had a real morale problem," Yung said, adding that following their mission, they were taken on a beach vacation "to get morale back up."

Empowering local commanders, considered key to a successful fighting force, is something that Beijing clearly has yet to embrace. British Royal Navy Commodore Tim Lowe, who commanded the Gulf of Aden operation for the U.S. 5th Fleet up until May, noted that while other navies would send operations officers to multinational meetings to discuss how to fight pirates, China would dispatch a political officer who often lacked expertise. The concept of sharing intelligence among partner countries was also tough for the Chinese to fathom. To the Chinese, he said, "that was an unusual point."

Tension with the Kremlin

China's military relations with Russia reveal further weaknesses. Between 1992 and 2006, the total value of Russia's arms exports to China was $26 billion - almost half of all the weapons Russia sold abroad.

But tensions arose in 2004 over two issues, Russian experts said. Russia was outraged when it discovered that China, which had licensed to produce the Su-27 fighter jet from Russian kits, had actually copied the plane. China was furious that after it signed a contract for a batch of IL-76 military transport planes it discovered that Russia had no way to make them. After receiving 105 out of a contracted 200 Su-27s, China canceled the deal and weapons negotiations were not held for several years.

Purchases of some items continued - S-300 air defense systems and billions of dollars worth of jet engines. An engine China made for its Su-27 knock-off would routinely conk out after 30 hours whereas the Russian engines would need refurbishing after 400, Russian and Chinese experts said.

"Engine systems are the heart disease of our whole military industry," a Chinese defense publication quoted Wang Tianmin, a military engine designer, as saying in its March issue. "From aircraft production to shipbuilding and the armored vehicles industry, there are no exceptions."

When weapons talks resumed with Russia in 2008, China found the Russians were driving a harder bargain. For one, it wasn't offering to let China produce Russian fighters in China. And in November, the Russians said they would only provide the Su-35 for China's aircraft carrier program if China bought 48 - enough to ensure Russian firms a handsome profit before China's engineers attempted to copy the technology. Russia also announced that the Russian military would buy the S-400 air defense system first and that China could get in line.

"We, too, have learned a few things," said Vladimir Portyakov, a former Russian diplomat twice posted to Beijing.

[buglerbilly]

China preparing for armed conflict 'in every direction'

China is preparing for conflict 'in every direction', the defence minister said on Wednesday in remarks that threaten to overshadow a visit to Beijing by his US counterpart next month.


Photo: AP By Peter Foster, Beijing

1:30PM GMT 29 Dec 2010

The threat to China is NOT external, its internal, has been since Maoism was overcome............

"In the coming five years, our military will push forward preparations for military conflict in every strategic direction," said Liang Guanglie in an interview published by several state-backed newspapers in China. "We may be living in peaceful times, but we can never forget war, never send the horses south or put the bayonets and guns away," Mr Liang added.

China repeatedly says it is planning a "peaceful rise" but the recent pace and scale of its military modernisation has alarmed many of its neighbours in the Asia-Pacific, including Japan which described China's military build-up as a "global concern" this month.

Mr Liang's remarks come at a time of increasingly difficult relations between the Chinese and US armed forces which a three-day visit by his counterpart Robert Gates is intended to address. A year ago China froze substantive military relations in protest at US arms sales to Taiwan and relations deteriorated further this summer when China objected to US plans to deploy one of its nuclear supercarriers, the USS George Washington, into the Yellow Sea off the Korean peninsula.

China also announced this month that it was preparing to launch its own aircraft carrier next year in a signal that China is determined to punch its weight as a rising superpower. The news came a year earlier than many US defence analysts had predicted.

China is also working on a "carrier-killing" ballistic missile that could sink US carriers from afar, fundamentally reordering the balance of power in a region that has been dominated by the US since the end of the Second World War.

A US Navy commander, Admiral Robert Willard, told Japan's Asahi Shimbun newspaper this week that he believes the Chinese anti-ship missile, the Dong Feng 21, has already achieved "initial operational capability", although it would require years of testing.

Analysts remain divided over whether China is initiating an Asian arms race. Even allowing for undeclared spending, China's annual defence budget is still less than one-sixth of America's $663bn a year, or less than half the US figure when expressed as a percentage of GDP.

However in a speech earlier this year Mr Gates warned that China's new weapons, including its carrier-killing missile, "threaten America's primary way to project power and help allies in the Pacific", underscoring the difficulties that lie ahead as China and the US seek to contain growing strategic frictions.

As China modernises, Mr Liang pledged that its armed forces would also increasingly use homegrown Chinese technology, which analysts say still lags behind Western technology even as China races to catch up.

"The modernisation of the Chinese military cannot depend on others, and cannot be bought," Mr Liang added, "In the next five years, our economy and society will develop faster, boosting comprehensive national power. We will take the opportunity and speed up modernisation of the military."

[buglerbilly]

Chinese military aircraft more aggressive since September, Japan claims

Chinese military aircraft have become more aggressive in confrontations with Japanese aircraft operating over the East China Sea, since a collision between a Chinese trawler and Japanese Coast Guard vessel in September.


Chinese aircraft are not turning home as soon as they realise they have been detected but are continuing on their course Photo: AP

By Julian Ryall in Tokyo 10:55PM GMT 30 Dec 2010

Defence officials in Tokyo told the Asahi newspaper that in addition to the harassment of Japanese aircraft, China has stepped up its probing of air defences in the region and the monitoring of military exercises involving units from the United States and Japan.

In the last nine months, Japanese fighters have been scrambled to intercept Chinese intruders on 44 occasions, the highest figure in the last five years and more than double the number for the whole of fiscal 2006, the defence ministry officials said.

In another deviation from their previous behaviour, the Chinese aircraft are not turning home as soon as they realise they have been detected but are continuing on their courses until they make visual contact with Japanese interceptors.

Chinese reconnaissance aircraft are also increasingly entering Japan's Air Defence Identification Zone. Although this is not a breach of territorial airspace, it does inevitably lead to interceptors being scrambled.

The ministry officials said that prior to the incident off the Senkaku Islands – which Japan controls but both Taiwan and China claim as their sovereign territory – Chinese fighters and reconnaissance aircraft had avoided entering Japan's ADIZ.

In October, a Chinese Navy JH-7 fighter-bomber reportedly breached the ADIZ and came close enough to a Japanese fighter to make a visual identification.

During the "Keen Sword" military exercises in early December, F-15 fighters based in Okinawa were scrambled to meet an unidentified aircraft approaching the ADIZ. Japanese pilots confirmed that the aircraft was a Chinese Navy Y-8X maritime patrol aircraft.

There is growing concern in Japan at Beijing's increased spending on its military, particularly its navy and air force, as it looks to project its influence further into the Pacific and south-east Asia.

[buglerbilly]

30 December 2010 - 10H40

EU 'could end China arms embargo'

A European Union arms embargo clamped on China in 1989 following the Tiananmen Square crackdown could be lifted in early 2011, Brussels sources told France's Le Figaro daily. AFP - A European Union arms embargo clamped on China in 1989 following the Tiananmen Square crackdown could be lifted in early 2011, Brussels sources told Thursday's edition of France's Le Figaro daily.

The lifting of the embargo on all lethal weapons "could happen very quickly," a source close to EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton told the paper.

It said that the embargo was considered a slap in the face for the world's second largest economic bloc as well as militarily ineffective by the EU as China increasingly builds its own weapons.

A confidential report presented to the last European Union summit that ended on December 17 described the embargo as "a major obstacle" to Europe-China security and foreign policy cooperation.

As a result "the EU should draw the practical conclusions and go ahead," the report said.

Europe was divided on the issue when it was discussed at a meeting of the EU's 27 foreign ministers in September, with some mooting the idea of a conditional lifting of the embargo.

Conditions included improved ties with Taiwan, an amnesty for arrests linked to the Tiananmen crackdown, and a calendar for the ratification of the convention on civil and political rights.

The Figaro said that the Netherlands, Britain and, to a lesser extent, Germany, had all lowered their opposition to lifting the embargo.

Chinese troops and tanks ended weeks of pro-democracy protests in Beijing's Tiananmen Square on June 4, 1989, killing hundreds if not thousands of demonstrators.

[gf a.k.a. ROBOPIMP]

anyone who thinks that they will make volume sales out of china is dreaming, at best they'll buy a short run, then they'll pick out what they want and either clone or adapt that tech to their own needs.

MTU have suffered this, Russian goods in general have suffered this, the French copped it with the Hecate, the British with Searchwater, Australia with the 2208's....

slow learners all

[buglerbilly]

Sat, Jan 01, 2011

PRC’s fifth-generation jet pictures cause stir in US

By William Lowther / Staff reporter in WASHINGTON

Signaling a greater-than-ever military threat to Taiwan, new information emerged this week showing that China might be much further ahead in its development of a fifth-generation fighter aircraft than previously believed.

In what has caused a major stir within the Pentagon, Beijing Internet censors earlier this week allowed high-resolution photographs of the Chengdu Aircraft Corp stealth fighter to be published for the first time.

“For Taiwan, this means that even a sale of the latest versions of the Lockheed Martin F-16 will only provide a brief period of technical parity with the People’s Liberation Army,” Rick Fisher, a senior fellow at the International Assessment and Strategy Center in Washington, told the Taipei Times.

Fisher said it was now possible China could deploy significant numbers of the fifth-generation fighters — codenamed the Chengdu J-20 — within 10 years.

“There is now even greater reason for Taiwan to consider shifting its air defense resources to the more survivable short take-off fifth-generation F-35B, with modifications that increase its air combat potential,” he said. “Today, it is doubly tragic for Taiwan that Washington does not appear to be willing to sell either fighter to Taipei. Such a lack of resolve by Washington will only hasten the military confrontation it has successfully deterred since the Korean War.”

Taiwan is urgently pressing US President Barack Obama to sell it 66 advanced versions of the F-16, but with Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) scheduled to visit Washington later this month, a sale is unlikely to be approved anytime soon.

Credible sources claim China could build at least 300 J-20s.

Aviation Week and Space Technology reported that China has begun flight-testing the J-20, which puts it only a few years behind the troubled F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which is being developed by the US and a coalition of countries.

While it is possible that the newly released photographs of the J-20 are fakes, most US analysts believe them to be the real thing.

One military analyst said the plane had a chiseled front--section, triangular wings, all-moving tail-planes and seemed to combine the front fuselage of the US’ F-22 with the back half of the Russian T-50 stealth prototype.

“The J-20’s appearance could signal a big step forward for the Chinese air force, which to date relies mostly on airplanes bought from Russia or reverse--engineered from Russian or Israeli designs,” an analyst said.

Judging from the photographs, the J-20 is at least 21m from nose to tail, which means it would have a lower “supercruise” performance and agility than the F-22. However, with larger weapon bays and more fuel, it would have a longer range and carry more arms.

US military sources told the Taipei Times that China may be getting Russian help with the J-20 and that Moscow may be supplying 14.5 tonne thrust 117S engines for the plane, which is expected to double as a bomber.

Fisher said the J-20 could “supercruise,” or fly supersonically, for extended periods without using fuel-guzzling afterburners.

One commentator, writing on the Aviation Week and Space Technology Web site, said the new plane was “something to hang out at 50,000 feet [15.2km] over the Taiwan Strait with a large downward looking radar and serve up a large payload of AAM’s [air-to-air missiles] at anything underneath.”

Dean Cheng (成斌) of the Heritage Foundation think tank has linked the unexpected leak of the J-20 photographs with news earlier in the week that China had reached initial operational capability with a ballistic missile that may be capable of hitting and sinking an aircraft carrier, and reports that Beijing would soon launch a refurbished former Soviet aircraft carrier.

“All of these news items serve to underscore that China’s military development has proceeded more rapidly than many had expected and all of these military efforts are occurring without any pressing military threat to China’s borders or interests,” Cheng said.

“The US should never be afraid to engage the PRC [People’s Republic of China], but neither should it give the Chinese the impression that Washington is dealing with them out of fear. Only a consistent national security policy, including a sustained US presence in the region, can do that,” he said.

[Gubler, A.]

One commentator, writing on the Aviation Week and Space Technology Web site, said the new plane was “something to hang out at 50,000 feet [15.2km] over the Taiwan Strait with a large downward looking radar and serve up a large payload of AAM’s [air-to-air missiles] at anything underneath.”

Isnt that a description for any fighter jet... terrible news story, no credible sources, no credible analysis. Joke time.

[buglerbilly]

Isnt that a description for any fighter jet... terrible news story, no credible sources, no credible analysis. Joke time.

Yup, its from a Taiwanese newspaper so part of the "Reds are coming" phobia that dominates so much of Political life there..........still!

Another "analysis", commentary or whatever, quoted APA as a qualified source, the Muppets are qualified for what exactly?

[Riđđu]

Yup, its from a Taiwanese newspaper so part of the "Reds are coming" phobia that dominates so much of Political life there..........still!


Ok that "analysis" is clearly flawed, but I must defend small countries here!

Consider the possibility that the Reds are really coming some day. At the moment the possibly is quite low, but if the Reds really decide to come consider what that means for a small country like Taiwan? Yes, it could be the end of their existence as an independent island.

[Gubler, A.]

Well China no longer has an agressive Taiwanese policy since Hu Jintao become Gen Sec of the CCP. Also despite all the song and dance about modernisation their forces do NOT and won't under current plans have the capability to invade Taiwan. To provide deterence Taiwan just needs to counter the kind of overmatch needed for a successful invasion. Not to mention keep Beijing happy over the political issues.

[Milne Bay]

Well China no longer has an agressive Taiwanese policy since Wen Jaibao become Gen Sec of the CCP. Also despite all the song and dance about modernisation their forces do NOT and won't under current plans have the capability to invade Taiwan. To provide deterence Taiwan just needs to counter the kind of overmatch needed for a successful invasion. Not to mention keep Beijing happy over the political issues.

I think that China will continue to pursue re-unification as a long term goal.
All it needs to do is to encourage a wide range of freedoms between itself and Taiwan, along with the development of trade and joint ventures. The carrot of a free trade agreement would be hard to resist.
Continue the mantra that it only seeks peaceful re-unification while showing at the same time how strong it is.
In time, I see Taiwan going the way of Hong Kong.
This may well be in the back of the minds of US strategists who would be reluctant to sell high tech weaponry to Taiwan (F-35 etc) in case it ended up in Chinese hands.
Just my 2c worth.
MB

[Gubler, A.]

I think that China will continue to pursue re-unification as a long term goal.
All it needs to do is to encourage a wide range of freedoms between itself and Taiwan, along with the development of trade and joint ventures. The carrot of a free trade agreement would be hard to resist.
Continue the mantra that it only seeks peaceful re-unification while showing at the same time how strong it is.
In time, I see Taiwan going the way of Hong Kong.
This may well be in the back of the minds of US strategists who would be reluctant to sell high tech weaponry to Taiwan (F-35 etc) in case it ended up in Chinese hands.
Just my 2c worth.
MB

Of course China has a very strong re-unification agenda with Taiwan but they turned it around 90 degrees after the heavy handed threats before Hu.

Taiwan effectively has free trade with China, the two are hugely inter-related economically. But Taiwan will never agree to re-unification as long as China remains a single Leninist party state.

As to American arms policy with Taiwan they have for a long time ‘negotiated’ an understanding with China that they can supply ‘second line’ equipment to Taiwan without significant change to their relationship with China. Of course what constitutes ‘second line’ is a very complex arrangement but certainly a weapon system like the F-35 which isn’t even in US front line service wouldn’t count. They sell a lot of highly advanced systems to Taiwan and have the anti-tamper stuff in place so that they aren't so concerned about it falling into bad hands. Certainly a China second hand acquistion via takeover of Taiwan is not a serious consideration.

[Poor_Canada]

Although I'm not an expert on geopolitics by any means, I'm just a humble contractor, I'll give my two cents derived from my post-college days teaching English in Beijing and Busan, ROK.

I agree with the sentiment in this thread that China's main threat is internal. Spending some time in the south of China opened my eyes to the divisions and regionalism present. The southern Chinese hate the northerners, ie Manchurians (even though the region is now mostly Han), they regard them as barbarians. Teaching my classes, I noticed that the Han students treated the kids of Mongol descent as sub-humans. Looking a han Chinese in the eye as a Mongol was an invitation for a beating. I never encountered Manchu as far I know in my classes, but I heard the deragatory jokes often enough.

Furthermore, the one lasting impression I got from my year in the Middle Kingdom was the the overwhelming cultural obesseion with food. Being heavily populated seemingly since the dawn of civilization, the Chinese consume anything thats edible. With food prices rising, a problem allured to in this thread, and Chinese households spending nearly half their incomes on food, social problems will arise.

I don't have time to get into the environmental aspects, and I'm probably in the minority, but I view the astonishing growth of the gobi desert eastward towards the fertile lands as one of their biggest hurdles, as it relates to food production down the road.

[buglerbilly]

EU to Keep China Arms Embargo Despite Massive Investments (excerpt)

(Source: EU Observer; published Jan. 4, 2011)

BRUSSELS --- Catherine Ashton has failed to persuade the UK and other Beijing-critical member states to lift the EU arms embargo on China. But China is continuing to build influence in the Union with bond purchases from vulnerable countries.

"There remains a broad consensus within the EU that the time is not right to lift the arms embargo. We need to see clear progress on the issues that necessitated the embargo in the first place, namely on civil liberties and political rights," a British diplomat told EUobserver on Tuesday (4 January) in response to speculation on a potential shift in EU policy, which would require a consensus of all 27 EU members.

A diplomat from a former Communist EU country added: "There is simply no talk of it in the run-up to the EU foreign ministers' meeting [on 31 January]. After the Nobel Peace Prize and China's reaction to that, it is politically unimaginable to make any move for the time being."

Leaving aside the moral dimension, any change on the embargo could also harm EU-US relations.

Asked by EUobserver on Tuesday if the US is reconsidering its position on China arms sales, the State Department pointed to comments made by a senior US diplomat, John Hillen, in 2005 as still being relevant. Mr Hillen at the time said that lifting the embargo would "raise a major obstacle to future US defence co-operation with Europe."

The EU imposed the ban in 1989 in response to China's killings of thousands of dissidents during protests in Beijing's Tiananmen Square.

France and Spain have recently argued that the arms ban is out of date due to China's economic metamorphosis and de facto changes in EU-China trade relations. The EU's foreign relations chief, British politician Catherine Ashton, aligned herself with anti-embargo countries in a strategy paper on China delivered to EU leaders in December. The paper said the embargo is "a major impediment" for better relations and that the Union should elaborate "a way forward." (end of excerpt)

Click here for the full story, on the EU Observer website.

http://euobserver.com/9/31592/?rk=1

-ends-

[buglerbilly]

China to make multimillion pound investment in beleaguered Spain

Agreements likely to involve public support for Spanish bonds and exports of olive oil, ham and wine

Elena Moya The Guardian, Wednesday 5 January 2011


Spain's prime minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero will sign the agreement. Photograph: Eric Thayer/Reuters

Spain will announce a series of economic agreements with China in an attempt to shore up the country's beleaguered finances.

With 4 million unemployed and borrowing costs near eurozone highs, Spain will welcome the multimillion pound Chinese investment, which is likely to include olive oil, ham and wine exports to the world's second-largest economy.

Spain has been under pressure from international investors, who have been selling sovereign bonds of high-deficit countries on fears that debts will not be repaid. The sell-off has already pushed Greece and Ireland into bailouts by the European Union and the International Monetary Fund, and has created high uncertainty around a potential rescue for Portugal and Spain. Both countries have denied they need any help to meet their debt payments.

"Europe's peripheral nations desperately need to find buyers for their debt to help push down the cost of their borrowings, so China's desire to diversify its reserves out of dollar-denominated assets could help to save the eurozone," said Kathleen Brooks, research director at Forex.com.

The agreements, to be signed by prime minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero and China's vice-president Li Keqiang , will most likely involve public support for Spanish bonds. China already holds 13% of Spain's debt.

Zhu Bangzao, China's ambassador to Madrid, told El País newspaper that his country planned to continue buying Spanish debt. "During these times of crisis, China feels it is a requirement to support Spain and the EU to work together to end the crisis," Bangzao said. "We are not coming empty handed."

China wants to diversify the investment of its more than $2.6tn (£1.6tn) of foreign reserves, now mostly allocated in the US treasury market.

The agreements with Spain may include deals in key areas such as banking, tourism and energy. The delegation has already met with several Spanish officials, including finance minister Elena Salgado, to finalise details. The meetings are part of a European tour by Chinese officials, who will also travel to Britain and Germany.

It is not the first time China has moved to help out struggling European nations. Following Greece's bailout in May, China announced multibillion euro accords with the country, involving shipping, tourism and telecommunications. The agreements included the commitment of Cosco, one of the world's largest container terminal operators, to extend its reach with the construction of up to 15 dry bulk carriers in Greece. The company took over cargo management at Pireaus, the eastern Mediterranean's premier dockyard, on a 35-year concession. BCEGI, a Chinese construction company, also signed an accord to develop a hotel and shopping mall complex in Pireaus. Other deals include the exchange of know-how between China's Huawei Technologies and the Greek telecoms organization OTE and four agreements signed by food firms to export olive oil to China.

[buglerbilly]

China's Missile and Stealth Fighter Advances Draw U.S. Attention

By Tony Capaccio - Jan 6, 2011 3:35 AM GMT+0800

The Pentagon underestimated the speed at which China has developed and fielded a ballistic missile that may be capable of hitting a maneuvering U.S. aircraft carrier, the head of Navy intelligence said today.

“We’ve been on the mark on an awful lot of our assessments but there has been a handful of things we have underestimated,” Vice Admiral Jack Dorsett told defense reporters. The DF-21D missile now has so-called initial combat capability, he said, according to his analysts and U.S. Pacific Command head Admiral Robert Willard.

Dorsett said it was too early to tell whether the U.S. also has misjudged China’s capability to build a stealth fighter jet comparable to the U.S. F-22. The purportedly stealthy aircraft, known as the J-20, would be a first for China.

The Chinese have tested the DF-21D missile over land a sufficient number of times to conclude that “the missile system itself is truly competent and capable,” Dorsett said. Still, China has not yet demonstrated a capability to use the missile effectively in combat situations, he said.

China’s advances in military technology are drawing close scrutiny and concern from the Pentagon and new Republican- controlled House, particularly when they may jeopardize the dominance of U.S. naval forces in the Pacific region. News of the Chinese advances comes as Congress prepares to consider cuts in the Defense Department budget.

Chinese Threat

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in a Sept. 16 speech that China’s “investments in anti-ship weaponry and ballistic missiles could threaten America’s primary way to project power and help allies in the Pacific -- particularly our forward bases and carrier strike groups.”

Gates is scheduled to visit China next week for talks seeking to improve military relations.

Dorsett’s remarks on the DF-21D status go further than the Pentagon did in its latest annual report on China’s military, released in August.

The 2010 report included a sketch of the notional flight profile of the new missile. It gave no indication that the missile had reached, or was close to, an initial combat capability. Nor did the report mention China’s new J-20 stealth fighter, which has appeared in photos on the Internet in recent days.

U.S. intelligence in particular misjudged China’s progress developing the technology necessary to sense and attack a maneuvering vessel, Dorsett said. Dorsett heads the Navy’s Office of Naval Operations for Information Dominance, which includes Navy intelligence.

Surprising Progress

On advances in ballistic-missile capabilities by the Chinese, Dorsett said “we certainly wouldn’t have expected them to be this far along” if asked five years ago.

“The technology has increased their probability of being able to employ a salvo of missiles to be able to hit a maneuvering target” he said.

Still, the Chinese military has yet to demonstrate it can effectively employ the missile, Dorsett said.

“They have certainly test fired this over land, but to our knowledge they have not test fired this over water against maneuvering targets,” he said.

China has “the intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, they have sensors on ships that can feed into the missile for targeting,” he said. “So could they start to employ that? Yes, I think so.” He added that it is unclear how “proficient they are in the employment” of that capability.

Stealth Fighter

Photos of the J-20 aircraft have appeared on the Internet and Aviation Week & Space Technology reported Monday that the aircraft was conducing early runway tests as a prelude to a first test flight.

“I think time will tell whether we have underestimated. I’m not convinced that we have at this point. It will take more time,” Dorsett said.

The J-20 disclosure “was not a surprise,” Dorsett said. “It’s not clear to me” when the aircraft will reach its initial operational status.

“They have been able invest in a military build-up and a stealth fighter is just one aspect of that,” he said. “The fact they are making progress in that should not be a surprise us.”

“How far along are they? I don’t know. They clearly have an initial prototype,” Dorsett said. “Is it advanced and how many trials and test and demos do they need to go through before it becomes operational? That’s not clear to me.”

Reaching that status could take years, he said.

To contact the reporters on this story: Tony Capaccio in Washington at acapaccio@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Mark Silva at msilva34@bloomberg.net .

[buglerbilly]

Chinese expansion fears revealed

Philip Dorling

January 7, 2011

AUSTRALIA'S intelligence agencies believe China is hiding the extent of a huge military build-up that goes beyond national defence and poses a serious threat to regional stability.

A strategic assessment by the agencies found China's military spending for 2006 was $90 billion - double the $45 billion announced publicly by Beijing.

Australia's peak intelligence agency, the Office of National Assessments, as well as the Defence Intelligence Organisation and the Defence and Foreign Affairs departments concluded that China was building a military capability well beyond its priorities of self-defence and preventing Taiwan's independence.

''China's longer-term agenda is to develop 'comprehensive national power', including a strong military, that is in keeping with its view of itself as a great power,'' says a copy of the secret assessment provided by Foreign Affairs officials to the US embassy in Canberra.

''We agree that the trend of China's military modernisation is beyond the scope of what would be required for a conflict over Taiwan. Arguably China already poses a credible threat to modern militaries operating in the region and will present an even more formidable challenge as its modernisation continues.''

Details of the 2006 intelligence assessment are contained in a US embassy cable obtained by WikiLeaks and provided exclusively to the Herald.

The Australian document goes on to warn that the pace of China's military build-up and ''the opacity of Beijing's intentions and programs'' was ''already altering the balance of power in Asia and could be a destabilising influence''.

''There is the potential for possible misconceptions which could lead to a serious miscalculation or crisis,'' it says.

The Australian intelligence agencies suggest China could overestimate its own capabilities with a significant risk of strategic miscalculation and instability.

''The nature of the [People's Liberation Army] and the regime means that transparency will continue to be viewed as a potential vulnerability. This contributes to the likelihood of strategic misperceptions,'' the document says.

''The rapid improvements in PLA capabilities, coupled with a lack of operational experience and faith in asymmetric strategies, could lead to China overestimating its military capability. These factors, coupled with rising nationalism, heightened expectations of China's status, China's historical predilection for strategic deception, difficulties with Japan, and the Taiwan issue mean that miscalculations and minor events could quickly escalate.''

Although successive Australian governments have called on China to be more transparent about its military spending, ministers and diplomats have studiously avoided public reference to the scale of the discrepancy between Beijing's published figures and the likely reality behind the scenes.

The Australian estimate of a 2006 military budget of $US70 billion ($90 billion at the September 2006 exchange rate), has not been revealed previously - though it is consistent with academic and published US government estimates of China's growing military spending.

The secret Australian assessment is also much sharper than the language later employed in the Rudd government's 2009 Defence white paper, which said China was on the way to becoming Asia's strongest military power ''by a considerable margin'' and warned that the pace and scope of its growth could give its neighbours cause for concern if not properly explained.

The Rudd government publicly played down reports of a hostile Chinese reaction to the white paper when it was published, but secretly briefed the US that Beijing had threatened that Australia would ''suffer the consequences'' if references to China's growing military capabilities were not watered down.

The Defence Chief, Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston, and the then defence minister, Joel Fitzgibbon, insisted that China had no problem with the white paper. But other leaked US embassy cables report that the then deputy secretary for Defence, Mike Pezzullo, briefed US diplomats that he had been ''dressed down'' by Chinese officials who had a ''look of cold fury'' at the references to China in the white paper.

In the September 2006 briefing of the US embassy, Foreign Affairs officials advised that Australia hoped to use its defence relationship with China to promote increased transparency in that country's military development plans.

''We remain focused on deepening the Australia-China defence relationship in areas such as peacekeeping, counter-terrorism and junior leadership exchanges, while remaining cautious to avoid practical co-operation that might help the PLA to fill capability gaps,'' the Australian paper presented to the embassy concluded.

The Royal Australian Navy and the Chinese navy held their first joint exercise involving firing of live ammunition in September last year.

Last month the Defence Department secretary, Ian Watt, and Air Chief Marshal Houston attended the 13th annual Australia-China Defence Strategic Dialogue, which was hosted in China by General Chen Bingde, the chief of the PLA General Staff.

Dr Watt said that the dialogue was ''an integral component of Australia's defence engagement with China, and provided the opportunity to have frank and open conversations and to exchange views on areas of common interest''.

Dr Watt and Air Chief Marshal Houston also met the vice-president and deputy chairman of China's Central Military Commission, Xi Jinping.

Air Chief Marshal Houston said: ''We committed to continuing to develop our military relationship and practical cooperation together.''

[Gubler, A.]

The disparity between real and declared funding is nothing new. Even SPIRI has been reporting this for years.

[buglerbilly]

Mon, Jan 10, 2011 - Page 3　

Early-warning radar site hits snag after Aborigines complain

By Hsu Shao-hsuan / Staff Reporter, Taipei Times

Plans to begin operating a long-range early-warning radar system at the Hsinchu Air Force base toward the end of this year could be temporarily shelved after Aborigines raised concerns over the impact of high-voltage transmission lines on their communities.

The Executive Yuan has reportedly approved subsidies of NT$8 million (US$272,000) and NT$4 million to be paid by the Air Force and Taipower respectively to three tribes over whose territories high-voltage transmission lines powering the system would pass. The NT$12 million would be put into a special account to be supervised by the Council of Indigenous Peoples.

The air force said that according to the contract, software for the long-range early-warning system — based at Leshan (樂山), Miaoli County, and scheduled for completion next month or in March — is expected to enter the testing phase this year. However, because the project has faced a series of delays since its inception in 2006, the US reminded the military last year that if tests on power supplies were not completed this year, the air force would be responsible for covering the expenses of the entire team of experts, which could amount to about US$250 million.

The long-range early-warning radar is about 10 stories high and has a range of 3,000km. Taiwan purchased the equipment from the US to monitor ballistic missiles and cruise missiles and to act as a forward position for the US’ ballistic missile defense system.

Because the amount of energy required to operate the radar is extremely high, the power supply at the radar site is insufficient and the Air Force has commissioned Taipower to erect high-voltage towers in Nanchuang Township (南庄), Miaoli County.

Sources said that while 50 high-voltage towers were initially planned for the project, protests by residents of Nanchuang forced contractors to find an alternative. As a result, 13 underground towers and about 30 aboveground towers will be built instead. However, the three Aboriginal tribes remained dissatisfied with the new plan and at one point are believed to have demanded NT$300 million in compensation from the air force.

The air force said that in a worst-case scenario, it could use the power supply at Leshan to try to satisfy energy requirements during the software--testing phase.

Sources said the radar was being manufactured in the US and that after software performance integration testing, the full system could be installed by the end of this year.

[buglerbilly]

U.S. will respond to Chinese military advances: Gates


Secretary of Defense Robert Gates prepares to board a military jet at Andrews Air Force Base outside Washington for a week-long, three-country trip to Asia, January 8, 2011.
Credit: Reuters/Larry Downing/Pool

By Phil Stewart

ABOARD A U.S. MILITARY AIRCRAFT | Sat Jan 8, 2011 7:34pm EST

ABOARD A U.S. MILITARY AIRCRAFT (Reuters) - The United States will enhance its own capabilities in response to China's growing military muscle, Defense chief Robert Gates said on Saturday, as he to flew to Beijing for talks with China's political and military leaders.

As its economy booms, China has significantly increased investment in its military, and its faster-than-expected advances in its ballistic missile, combat aircraft and other strategic programs have raised eyebrows in the United States.

Gates acknowledge that some of China's advances, if confirmed, could eventually undermine traditional U.S. military capabilities in the Pacific region.

"They clearly have the potential to put some of our capabilities at risk and we have to pay attention to them. We have to respond appropriately with our own programs," Gates told reporters.

"My hope is that through the strategic dialogue that I'm talking about, that maybe the need for some of these capabilities is reduced."

Gates cited a five-year budget outline that he unveiled on Thursday as an example of how the U.S. military would maintain its edge. It included funding for a new generation of long-range nuclear bombers, new electronic jammers and radar, and new satellite launch technology.

But critics in Congress seized upon the budget outline's $78 billion in overall defense spending cuts as a sign that key U.S. military capabilities would be under-funded.

U.S. officials have taken note of disclosures in recent weeks of advances in China's capabilities, including in its anti-ship ballistic missile program, which could challenge U.S. aircraft carriers in the Pacific.

"I've been concerned about the development of the anti-ship cruise and ballistic missiles ever since I took this job," Gates said. He added China appeared "fairly far along" with its anti-ship ballistic missile but he said he did not know if it was operational yet.

China may also be ready to launch its first aircraft carrier in 2011, faster than some estimates, and new photos indicate it has a prototype of a stealth fighter jet.

Still, Gates appeared to play down the Chinese program. Asked about its prototype, he said: "I think there is some question about just how stealthy" it is.

NO DRAMATIC BREAKTHROUGHS

The stated goal of Gates' Jan 9-12 trip to China is to improve relations with China's military.

U.S. and Chinese military ties were suspended through most of 2010, as Beijing protested President Barack Obama's proposed arms sale to Taiwan. His trip to China is the most visible demonstration that relations have normalized.

Gates said he did not expect any dramatic breakthrough in relations with China's military during the visit, saying an improvement in ties was more likely to be gradual.

"I think this is evolutionary, particularly the military to military side," Gates said.

"So rather than something dramatic, some kind of dramatic breakthrough, I think just getting some things started would be a positive outcome," he added, after having spoken at length about ways the U.S. and China could improve dialogue.

Analysts warn that as China's military expands its reach, the risks of potentially dangerous misunderstandings between the U.S. and Chinese militaries will increase.

That bolsters U.S. arguments about the need for sustained U.S.-China contacts that can endure friction over issues like Taiwan, as opposed to on-again, off-again contacts that have characterized the relationship for years.

Gates' visit comes a week before Chinese President Hu Jintao's state visit to Washington, creating diplomatic momentum that U.S. officials hope will allow Gates to make headway on sticky security issues.

"I think the Chinese' clear desire that I come first, come to China before President Hu goes to Washington, was an indication of their interest in strengthening this part of the relationship," Gates said.

He also praised China's efforts to reduce tensions on the Korean peninsula. As North Korea's main diplomatic and economic backer, China has been under pressure to rein in Pyongyang after the sinking of a South Korean warship and shelling of a South Korean island last year.

"We recognize that China played a constructive role in lessening tensions on the peninsula in the latter part of last year," he said.

(Editing by Philip Barbara)

[buglerbilly]

U.S., China Must Cooperate as World Powers, Gates Says

(Source: U.S Department of Defense; issued January 10, 2011)

BEIJING --- The United States and China are world powers that need to cooperate, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said here today.

At a news conference with after their meeting at the Bayi Building, Gates and Gen. Liang Guanglie, China’s minister of national defense, spoke of the importance of strong, reliable military-to-military contacts between the nations.

“Our two nations now have an extraordinary opportunity to define our relationship not by the obstacles that at times divide us, but by the opportunities that exist to foster greater cooperation and bring us closer together,” Gates said.

Both men noted that Chinese President Hu Jintao and President Barack Obama want good military-to-military ties between the nations.

Later, Gates met with Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping at the Great Hall of the People. “We’ve seen the United States and Chia cooperate to address several issues on the international front that pose dangers both regionally and across the world,” Gates said to Xi. “These are examples of what we can accomplish when we work together.”

The Chinese cut off military-to-military ties after the U.S. government sold defensive weapons to Taiwan last year. Gates has stressed that the military-to-military relationship must continue in good times and bad.

“We are in strong agreement that in order to reduce the chances of miscommunication, misunderstanding or miscalculation, it is important that our military-to-military ties are solid, consistent and not subject to shifting political winds,” Gates said.

Liang seemed to agree. Through a translator, the Chinese defense minister said both countries desire a healthy military-to-military relationship. “We both recognize that enhancing and maintaining dialogue and communication at all levels is of great significance in the development of military-to-military relations,” Liang said. Both sides share a responsibility to build mutual trust, he added.

The United States and China have more uniting them than dividing them, both men said. The United States and China agreed to cooperate on counterterrorism, counterpiracy, humanitarian operations and disaster assistance. The United States proposed, and the Chinese agreed, to study beginning a strategic security dialogue “as part of a broader strategic and economic dialogue that covers, nuclear, missile defense, space and cyber issues,” Gates said.

The two agreed to pick up and move out on seven high-priority areas for developing military-to-military relations that Gates negotiated with Gen. Xu Caihou, vice chairman of the Central Military Commission, in October 2009. They include high-level visits, institutionalized exchange programs and military education.

The high-level visits will begin soon with Gen. Chen Bingde, the Chinese army’s chief of staff, visiting the United States in the coming months as the guest of Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The two men sought to institutionalize and normalize contacts between the two militaries, agreeing that the defense consultative talks, the defense policy coordination talks and the military maritime consultative agreement can serve as important channels of communication between the two nations. Liang announced that the two nations agreed to hold the military maritime working group meeting and the defense policy coordination talks in the first half of this year.

The United States and China also will put together a joint working group that will discuss the guiding principles and framework for military-to-military relations and produce working documents for approval.

Gates and Liang both stressed that the cooperation will expand mutual interests and avoid misunderstanding and miscalculation.

China and the United States share many common interests and concerns that can best be addressed cooperatively, Gates said, noting that the two nations can work together addressing the challenges posed by the spread of nuclear, space, cyber and missile technology. They also can work to maintain peace and security on the Korean peninsula by facilitating engagement between the two Koreas and working toward the de-nuclearization of the Korean peninsula, he added.

China and the United States also can cooperate to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to defuse global conflicts and tensions.

U.S. service members can expect more joint exercises with the Chinese military.

“Not only will joint exercises improve key capabilities on both sides,” Gates said, “they will also lead to safer practices for our sea and air forces and over time cultivate trust and lead to more opportunities for defense cooperation.” (ends)

Media Availability with Secretary Gates En Route to Beijing, China (excerpt)

(Source: U.S Department of Defense; issued January 8, 2011)

Q: Secretary, considering the revelations recently about the new ballistic missile that the Chinese are developing faster than American – the U.S. intelligence thought and the stealth fighter photos which have come out, does this – first of all, does this lend any additional urgency to your visit? Are you particularly concerned about that? And secondly, are you doing anything to address the possible – or checking to possible intelligence lapses that allowed them to get further than expected?

SECRETARY GATES: Well, I think, first of all, we’ve been watching these developments all along. I’ve been concerned about the development of the anti-ship cruise and ballistic missiles ever since I took this job. I would – we knew they were working on a stealth aircraft. I think that what we’ve seen is that they may be somewhat further ahead in the development of that aircraft than our intelligence had earlier predicted.

The one statement that I would make in terms of – I never said – as somebody quoted me – that their stealth aircraft didn’t matter. What I said was that in 2020 or 2025 that there would still be a vast disparity in the number of deployed fifth generation aircraft that the United States had compared to anybody else in the world. And I continue to stand by that statement even with some of the program changes that we’ve made in the Joint Strike Fighter.

And so these are matters of concern, and frankly if you go back and look very carefully at that egregiously long statement from last Thursday, you will notice that there – some of these higher priority areas for investment are focused on some of these anti-access programs.


Q: Let me just clarify what you said. You said the intel on the stealth fighter was – that they were (moving ?) ahead of that, faster than you thought?

SECRETARY GATES: Somewhat.


Q: (Inaudible.)

SECRETARY GATES: Well, I’ve heard it. I’d seen it about the stealth, but not – about the aircraft but not the missiles.


Q: Mr. Secretary, the last time that you were here, you talked very specifically about transparency with the Chinese. Is that something that you’ll be pushing again soon?

SECRETARY GATES: Well, I think that becomes – my hope would be that that would be part of the strategic dialogue, that as the two countries begin to talk about strategy and policies and so on that intentions will become more transparent. And I think that would be helpful. (end of excerpt)

Click here for the full transcript, on the Pentagon website.

http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=4748

-ends-

[buglerbilly]

China: a force fit for a superpower

The technology and firepower of the People’s Liberation Army are growing so fast that observers are no longer curious but concerned, says Malcolm Moore.

By Malcolm Moore 7:28PM GMT 10 Jan 2011

It has been a month to remember for the top brass of China’s People’s Liberation Army. While other armies fret about their funding, China’s generals have unveiled three major new weapons that could challenge the military supremacy of the United States and provide the firepower to underline China’s superpower status.

In a dry dock in the northern city of Dalian, smoke has begun to billow from the chimneys of the Shi Lang, a hulking Soviet-era ship that China bought from Russia and has refitted to become its first aircraft carrier. Named after a Qing dynasty admiral, the carrier is slated to make its maiden voyage later this year, four years ahead of schedule. Five more aircraft carriers could bolster the Chinese fleet further over the next decade.

Meanwhile, at an air base in the central city of Chengdu, China’s first stealth fighter jet has been spotted taxiing along a runway. It has yet to take off, but American plane-spotters have already begun speculating that it might be able to beat an F-22 in a dogfight. Finally, at a command bunker in the north of Beijing, the Chinese Second Artillery Corps controls the jewel in the crown – a new missile that could sink a US aircraft carrier, the first such weapon in the world. The Dong Feng (or East Wind) 21D missile is now “operational”, according to Admiral Robert Willard of the US Pacific Command, which will now have to think twice before committing a $20 billion (£12.8 billion) aircraft carrier and its 6,000 crew anywhere within 900 miles of the Chinese coast.

The unveiling of the new weapons could not have been better timed. Tomorrow, the US defence secretary, Robert Gates, is due to visit the tall white skyscraper that serves as the Second Artillery’s headquarters. Mr Gates, who has admitted that US intelligence has underestimated the speed of China’s progress, will be able to see the PLA’s array of nuclear and ballistic missile options for himself.

The transformation of the PLA, from Chairman Mao’s Red Army into a modern fighting force, began in the wake of the first Gulf War, when America’s precision missiles impressed upon Beijing that modern warfare no longer depended on having the biggest army. Ever since then, the PLA has been shedding troops, from some three million during the 1990s to 2.3 million currently. Xu Guangyu, a senior military analyst, predicted that troop numbers would keep falling, to 1.5 million – “Around the same size as the US and Russian armies,” he said.

But while troop numbers have fallen, the quality of the soldiers has risen, said Mr Xu. Almost 80 per cent of officers are now graduates, and a full two-thirds of China’s defence budget is spent on salaries and training. Meanwhile, a stinging submission at the hands of the US in 1996, when Bill Clinton sent two aircraft carrier strike groups into the East China Sea to support Taiwan during a regional spat, has provoked the PLA into upping its firepower. According to the Pentagon, China has the world’s “most active land-based ballistic and cruise missile programme”. A battery of more than 1,100 short-range missiles faces Taiwan, while medium and longer-range missiles, many bought from Russia, can carry nuclear or conventional warheads to anywhere within 4,000 miles of China, giving Beijing the ability to knock out every US air base in the Pacific.

China’s economic miracle has paid for the munitions, with the PLA’s official budget increasing more than fivefold from $14.6 billion in 2000 to $78.6 billion this year. Unofficially, the spending is thought to be far higher, at $150 billion, with China’s leaders keeping many of the PLA’s deals off the books in order to avoid alarming the rest of the world. And while the sum is still just a fraction of the US budget – Mr Gates has allocated $588 billion for “non-war” military spending this year, after trimming $78 billion of cuts – China has spent the money prudently, focusing on areas of US weakness.

China’s submarine fleet now boasts 65 vessels, and by 2030, according to the Kokoda Foundation, an Australian think tank, the total could rise to between 85 and 100, more than the US and enough to establish an edge in the Pacific. China has also integrated the skills of its military and civilian computer hackers, launched several reconnaissance and guidance satellites, and installed arrays of new radars and underwater sensors to ring its territory.

“There are a number of areas where the PLA has adopted approaches that differ significantly from the US’s approach,” said a Pentagon report to Congress last month. “Examples include the heavy reliance on ballistic and cruise missiles, rather than stealth aircraft, to attack ground targets inside heavily defended airspace; an array of systems to attack intelligence, communications and navigation satellites [and] an emphasis on offensive and defensive electronic warfare.”

While the PLA’s generals have been careful to tone down their nationalistic rhetoric in recent years, dropping the suggestion of an imminent invasion of Taiwan, the army is behaving with more swagger, at least in its own backyard. China insists its only goal is to safeguard “regional peace and stability”, but it has dramatically increased its penetrations of Japanese airspace, resulting in Japanese fighter jets being scrambled 44 times in the past year, double the total for 2006, according to the Asahi Shimbun newspaper.

Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, said: “A gap as wide as what seems to be forming between China’s stated intent and its military programmes leaves me more than curious about the end result. Indeed, I have moved from being curious to being genuinely concerned.”

The PLA does, however, have a long list of fundamental weaknesses that have been pointed out by critics both in China and abroad. Its biggest failing is that it cannot, yet, produce the reliable jet engines it needs for its fighters, having to rely on Russia. That relationship was strained, in 2004, when Moscow discovered that China had copied one of the jets it had advance-ordered and put it into production. “China’s army should not have to rely on others or have to buy its equipment,” said Liang Guanglie, the defence minister, despairingly.

Meanwhile, the PLA’s Jin-class nuclear submarine is said, by the US Office of Naval Intelligence, to be noisier than the submarines built by the Soviets 30 years ago. China’s fighter pilots are no match for US Top Guns. A shortage of foreign naval bases makes it difficult for China to maintain ships on long missions. Sailors who took part in exercises against Somali pirates in the Gulf of Aden were reported to have run short of water and fresh food.

And perhaps most reassuringly, the new Dong Feng “carrier killer” missile is impaired by China’s undeveloped missile guidance system. While Beijing can launch the deadly missile, it is not clear it can actually hit a ship. Since US satellites would detect the missile upon launch, an aircraft carrier would have enough warning to move several miles out of the way.

For now, Beijing wields enough power to keep the US in check in the Pacific and to discourage Taiwan from relying too heavily on American support. In the future, the Pentagon believes that the PLA could extend further into the Pacific, using its fleet to control shipping lines and oil concessions. The “pace and scale” of the PLA’s modernisation has been “broad and sweeping”, the Pentagon said. But, for now, China’s modern army “remains untested”.

[Gubler, A.]

China: a force fit for a superpower

The technology and firepower of the People’s Liberation Army are growing so fast that observers are no longer curious but concerned, says Malcolm Moore.

By Malcolm Moore 7:28PM GMT 10 Jan 2011

Meanwhile, at an air base in the central city of Chengdu, China’s first stealth fighter jet has been spotted taxiing along a runway. It has yet to take off, but American plane-spotters have already begun speculating that it might be able to beat an F-22 in a dogfight.

[buglerbilly]

You mean Bunny Rabbit is wrong in his accurate assessment of the inter-galactic adventurism and overwhelming capability of this new Chinese plane to make MacDonalds healthy? Fuck! I'm disappointed...............

[buglerbilly]

This is where the true "threat" from China lies, commercial supremacy, or at least an attempt at such.............

More Western nations match China's financing strategy to win contracts

By John Pomfret
Washington Post Staff Writer

Wednesday, January 12, 2011; 12:04 AM

When General Electric approached the U.S. Export-Import Bank in 2009 wanting to sell 150 locomotives for $477 million to Pakistan, there was a sense of futility. GE had already lost an earlier bid to a Chinese firm. Why would Pakistan buy American-made locomotives this time?

After all, China was a powerful competitor that routinely offered low-cost financing - below-market interest rates, easy repayment terms - that cut tens of millions of dollars off the bottom line of its international deals.

But in a case that underscores a significant shift in how the United States and the rest of the developed world are dealing with the challenge of China's economic might, the U.S. Ex-Im Bank decided to fight back. In February of last year, U.S. Ex-Im informed Pakistan's Ministry of Railways that it would take the unprecedented step of matching China's below-market-rate financing terms. And on Dec. 9, the executive committee of Pakistan's National Economic Council approved the purchase of the locomotives. While the case remains caught up in Pakistan's famously Byzantine court system, thanks to a lawsuit brought by a Chinese-backed plaintiff, the Ex-Im decision underscores an evolving new view on China.

"There's a new willingness to take on China, to compete toe-to-toe with China on financial terms," said Fred Hochberg, the chairman of the Ex-Im Bank. "This is a policy change that we will compete with anyone who's not compliant."

China's president, Hu Jintao, will travel to the United States next week for his second and probably last summit with President Obama. Behind the visit, with the pomp of a 21-gun salute and a state dinner, the relationship between the United States and China is undergoing a sea change.

The consensus about China formed during the Clinton administration, that as long as the United States was patient with China it would ultimately adopt Western political values and business practices, is "crumbling," said Daniel Rosen, a longtime China specialist and principal at the Rhodium Group, a New York-based consultancy.

What's replacing it is a new willingness to challenge China - in Congress, within the federal bureaucracy and in business circles - as more and more officials and executives draw the conclusion that Beijing, emboldened by its success at riding out the global financial crisis, is not interested in playing by Western rules.

A new Defense authorization law, signed by Obama on Friday, contains a provision banning Defense Department purchases of solar panels from countries that haven't agreed to open up government procurement to all competitors. The provision was written to target China, its authors said, because China has failed to sign the agreement. In the past, administration officials said, the federal government would have lobbied to strike the provision, fearing a backlash from Beijing. Not anymore.

The United States is not alone. With China in mind, Japan's Bank for International Cooperation changed its rules late last year, giving it more flexibility to finance loans for Japanese companies all over the world. Faced with heavy competition from Chinese firms in Africa, Brazil has sought U.S. help to establish its own export-import bank. And France is worried about China's challenge to its high-speed rail industry; French officials have aired the possibility of encouraging a merger of competing European firms to confront Chinese competition.

"The political resistance to brash tactics which would imperil the delicate management of the China relationship has collapsed," said Rosen.

Instead, Rosen said, he sees Western and other major countries employing what is basically an industrial policy to confront China. Take the Pakistani case. "By choosing to offer potentially costly concessionary economic terms on financing," he said, "the U.S. is saying that this industry has to be a winner for the U.S. We may not call it industrial policy, but it is."

Hochberg contests the idea that the United States is embracing an industrial policy. "We are not picking winners or losers," he said. The United States is simply responding to unfair competition, he said, or otherwise Chinese firms are going to snap up contracts all over the world.

China's arrival on the stage of global business has been swift. A decade ago, China's firms had only barely begun to operate overseas. Now telecommunications giants such as Huawei, dam builders such as Sinohydro and mining behemoths such as China MinMetals are involved in tens of billions of dollars worth of deals across the globe.

Many of those deals are powered by below-market-rate financing courtesy of the Export-Import Bank of China. Asked to comment about its practices, a spokesman at the state-run bank in Beijing said, "It's not convenient to answer questions, especially any questions about interest rates." He declined to give his name.

Another key to China's success is its prowess at patching together contracts that combine sales and aid. The deal China offered Pakistan was simple: You buy our locomotives and we will build you a railroad. In Tanzania, a Chinese telecom company and its government offered another one - you buy our gear and as collateral you put up your sovereign fishing rights. Such tactics - phones for fish - are beyond what U.S. companies and the government can match.

For one, U.S. foreign aid is run out of the State Department and is supposed to serve diplomatic or strategic goals. But in China, the Ministry of Commerce dispenses those funds and its purpose is simple: making money for China.

Ian Bremmer, the president of Eurasia Group, a Washington-based political risk consultancy, calls China's practices "state capitalism" and says they amount to a unique challenge to the Western way of business.

For decades, the guarantor of that way of business has been the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. Made up of the world's richest countries, the OECD has banned competitive financing as a tool of trade.

But the OECD was formed 50 years ago when, as Hochberg said, "no one anticipated large industrial powers would arise outside the OECD. Those days are gone."

GE first got an inkling that there was hope of winning the deal when Pakistani rail officials approached them and said they preferred GE's locomotives to China's, based on their experiences with previously purchased Chinese equipment.

In February, the U.S. Ex-Im Bank, after securing approval from the departments of State and Treasury, informed the OECD that it was going to compete with China's terms for the Pakistani deal. In recognition of the need to be creative when it came to confronting China, the OECD did not oppose the move. Instead of fees of up to 21 percent of the contract, the United States said it would charge Pakistan 8 percent. Repayment was stretched from 10 years to 12.

China lobbied heavily against the deal. In December, Premier Wen Jiabao traveled to Pakistan and the locomotives were a key topic in his discussions, government sources said. That prompted Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke to write to Pakistan's president and prime minister requesting that Pakistan ensure that the bid was awarded in a transparent manner.

In a statement, GE thanked the administration, saying the financing created "a level playing field for U.S. companies to compete and" would save and even create new jobs at its plant in Erie, Pa.

For Hochberg, the lesson for American firms is clear: "Don't throw in the towel. Sharpen your pencils. And don't be scared of China."

[buglerbilly]

Chinese Leaders Surprised by Fighter Test During Gates Visit

(Source: Voice of America; issued Jan. 11, 2011)

A senior U.S. defense official says China’s civilian leaders did not know about Tuesday’s first flight test of the country’s new fighter jet when U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates asked about it during a meeting with President Hu Jintao.

The situation raised concerns among U.S. officials, coming during the secretary’s high-profile visit and just a week before President Hu meets with U.S. President Barack Obama in Washington.

The U.S. official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said when Secretary Gates asked about the test during a meeting with President Hu Tuesday afternoon, "it was clear that none of the civilians in the room had been informed." President Hu is a civilian, and he is also chairman of the country’s Central Military Commission.

Secretary Gates did not mention President Hu’s surprise, but he did talk to reporters of his concerns about a possible disconnect between China’s civilian and military leaders, and the possibility that the Chinese military sometimes acts independently.

"I’ve had concerns about this over time and frankly it’s one of the reasons I attach importance to a dialogue between the two sides that includes both civilians and militaries," Gates said.

During this visit, Gates proposed a bilateral civilian-military strategic dialogue, but Chinese officials only promised to study the idea. Gates said he hopes to reach agreement on the dialogue during the first half of the year.

Gates said President Hu assured him the timing of the fighter test was not related to his visit, and the secretary said he takes the president at his word. But answering a reporter’s question, Gates indicated he thinks it would have been appropriate to delay the test. And the decision for another senior official to report President Hu’s surprise indicates the American delegation was angered by the timing.

This latest problem comes as U.S. and Chinese officials have been trying to put their defense relationship in a positive light, in spite of ongoing disagreements.

Gates said Chinese officials indicated they will not again freeze working-level defense talks and exchanges to protest U.S. arms sales to Taiwan or other policies with which they disagree. But he said high-level visits like this one could be affected. And Gates publicly recognized China’s concerns about the arms sales, saying the United States might be willing to reduce them in the future if tensions ease between Taiwan and the mainland.

On Tuesday, the Chinese foreign ministry spokesman, Hong Lei, again called on the United States to respect China’s sovereignty in order to safeguard the defense relationship. Hong called for "effective and concrete measures" to avoid instability in U.S.-China defense relations, an apparent reference to China’s desire for the Taiwan arms sales to stop.

In spite of the clear ongoing tension, Secretary Gates described his Beijing talks as "very positive," but he cautioned that improving U.S.-China defense relations will take time.

"This is an arena where we have to play the long game," Gates said. "This is not an area where I think you will see dramatic breakthroughs or big headlines, but rather the evolutionary growth of relationships and activities together."

Gates said he hopes the strategic dialogue he proposed will improve the two countries’ understanding of each other’s intentions and strategy, as China continues its rapid military growth and the United States takes steps to counter it.

But Gates added he is not seeking arms control talks specifically. He said he wants a steady defense relationship, like the U.S.-China intelligence relationship with which he said he was associated when he was in the Central Intelligence Agency.

-ends-

[buglerbilly]

JANUARY 12, 2011, 7:04 P.M. ET.

After China, Gates Goes to Rally Japan .

By YUHA HAYASHI in Tokyo and JULIAN E. BARNES in Beijing

TOKYO—U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates left Beijing Wednesday for Tokyo, where he is expected to push for Japan to more actively involve itself in regional defense in order to ease tension on the Korean peninsula and counterbalance the rapid buildup of China's military capability, highlighted by China's bold move to test fly its new stealth fighter during his visit.


Associated Press
U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates is welcomed by Director-General of Japan's Foreign Ministry Kazuyoshi Umemoto upon arrival at Haneda international airport in Tokyo.

As security dynamics in East Asia rapidly realign, the U.S. has stepped up the heat on Tokyo to share the peacekeeping burden in the region. Japan, still among the region's wealthiest economies despite its struggles, has been asked to establish stronger military ties with South Korea as Washington and Seoul try to rein in North Korea's aggression.

Mr. Gates, who pronounced his China visit a success despite the stealth fighter test, which came years earlier than many expected, suggested Tuesday he would make a case for Japan's purchase of a new generation of fighter jets, the first public comments by a U.S. official pushing for such a deal. Mr. Gates didn't name a specific fighter but if the Japanese want a stealth capability they would need to buy F-35s, developed by an international consortium led by Lockheed Martin Corp.

But Mr. Gates faces a high hurdle in persuading Japan to embrace such requests wholeheartedly. A deadlock over relocating a U.S. military base in Okinawa continues to hinder the expansion of bilateral security ties after Japan and the U.S. marked the 50th anniversary of their military alliance last year.

Julian Barnes and John Bussey discuss whether China's President Hu is really in control of his country's military after he appeared unaware of the first test flight of China's stealth fighter during a visit by U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
.The government of Prime Minister Naoto Kan has promised to implement a U.S.-Japan agreement signed in 2006 to build a new facility in Okinawa, but voters and officials on the island—including its governor, whose support is essential—oppose the plan.

Mr. Gates said Wednesday that the disputes over moving the Okinawa military base shouldn't influence talks over a joint vision statement for the bilateral alliance, to be signed during Mr. Kan's planned trip to Washington in the spring.

"It has been since 2005 when there was last a joint vision statement and a lot has happened in the last six years including the fact we have a new president and Japan has a new government," he said before leaving Beijing Wednesday. "A lot has happened in the last six years and so it is timely to look at the alliance, and update it if you will, going forward. The one thing that continues, is the strength of the alliance."

Some blame Mr. Gates for contributing to the escalation of the Okinawa base contention during his last visit in late 2009, when he urged Japan it was "time to move on" with the unpopular plan to build a new base in Okinawa in exchange for the return of other facilities in the island's crowded urban areas.

The two sides are making efforts to avoid such friction this time.


See the approximate inventory and estimated range of China's missile force.

On the last stop of his whirlwind tour of Asia, that in addition to China also included a stop in South Korea, Mr. Gates is spending nearly two full days in Japan, despite there being no urgent military tension. He is attending a wreath-laying ceremony to commemorate fallen soldiers of Japan's Self-Defense Forces. He will also speak to university students about the future of bilateral cooperation.

Mr. Kan's government, for its part, is escalating efforts to persuade Okinawans to support its plan for the military base by putting together a large package of economic stimulus steps aimed at helping the local economy.

In addition to broader regional security issues, the topics of discussions between Mr. Gates and Japanese Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa are expected to include moving part of the air force drills conducted in Okinawa to elsewhere in Japan and to U.S. facilities in Guam.

Still, experts say solving the base issue—on its own a relatively small matter in the context of the broader bilateral relations—is a prerequisite for further military cooperation between the two allies. The Japanese government, weakened by a divided parliament and falling popular support, needs to come up with bold and creative solutions to convince the Okinawans to drop their opposition to the new base. The U.S. needs to help Tokyo by showing flexibility in implementing the relocation plan and reducing the impact of the hefty military presence on the local community.

The inability of the two nations to solve the problem has "corrosive effect on the alliance, both internally...and for the third parties, the Chinese and the Russians," said Kent Calder, director of Japan studies at Johns Hopkins' School of Advanced International Studies. "It was part of the reason why they are thumbing their nose at Japan in the way they have."

Before leaving Beijing, Mr. Gates visited the headquarters of the People's Liberation Army's Second Artillery Corps, which commands China's nuclear missile force and said he discussed nuclear strategy with military leaders there.

"I felt it was a pretty wide-ranging conversation and pretty open," Mr. Gates said. He said Gen. Jing Zhiyuan, commander of China's nuclear arms, had accepted his invitation to visit U.S. Strategic Command in Omaha, Neb., which oversees American nuclear weapons. U.S. officials say such visits are important to prevent dangerous misunderstandings.

China's foreign and defense ministries didn't respond to requests to comment.

Mr. Gates said he had expected evolutionary progress in building U.S.-China military ties, rather than headline-grabbing breakthroughs.

His visit also exposed divisions in the Chinese government about pursuing closer relations with the Pentagon. The Chinese military's test flight of the J-20 stealth fighter just hours before Mr. Gates met with Chinese President Hu Jintao on Tuesday was a brash display of military might that fueled doubts about the extent of Mr. Hu's authority just a week before his state visit to the U.S.

Mr. Gates on Wednesday confirmed the earlier account of a U.S. defense official that China's civilian leadership didn't seem to know about the J-20 test before he asked Mr. Hu about it in Tuesday's meeting. "The civilian leadership seemed surprised by the test and assured me it had nothing to do with my visit," Mr. Gates said.

China's state media had largely sidestepped reports of runway tests of the J-20 over the past several few weeks, but on Wednesday they gave prominent coverage to the test flight. China Central Television aired photos of the J-20 in flight, and carried the first public comments by China's military on the episode. Gen. Guan Youfei, deputy director of the foreign affairs office of the Ministry of National Defense, echoed Mr. Hu's remarks that the test flight wasn't aimed at any country and wasn't related to Mr. Gates's visit. Mr. Guan said the test was part of a "normal working schedule."

In Washington Wednesday, Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, said he was not surprised by China's test of the J-20 fighter, and acknowledged that the plane appears to give the Chinese a "significant capability."

Adm. Mullen said China is investing in "very high-end, very high-tech capabilities." Beyond the new stealth fighter, he pointed to Beijing's development of antisatellite and antiship technologies, which could affect U.S. forces.

"Many of these capabilities seem to be focused very specifically on the United States," Adm. Mullen said.

—Adam Entous in Washington contributed to this article.

[buglerbilly]

New Chinese arms aimed at US: military chief

(AFP) – 4 hours ago

WASHINGTON — China's new weapons programs, including the J-20 stealth aircraft, appear to be directed against the United States, the highest-ranking US military officer said Wednesday.

"China is investing in very high-end, high-tech capabilities and the question that is always out there is to try to understand exactly why," said Admiral Mike Mullen, head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

"The opaqueness of that, tied to our lack of relationship, is something I'd like to see if we can crack open," he told reporters, stressing the importance of direct military relations between the United States and China to defuse any potential problems that could escalate into violence.

The J-20, China's first radar-evading combat aircraft, had its inaugural flight on Tuesday as US Defense Secretary Robert Gates toured China.

The airplane appears to give "significant capability" to the Chinese military, Mullen said.

Military officials see the J-20 as China's response to the F-22A Raptor stealth fighter. The United States is currently the only country to have an operational stealth fighter-bomber.

"The Chinese have every right to develop the military that they want, they're a emerging, global country with global influence, as the United States does -- we developed our capabilities to protect our interests," said Mullen.

Mullen wondered aloud why China was boosting its high-tech weaponry, whether it was anti-satellite missiles or anti-ship missiles.

"Many of these capabilities seem to be focused very specifically on the United States so that's why having this relationship is so important," said Mullen.

The timing of the China's J-20 flight co-inciding with Gates's visit appeared to be a snub to Washington, fueling the sense of a military rivalry despite positive statements from both the Chinese and US governments aimed at defusing tensions over US arms sales to Taiwan and maritime disputes.

The incident illustrated Beijing's confidence and also raised questions about the role of its military, as a senior US defense official said Hu and other top Chinese civilians apparently were unaware of the test flight.

Gates on Wednesday completed a visit to China aimed at convincing the Chinese to maintain a permanent military dialogue, similar to the relations Washington had with Moscow during the Cold War.

Copyright © 2011 AFP. All rights reserved

[buglerbilly]

Political reform: China's next modernization?

By Daniel Twining, Washington Post
Thursday, January 13, 2011

China boasts the world's second-largest economy, delivering double-digit economic growth on a seemingly permanent basis. It pursues the world's most ambitious program of military modernization, emphasizing the projection of power beyond its borders. It is the planet's biggest steel producer, car market, commodity consumer and exporter. As President Hu Jintao prepares to visit Washington next week, his country's model of authoritarian development looks unstoppable - with troubling implications for American primacy in world affairs.

Yet China may soon bump up against the model's limitations. An aging demographic profile means the population's share of prime workers has already peaked. Resource constraints and environmental devastation will increasingly complicate economic development. Worried neighbors across Asia are moving closer to America and each other, challenging China's room to maneuver in its region.

But it is China's political model that may be the most significant obstacle to the country's economic modernization. This would invert the belief that China's developmental dictatorship has catalyzed its economic dynamism. But it is the opinion of no less than the country's No. 2 official, Premier Wen Jiabao.

In remarkable public comments last summer, Wen said Chinese officials "must continue to liberate their thinking and make bold explorations" in reform. Without "reform of the political system," he argued, "it will be impossible for the goal of economic reform and modernization to be realized." China must reverse "the excessive concentration of unrestrained power" and "create conditions for the people to criticize and supervise the government. . . . People's democratic rights and legitimate rights must be guaranteed" for economic growth to continue.

Wen leaves office next year. His remarks may be an effort to shape his legacy and throw his weight behind the reform agenda in the face of resistance from regime hard-liners - including President Hu.

But the premier's comments reflect broader leadership concerns about growing social inequality and rising demands among citizens for the rule of law and an end to corruption. To sustain the legitimacy of their rule, some of China's mandarins appear to understand that full economic modernization requires a political opening that fuels innovation, promotes broad-based social welfare and strengthens the institutions that underpin the free market.

As a former senior official of China's central bank, Yu Yongding, recently wrote in the China Daily, "China's rapid growth has been achieved at an extremely high cost. Only future generations will know the true price." Yu called China's inability to innovate its "Achilles heel" - and urged political reform aimed at "breaking this unholy alliance" between government officials and business elites. "[M]eritocracy is a prerequisite for good governance. But meritocracy has been eroded by a political culture of sycophancy and cynicism," he wrote. China risks a "serious backlash" that will stall growth unless it moves beyond a "capitalism of the rich and powerful."

The implications for America of China's reform debate are clear. The Obama administration should not shy away from promoting universal values in its China policy. Ultimately, U.S. policymakers may find that a reluctance to speak out in defense of human freedom and the rule of law in China leaves them on the wrong side of a debate whose outcome will have enormous consequences for the Chinese people - and the 21st-century world.

Rather than declaring, as Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton once did, that the United States would not let issues such as human rights "interfere" with closer Sino-American ties, Washington could calibrate its cooperation with Beijing based on China's reform progress - both for intrinsic reasons and because the way the Chinese state treats its citizens is an internal manifestation of how other countries should expect to be treated by China in its conduct of external affairs.

American assistance and exchange programs to strengthen the rule of law, free media, labor rights and local elections could help Beijing manage a graduated reform agenda. Closer U.S. relations with such developing giants as India and Indonesia could strengthen the hand of Asian democrats in ways that influence their neighbor's own debate about political reform.

As a large group of senior Chinese scholars and activists wrote in an open letter urging the release of imprisoned Nobel Prize winner Liu Xiaobo, China should "join the mainstream of civilized humanity by embracing universal values. Such is the only route to becoming a 'great nation' that is capable of playing a positive and responsible role on the world stage." President Obama would do well to remind President Hu of these words next week.

Daniel Twining is the senior fellow for Asia at the German Marshall Fund of the United States. He was a member of the State Department's policy planning staff from 2007 to 2009 and the foreign policy adviser to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

[buglerbilly]

January 13, 2011, 7:02 PM HKT.

What The J-20 Says About China’s Defense Sector.


Tai Ming Cheung is an associate research scientist at the University of California Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation in San Diego. His book, Fortifying China, examines the transformation and workings of the Chinese defense economy.

The stealthy online unveiling of China’s next-generation fighter aircraft, dubbed the J-20, represents an important marker in the accelerating development of China’s defense science, technology, and innovation capabilities. Although it will likely take another five-to-ten years before the aircraft is ready for serial production and operational service, its unofficial public debut serves notice of China’s intent to become a world-class military power within the next decade.

Strategic Significance of the J-20 Program

The Chinese military aviation industry has made impressive strides over the past 15 years in narrowing the technological gap with the world’s advanced aviation powers. In the mid-1990s, China was struggling to produce third-generation, 1970s-era combat aircraft that were 20-to-30 years behind their global counterparts. After major structural reforms and considerable assistance from Russia, China is now able to field fighter aircraft such as the Chengdu J-10 and Shenyang J-11 that are only 10-to-15 years behind the most advanced Western models. The J-20 will reduce this gap even further.

China’s military aviation industry is now a prospective candidate to join an exclusive group of countries able to indigenously develop a stealth aircraft. The only established member of this elite set is the U.S., which has successfully developed and fielded a number of stealth aircraft over the past two decades. Russia is in the early stages of test-flying its first stealthy aircraft, called the T-50. Other advanced military aviation powers such as the U.K., France, and Sweden that potentially have the technological capabilities to develop stealth programs have opted not to because of the huge costs involved, uncertain sales prospects, and their considerable investment in more traditional non-stealthy fighter aircraft projects.

Besides China, no other country in the Asia-Pacific region has the technological and industrial capabilities to pursue a stealth fighter program. Japan has built a scaled mock-up of a stealth fighter, but it has yet to make any significant investments in conducting serious research and development in this area and most likely will seek instead to purchase the F-35 stealth fighter from the U.S. India signed an agreement with Russia in December 2010 to acquire fifth-generation fighter aircraft based on the T-50. Other regional powers, especially Taiwan, may now have to reconsider their long-term plans for the modernization of their air forces in anticipation of China’s arrival into the stealth fighter club before the end of this decade.

Technological Breakthrough?

Associated PressWhile web images of the J-20 offer some tantalizing glimpses of its design profile, there are critical knowledge gaps that make it difficult to determine whether the aircraft represents an incremental or breakthrough technological innovation or something in-between. One big question concerns how stealthy the aircraft is. This refers to its ability to minimize its radar-cross section through its architectural design and radar-absorbent composite materials. Another issue concerns the sophistication and integration of avionics capabilities. The latest generations of state-of-the-art Western fighter aircraft are now being equipped with Active Electronically Scanned Array radar and advanced sensors and there are few indications that the Chinese defense industry has been able to master this technology. Additionally, stealth aircraft are supposed to be exceptionally maneuverable and able to cruise at high speeds because of high-performance vectoring engines.

If the J-20 were able to meet all or even some of these requirements, it would be a remarkable breakthrough technological accomplishment. While the Chinese aviation industry has made some important progress in the fields of composite materials, avionics and sensors, design processes and propulsion technology over the past decade, these technological capabilities and standards remain considerably short of world-class standards. For example, the Chinese aero-engine sector has yet to begin serial production of its own high-performance turbofan engines such as the WS-10 even though it claims to have mastered development a few years ago.

To address these weaknesses in its research, development and engineering capabilities, China has turned to foreign sources, especially Russia, for critical assistance. Without reliable Chinese aero-engines, China has had to import Russian engines to equip its mainstay J-10 and J-11 fighter fleet. Of particular relevance for the J-20 program was China’s request to Russia for Type 117S aero-engines during annual defense technology cooperation talks between the two countries last year. These engines are being used on Russia’s T-50 aircraft.

Reverse engineering is another technique extensively employed by the Chinese aviation industry to overcome technological hurdles and shorten development times. This includes cooperative deals with Russia in which the Chinese purchased licenses for production rights to produce Su-27 fighter aircraft in the late 1990s, and unauthorized reverse engineering of the same aircraft at the same time. Having access to foreign technologies and knowledge will allow China to mitigate the considerable developmental risks posed by an ambitious but technologically immature aviation industry.

State of China’s Aviation Industry

After sixty years of struggle and stagnation, the Chinese aircraft industry has been experiencing a renaissance over the past decade. The industry is reaping record profits, receiving plentiful flows of orders, developing and producing new generations of advanced aircraft, and forging business and technology ties with some of the world’s leading aircraft and aircraft-component firms.

This is a far cry from the end of the 1990s when the industry was a loss-making relic of the bygone central-planning era. The aviation industry, along with the rest of the defense economy, was severely impacted by the introduction of economic reforms in the late 1970s. Heavy cuts in defense spending and a sharp decline in support for the state sector led to a prolonged downturn during the 1980s and 1990s. The aviation industry’s problems were exacerbated by the unwillingness of conservative defense industrial leaders to implement meaningful reforms to reduce enormous waste, inefficiency, and widespread obsolescence.

The inability of the aviation and defense industries to meet the modernization needs of the People’s Liberation Army, or PLA, became a critical national security concern from the mid-1990s, as tensions intensified in the Taiwan Strait. In the late 1990s, the central authorities intervened and carried out sweeping reforms of the defense and aviation sectors:

Shifting from Administrative to Corporate Mechanisms: The outdated administrative management structure was replaced by new corporate arrangements intended to foster market competition. Two new aviation conglomerates, Aviation Industries Corp. of China (AVIC) 1 and AVIC 2, were established and given considerable autonomy along with major industrial enterprises such as Chengdu Aircraft Corp., which is responsible for development of the J-20.

Overhauling the Research and Development (R&D) Base: Reforms were launched to break down entrenched compartmentalization by integrating R&D and production activities. Funding for R&D activities was also revamped with more money going into viable high priority projects and the culling of lower priority and failing projects.

Paying Attention to End-User Requirements: The aviation industry’s blinkered technology-push approach to product development was wrestled open and the PLA, especially the air force, was given the lead role in setting and overseeing equipment research, development and evaluation.

Changing the Leadership: Reform-minded technocrats took charge of the defense and aviation sectors and vigorously implemented far-reaching reforms, including slashing costs and laying off tens of thousands of workers.

The implementation of these and other reforms created the conditions for a remarkable turnaround in the aviation industry’s fortunes since the beginning of the 21st Century:

Financial Performance: After more than a decade of losses, the aviation industry became profitable again in 2003 and has posted record earnings and revenue growth annually since then. In 2009, AVIC had profits of US$1.4 billion and revenue of $28 billion, and was also included for the first time on the Fortune 500 list of top global companies

R&D and Innovation: Heavy investment in R&D has led to a strong surge in innovation activities, especially with the establishment of dozens of research laboratories and expansion of aviation universities and institutes. By 2009, AVIC had received more than 5,300 patents, the vast majority of which were obtained in the last few years.

Product Development: An extensive range of military aircraft from fighters to electronic warfare aircraft has emerged from the Chinese aviation industry over the past 10 years. Chinese air force officials proudly stated that more than 90 percent of the 15 types of military aircraft that took part in the 60th national day anniversary fly past in October 2009 were indigenously developed products.

While these performance indicators show impressive gains, the aviation industry still suffers from serious structural weaknesses that threaten its long-term ability to narrow the technological gap and catch up with the top tier of global aviation powers. The aero-engine sector, as already pointed out, has struggled mightily to develop and produce state-of-the-art high performance power plants.

Another major structural weakness, and a legacy of the Maoist past, is the widespread duplication and balkanization of industrial and research facilities. The aviation industry has more than 130 large and medium-sized factories and research institutes employing 250,000 workers scattered across the country, especially in the deep interior, and often possessing the same manufacturing and research attributes. But intense rivalry, local protectionism, and huge geographical distances mean that there is little cooperation or coordination among these facilities, preventing the ability to reap economies of scale and engage in innovation clustering, and also hampering efforts at consolidation.

The extended cut-off in ties between the Chinese and Western military aircraft industries since the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown has also contributed to its technological weakness. But Beijing has been able to mitigate the severity of these restrictions by forging a close relationship with Russia that has allowed the Chinese aviation industry to gain access to state-of-the-art weapons, and technology and knowledge transfers through off-the shelf purchases, offsets and license production arrangements.

State of the Chinese Defense Industry

The Chinese defense industry is making a concerted effort to build a strong and capable indigenous innovation capacity, but overall progress is at an early stage and focused predominantly on incremental and sustaining types of activities. More advanced forms of innovation, especially disruptive approaches that would lead to important defense technological advances, are likely to be beyond China’s reach for the near to medium term, although there may be exceptions in select high-priority areas that enjoy access to ample funding, foreign knowledge and technologies, and leadership support. The J-20 program appears to be accorded this special status.

China has demonstrated that it can engage in radical defense innovation leading to significant technological breakthroughs if the country’s security is considered to be in acute danger. This was achieved in the 1960s and 1970s with the development of nuclear weapons and strategic missiles. If China’s leaders were to become as seriously alarmed again, this could see another concerted drive to attain breakthroughs in critical defense technological capabilities. This may have occurred in the 1990s with the development of long-range precision ballistic missile capabilities to counter military contingencies involving Taiwan, especially to deny access to the U.S. navy to waters near China.

China’s present approach appears to be the selective targeting of a few critical areas for accelerated development while the rest of the defense economy pursues a more moderate pace of transformation. But as the country grows more prosperous, more technologically capable, and its security interests become more global and complex, this focused strategy is likely to be broadened. The defense electronics, aviation, shipbuilding and select portions of the space industries are leading the way in the Chinese defense economy’s transformation, especially in forging close ties between the civilian and defense economies, access and linkages with global production and innovation networks, the building of innovation capabilities, and ability to adapt to market competition.

To fully understand China’s defense innovation potential requires the examination of a broad range of tangible and intangible science, technology and innovation indicators. This includes not only hard performance measures such as research-and-development budgets, corporate investment, the output of patents, publications, and products–and the size of the science and technology workforce–but also soft process-related factors such as leadership, organizational flexibility, marketing, entrepreneurial skills, risk cultures, and governance factors.

The Chinese defense economy has been investing heavily in the construction of a comprehensive and high-quality innovation apparatus since the late 1990s that is intended to nurture the ability to conduct disruptive technological innovation R&D. This involves the establishment of large numbers of research laboratories, training a large pool of new generations of scientists and engineers, and forging a robust regulatory regime of standards, regulations, and rules designed to impose discipline, oversight, and raise quality control in a previously haphazardly run system. These structural and process reforms are likely to bear fruit over the next decade and will play an influential role in advancing the defense economy’s innovation performance.

[buglerbilly]

U.S.-Japan ties should deepen, Gates says, citing threats from China, N. Korea

By John Pomfret
Washington Post Staff Writer

Friday, January 14, 2011; 1:02 AM

TOKYO - Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates on Friday invoked threats from North Korea and China's modernizing military as reasons to strengthen the U.S. alliance with Japan and to keep U.S. forces strong in the Pacific.

Speaking at Keio University, Gates also said he was worried about a "disconnect" between China's civilian and military leadership. While he was in Beijing earlier this week, the country's military conducted the first flight test of its new stealth fighter jet on the same day as Gates met with President Hu Jintao. Hu told Gates that he didn't know the test had taken place.

"On the whole, I think this is something of a worry," Gates said, citing a Chinese anti-satellite test in 2007 and the menacing of a U.S. Navy surveillance ship in 2009 as other examples. Still, Gates added, "in the larger sense of who controls the Chinese military and who is the ultimate authority, there is no doubt in my mind that it is President Hu Jintao and the civilian leadership of that country."

Gates reiterated a proposal for a dialogue that would, for the first time, group China's military and civilian leaders with their U.S. counterparts as a way to help Beijing bridge its gaps. Hu is coming to Washington next week for his second and last summit with President Obama.

In pointed comments directed to both Pyongyang and Beijing, Gates also told an audience of students that, without a strong U.S. military presence in Japan, North Korea's military could be even more "outrageous" and "China might behave more assertively towards its neighbors."

Gates also said he would like to see Japan's security forces take on a wider role in the region and pushed Japan and South Korea's military to work more closely together to deal with North Korea's provocations.

In an interview Thursday, Japanese Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa committed Japan to work in unprecedented ways with the U.S. military - such as providing logistical support for a potential war on the Korean Peninsula or undertaking evacuations of civilians there.

"The basic principle of Japan is to pursue peace," Kitazawa said. "But we also need to have measures to avoid being left behind."

Gates is on the last day of a five-day trip to Asia that has focused on coming up with a strategy to deal with a nuclear-armed and increasingly erratic North Korea and also reestablishing high-level military talks with China. He spent three days in Beijing, two in Tokyo and was set Friday to hold several hours of meetings in Seoul before heading back to the United States.

In Beijing, Gates's message was that the United States wanted better ties with the People's Liberation Army in order to avoid the miscalculations that can often lead to war. Gates also aimed at convincing China to do more to rein in North Korea, which in the past year has been blamed in two attacks on the South that killed 50 people.

He put the Chinese on notice that North Korea would, within five years, become a "direct threat" to the interests of the United States as it develops nuclear weapons and intercontinental ballistic missiles.

In his speech Friday, Gates noted that Chinese technological advances in cyber- and anti-satellite warfare posed a "potential challenge to the ability of our forces to operate and communicate in this part of the Pacific." He drew a parallel between China and the Soviet Union - saying that during the Cold War, the talks between Washington and Moscow were important in ensuring peace.

Then Gates, as he has in the past, followed immediately by saying that "the Cold War is mercifully long over and the circumstances with China today are vastly different." Still, his persistent framing of Washington's ties with Beijing within the context of the Cold War underscore the complex nature of U.S. relations with China.

Gates also put Beijing on notice that the United States completely rejected China's view that it can claim an exclusive economic zone stretching 200 miles from its coast. Beijing contends that U.S. naval vessels should not be allowed to conduct operations there.

"One area where it's impossible to compromise" with China, Gates said, "is the freedom of navigation, the freedom of the global commons for commerce, trade, for shipping."

[buglerbilly]

Avoiding a U.S.-China cold war

By Henry A. Kissinger, via Wshington Post

Friday, January 14, 2011 ,

The upcoming summit between the American and Chinese presidents is to take place while progress is being made in resolving many of the issues before them, and a positive communique is probable. Yet both leaders also face an opinion among elites in their countries emphasizing conflict rather than cooperation.

Most Chinese I encounter outside of government, and some in government, seem convinced that the United States seeks to contain China and to constrict its rise. American strategic thinkers are calling attention to China's increasing global economic reach and the growing capability of its military forces.

Care must be taken lest both sides analyze themselves into self-fulfilling prophecies. The nature of globalization and the reach of modern technology oblige the United States and China to interact around the world. A Cold War between them would bring about an international choosing of sides, spreading disputes into internal politics of every region at a time when issues such as nuclear proliferation, the environment, energy and climate require a comprehensive global solution.

Conflict is not inherent in a nation's rise. The United States in the 20th century is an example of a state achieving eminence without conflict with the then-dominant countries. Nor was the often-cited German-British conflict inevitable. Thoughtless and provocative policies played a role in transforming European diplomacy into a zero-sum game.

Sino-U.S. relations need not take such a turn. On most contemporary issues, the two countries cooperate adequately; what the two countries lack is an overarching concept for their interaction. During the Cold War, a common adversary supplied the bond. Common concepts have not yet emerged from the multiplicity of new tasks facing a globalized world undergoing political, economic and technological upheaval.

That is not a simple matter. For it implies subordinating national aspirations to a vision of a global order.

Neither the United States nor China has experience in such a task. Each assumes its national values to be both unique and of a kind to which other peoples naturally aspire. Reconciling the two versions of exceptionalism is the deepest challenge of the Sino-American relationship.

America's exceptionalism finds it natural to condition its conduct toward other societies on their acceptance of American values. Most Chinese see their country's rise not as a challenge to America but as heralding a return to the normal state of affairs when China was preeminent. In the Chinese view, it is the past 200 years of relative weakness - not China's current resurgence - that represent an abnormality.

America historically has acted as if it could participate in or withdraw from international affairs at will. In the Chinese perception of itself as the Middle Kingdom, the idea of the sovereign equality of states was unknown. Until the end of the 19th century, China treated foreign countries as various categories of vassals. China never encountered a country of comparable magnitude until European armies imposed an end to its seclusion. A foreign ministry was not established until 1861, and then primarily for dealing with colonialist invaders.

America has found most problems it recognized as soluble. China, in its history of millennia, came to believe that few problems have ultimate solutions. America has a problem-solving approach; China is comfortable managing contradictions without assuming they are resolvable.

American diplomacy pursues specific outcomes with single-minded determination. Chinese negotiators are more likely to view the process as combining political, economic and strategic elements and to seek outcomes via an extended process. American negotiators become restless and impatient with deadlocks; Chinese negotiators consider them the inevitable mechanism of negotiation. American negotiators represent a society that has never suffered national catastrophe - except the Civil War, which is not viewed as an international experience. Chinese negotiators cannot forget the century of humiliation when foreign armies exacted tribute from a prostrate China. Chinese leaders are extremely sensitive to the slightest implication of condescension and are apt to translate American insistence as lack of respect.

North Korea provides a good example of differences in perspective. America is focused on the proliferation of nuclear weapons. China, which in the long run has more to fear from nuclear weapons there than we, in addition emphasizes propinquity. It is concerned about the turmoil that might follow if pressures on nonproliferation lead to the disintegration of the North Korean regime. America seeks a concrete solution to a specific problem. China views any such outcome as a midpoint in a series of interrelated challenges, with no finite end, about the future of Northeast Asia. For real progress, diplomacy with Korea needs a broader base.

Americans frequently appeal to China to prove its sense of "international responsibility" by contributing to the solution of a particular problem. The proposition that China must prove its bona fides is grating to a country that regards itself as adjusting to membership in an international system designed in its absence on the basis of programs it did not participate in developing.

While America pursues pragmatic policies, China tends to view these policies as part of a general design. Indeed, it tends to find a rationale for essentially domestically driven initiatives in terms of an overall strategy to hold China down.

The test of world order is the extent to which the contending can reassure each other. In the American-Chinese relationship, the overriding reality is that neither country will ever be able to dominate the other and that conflict between them would exhaust their societies. Can they find a conceptual framework to express this reality? A concept of a Pacific community could become an organizing principle of the 21st century to avoid the formation of blocs. For this, they need a consultative mechanism that permits the elaboration of common long-term objectives and coordinates the positions of the two countries at international conferences.

The aim should be to create a tradition of respect and cooperation so that the successors of leaders meeting now continue to see it in their interest to build an emerging world order as a joint enterprise.

The writer was secretary of state from 1973 to 1977.

[buglerbilly]

Chinese President Hu looks for 'common ground' with U.S.


Chinese President Hu Jintao
Chinese President Hu Jintao is set to arrive in the United States early next week for a state visit.

By Keith B. Richburg
Washington Post Staff Writer

Monday, January 17, 2011; 12:51 AM

BEIJING - Chinese President Hu Jintao, who travels to Washington this week for a state visit after a year marked by disputes and tension with the United States, said the two countries could mutually benefit by finding "common ground" on issues from fighting terrorism and nuclear proliferation to cooperating on clean energy and infrastructure development.

"There is no denying that there are some differences and sensitive issues between us," Hu said in written answers to questions from The Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal. "We both stand to gain from a sound China-U.S. relationship, and lose from confrontation.''

To enhance what he called "practical cooperation" on a wide range of issues, Hu urged an increase in dialogues and exchanges and more "mutual trust." He said, "We should abandon the zero-sum Cold War mentality," and, in what seemed like an implicit rejection of U.S. criticisms of China's internal affairs, said the two should "respect each other's choice of development path."

Hu took aim at the international currency system, now dominated by the dollar, calling it a "product of the past." China has moved to make its currency, the renminbi convertible on international markets, and Hu pointed to Chinese efforts to boost its use in trade and investment. But he cautioned against any suggestion that the renminbi, also called the yuan, might soon become a new reserve currency. "It takes a long time for a country's currency to be widely accepted in the world," Hu said.

Hu, the secretary general of the Chinese Communist Party since 2002 and China's president since 2003, rarely speaks in interviews or gives news conferences. His last extensive comments to American media outlets came in 2008, in a joint meeting around the time of the Beijing Olympics. His last comments to Western media were in written format last November to a French and a Portuguese newspaper.

Under the ground rules, Hu decided which questions to answer from lists submitted separately by the Post and the Journal.

Hu made an official visit to the White House in 2006, but President George W. Bush denied him the privilege of a full state visit, offering only a lunch. He was in Washington in April for President Obama's nuclear security summit.

The Obama administration plans to use the summit to refocus attention on China's record on human rights and political freedoms, after spending much of the past two years seeking to engage the Chinese leadership on a broad array of global issues including climate change, helping stabilize the global economy, and dealing with the nuclear ambitions of Iran and North Korea.

The human rights issue - which many administration critics believe was underplayed over the past two years - gained a new spotlight in October, when the Nobel Committee in Oslo awarded the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize to a jailed Chinese dissident, Liu Xiaobo. Also last fall, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao linked political reform to continued economic progress in a speech in Shenzhen, at the United Nations in September and later in an interview with Time magazine and CNN.

Hu, in his written answers Sunday, said China would continue to develop "socialist democracy." His comment on the topic seemed to suggest that China's leadership at once understands the growing demand for more pluralism from its increasingly affluent citizens, while at the same time signaling that any further opening will come only within the strict confines of the current, Communist-led system.

Political reform, Hu said, must "meet people's growing enthusiasm for participating in political affairs." But he added: "The political structuring we pursue in China is aimed at advancing the self-improvement and development of the socialist political system."

Hu pointed to China's economic success of the past three decades as a validation of its political model.

"The fact that China has enjoyed sustained, rapid economic growth and social stability and harmony proves that China's political system fits China's national conditions and meets the requirement of overall economic and social development," Hu said.

The term "socialist democracy," often used by Chinese leaders, broadly means allowing some public debate on certain topics and under strict limitations, without challenging the Chinese Communist Party's core leadership role over all institutions of government.

Hu, in his written answers, said, "We will define the institutions, standards and procedures for socialist democracy, expand people's ordinary participation in political affairs at each level and in every field, mobilize and organize the people as extensively as possible . . . and strive for continued progress in building socialist political civilization."

Touching on several other topics, Hu said that the global financial crisis of 2008 showed "the absence of regulation" and that "its root cause lies in the serious defects of the existing financial system." He said the international system needs to build up the resources and means to tackle any future crises.

Hu also said the international community should now work to "move toward the establishment of a fair, just, inclusive and well-managed international financial order" and "build a new and more equal and balanced global partnership" that would address the disparities between the developed world and poorer countries, which he called "the North and the South."

The United States and China have sparred over the U.S. Federal Reserve's moves to keep interest rates low, and what China and other developing countries see as resulting inflationary pressures abroad.

In his comments Sunday, Hu appeared to criticize such Fed actions. "The monetary policy of the United States has a major impact on global liquidity and capital flows," he said.

Addressing the recent tensions between North and South Korea, Hu said China "made relentless efforts" to calm tensions on the divided peninsula, and as a result of the diplomacy by China and other parties, "there have been signs of relaxation." He urged the two sides to "take active measures" and "create conditions" for a resumption of the six-party talks, the format that includes the United States, Japan, Russia and China as well as the two Koreas.

[buglerbilly]

Job creation seen as key to China's investment in U.S.


Chinese President Hu Jintao arrives in Washington
Hu is making his first state visit to the United States.

By John Pomfret
Washington Post Staff Writer

Wednesday, January 19, 2011; 12:00 AM

ELGIN, ILL. - Ni Pin believes in the United States. He's lived here for almost 20 years. His three children were born here. And, unlike many Americans, he thinks that even in the middle of the Rust Belt, there's hope for manufacturing in this country.

Ni runs the U.S. operations of a Chinese company called Wanxiang International, an auto parts giant with worldwide revenue of $8 billion. Over the past decade, Wanxiang America has purchased or invested in more than 20 U.S. firms and now employs more Americans - 5,000 at last count - than any other Chinese company.

It's for that reason - jobs, jobs, jobs - that Chinese President Hu Jintao will highlight Wanxiang's U.S. operations on Friday during an event in Chicago. Hu is hoping to show Americans that in addition to providing them with cheap goods, Chinese companies can also give them good jobs.

That issue is a critical one in an economic relationship that many Americans feel is unfairly tilted toward Beijing. In speeches last week, Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner and Commerce Secretary Gary Locke both complained that China was not open enough to U.S. products, had not done enough to let the value of its currency appreciate against the dollar and was not respectful of U.S. intellectual property rights.

If the United States and China are going to begin to rebalance their economies, China needs to bring more jobs to the United States.

For years, there wasn't much progress. As of 2008, Chinese companies had invested less than a total of $5 billion in the United States, even as U.S. firms had made $50 billion in capital investments in China and employed tens of thousands of Chinese workers.

But since 2009, Chinese investment in the United States has exploded - jumping about 150 percent to almost $12 billion in total, according to new figures from Rhodium Group, a New York-based consultancy. Today, Chinese firms employ at least 10,000 Americans.

"While most people are asking, 'What's holding Chinese investment back?' that question is obsolete," said Daniel Rosen, a principal at Rhodium. "Chinese investment is taking off."

Among leading Chinese entrepreneurs, the United States was second only to Hong Kong in a survey of potential destinations for investments, said Clarence Kwan, the head of the China Services Group for Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu. "There is a real enthusiasm about the United States," he said.

That enthusiasm could be a boon for China's image in the United States. While China's economic growth has benefited U.S. companies and shareholders, most Americans still view the country warily. In a new poll conducted by The Washington Post and ABC News, 61 percent of 1,053 people surveyed said they viewed China's economy as more of a threat to U.S. jobs than an opportunity for new markets and investment.

Until China figures out a way to link itself to "the idea of job creation . . . you are always going to have a negative perception of China in the United States," said Drew Thompson, director of the Nixon Center's China Studies Program in Washington.

Thirty years ago, another Asian dynamo faced the same problem. Like China, Japan had an enormous trade surplus with the United States and was being attacked over unfair trading practices.

Then Japanese firms began pouring money into the U.S. economy. In 1980, Japan had $8.7 billion invested here. A decade later, the investment was up to $83.1 billion. While there was scare-mongering about a Japanese takeover of the U.S. economy, more than 50 congressional districts have benefited from Japanese funds and Americans grew accustomed to working for Japanese bosses.

But unlike Japan, which came to the United States with well-established brands such as Toyota, Honda and Sony, China has only a handful of companies that Americans might recognize. So while Japanese firms invested here to produce already-popular goods for the U.S. market, Chinese companies are seeking something else - American technology, management and ideas.

That has opened China to allegations of corporate piracy.

One of last year's biggest Chinese investments - a $1.08 billion injection from a Chinese oil company, CNOOC, into a Texas venture - raised concerns that the firm was making the deal to obtain U.S. shale oil technology, which it would then use to compete with American firms overseas.

"You Americans always think I'm here just to steal your technology," said Zheng Yongzhi, the deputy general manager of an air compressor manufacturer who was in the United States recently looking for investment opportunities.

Chinese firms have also seen significant investments blocked on national security grounds. CNOOC's investment last year into the shale oil fields marked the first time it had returned to the United States since its attempt to buy a U.S. oil firm, UNOCAL, was blocked in 2005. At the time, some lawmakers objected to the prospect of a Chinese firm owning U.S. oil assets.

Other Chinese firms, such as the telecommunications giant Huawei, have seen their investment plans stymied as well.

In 2008, Huawei's attempt to buy 3Com, another telecom firm, was rebuffed by the Committee on Foreign Investment of the United States, a unit of the Treasury Department.

And while Huawei has invested millions in the United States over the past few years and employs hundreds of Americans, it is still having difficulty selling its technology to U.S. telecommunications firms. In 2009, the U.S. government stopped AT&T from buying equipment for a new phone system because of concerns that Huawei might help the Chinese government tap into U.S. government lines. Last year, Huawei lost out on a contract to Sprint.

For their part, Chinese investors complain that they can't even get to America. In interviews, all five members of a Chinese delegation in the United States recently to look for investment opportunities had stories of having their visas rejected by the State Department.

"You don't want to close your doors and believe you can do everything yourselves," said Ma Xin, chairman of the Sinocome Group. "That's a ticket to becoming a Third World country."

Ni, the 46-year-old president of Wanxiang America, has had a much more positive experience, one that illustrates the bright side of Chinese business in the United States.

In 1989, after the crackdown on the student-led protests at Tiananmen Square, Ni graduated with a master's degree in business from a university in Zhejiang province.

Like all students who had participated in the demonstrations, Ni was dispatched for a year to work at the "grass roots" - part of a Chinese government program to purge the pro-Western thoughts from the minds of its youth. Ni was sent to work at Wanxiang.

Ni married the daughter of Wanxiang's chief executive, Lu Guanqiu, who along with other Chinese and American executives will meet with President Obama and Hu in the White House on Wednesday. Within three years, Ni found himself at the University of Kentucky pursuing a doctorate in economics. But Wanxiang needed help once it began selling its auto parts in the U.S. market. So Ni resumed working for his father-in-law.

Now, Wanxiang America has $1.3 billion in revenue. It has saved more than a dozen companies from bankruptcy. It has set up an investment fund to look for more opportunities in the United States. And while U.S. solar companies are pulling up stakes and moving production to China, Wanxiang helped set up a solar panel manufacturing plant in Rockford, near Elgin. Illinois proclaimed Aug. 12, 2002, Wanxiang Day because it kept manufacturing jobs there.

"I never say we're the solution," Ni said. "I say we're part of the solution."

[buglerbilly]

U.S. says seeks "right time" for Taiwan arms sales

TAIPEI | Tue Jan 25, 2011 5:26am EST

TAIPEI (Reuters) - The U.S. is looking for the "right time" before any decision on arms sales to Taiwan, and any such move would not be swayed by China's likely reaction, the top U.S. representative to Taiwan said on Tuesday.

Raymond Burghardt, chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan, said that China's "habit" of breaking off military ties following arms deals was not a factor behind the lack of U.S. approval of Taiwan's long-standing request for advanced F-16 C/D fighter jets.

"All good things come in their own time," Burghardt told reporters at a briefing during a visit to Taipei.

"The military-military relationship with Taiwan is so much more than arms sales," he said, noting that the U.S. approved a $6.4 billion arms package last year.

Taiwan remains one of the most thorny issues in U.S. relations with China. Beijing has never renounced the use of force to achieve its goal of bringing the self-ruled Taiwan into its fold.

The United States maintains support for Taiwan through the Taiwan Relations Act that obliges it to provide Taiwan with defensive weapons.

While economic ties between China and Taiwan have reached their closest in their 60-year standoff, political ties remain sensitive. Beijing has as many as 1,900 missiles aimed at the island, while Taiwan recently revealed that it is developing missiles that can hit mainland cities.

But the recent state visit of Chinese President Hu Jintao to Washington raised concern in Taipei that the island's security interests could be damaged.

Burghardt, visiting Taiwan to brief President Ma Ying-jeou about the Hu visit, said the U.S. "purposefully constructed" the joint statement issued at the end of the visit so that it "in no way violates any of Taiwan's interests".

He noted that there was very little discussion of Taiwan during Hu's U.S. visit.

Ma had earlier reiterated Taiwan's request for the F-16 C/D jets in his meeting with Burghardt, warning that the growing military imbalance across the Taiwan Strait could dampen future engagement with China, the semi-official Central News Agency reported.

The issue of weapons had been highlighted after Taiwan conducted missile tests on the day that China's Hu left for Washington.

The test flopped when some of the missiles missed their targets, prompting speculation that Taiwan wanted to impress on the U.S. the need for better weapons. The government denied the tests had anything to do with the Hu visit.

(Reporting by Jonathan Standing, editing by Andrew Marshall)

[buglerbilly]

Europe Divided Over China Arms Sales

(Source: Voice of America news; published Jan. 25, 2011)

Britain is on a collision course with the European Union over the sale of arms to China. Since the Beijing government crackdown on protestors in Tiananmen Square in 1989, EU member states have been banned from selling goods that could be used by the Chinese military.

China’s new J-20 stealth fighter roars along the runway and takes to the skies, the maiden test-flight of a plane designed to rival the United States’ radar-eluding aircraft.

Images of the flight, leaked on the Internet and subsequently confirmed as genuine by the Beijing government, have focused attention on China’s military modernization.

The European Union banned the sale of military technology to China following the crackdown on dissidents in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square in 1989.

But Alexander Neill of analyst group the Royal United Services Institute says China’s growing financial influence in Europe is starting to tell.

"EU member states certainly feel pressured by China given the economic contagion, which seems to be spreading through the EU at the moment,” Neill said. “Many national leaders, I am sure, will think twice about how they engage the Chinese on investment, which is essentially bailing them out of elements of their economic doldrums."

Beijing has just signed a series of multi-billion-dollar deals with European companies. China says it is also prepared to buy up to $7.9 billion of Spanish government debt at a time of heightened fears over the future of the euro currency.

Many EU leaders, including the bloc’s foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton, have suggested it is time the arms export ban to China was revised.

Britain, while welcoming its own slice of Chinese investment, is at odds with EU countries that want to repeal the embargo."The U.K.’s position remains exactly as it has been over the last few years, which is now is not the right time to lift the ban," Neill stated.

Chinese President Hu Jintao visited Washington earlier this month and sought to calm fears over China’s investment in its military. He says China does not engage in arms races or pose a military threat to any country and will never seek hegemony or pursue an expansionist policy.

Despite military spending estimated at $78 billion in 2010, Alexander Neill says China’s armed forces still lag behind. "But there are areas of concern where China has managed to play catch-up with the United States,” he said. “Particularly in its high-tech and asymmetric capabilities."

China’s J-20 stealth fighter is an example of such high-tech advances.

-ends-

[rawcs]

* EXCLUSIVE Greg Sheridan, Foreign editor
* From: The Australian
* February 05, 2011 12:00AM

AUSTRALIA will need nuclear-powered attack submarines among a range of highly potent weapons systems, and must revolutionise its strategic culture to answer the security dangers posed by China's massive military build-up, according to one of the federal government's chief military advisers.

Ross Babbage, who served on the government's advisory panel for the 2009 Defence white paper, believes Australia should acquire a fleet of 12 nuclear-powered attack submarines.

He also favours developing a conventionally armed cruise and ballistic missile capability to be carried on new "arsenal ships", as well as a massive increase in Australia's cyber-warfare investment.

In a report to be published on Monday, Australia's Strategic Edge 2030, Professor Babbage calls for Australia to host a range of American military bases. This would help disperse US military assets and make them harder to hit in the event of military conflict with China.

It would also emphasise the strength and intimacy of the US-Australia alliance and discourage any aggression against Australia, as any hostile power would fear that this would automatically involve the Americans.

Professor Babbage, the founder of the influential Kokoda Foundation security think tank, believes all this is necessary because China's extremely aggressive military build-up has transformed Australia's strategic environment, making it much more dangerous.

"Australia cannot overlook the way that the scale, pattern and speed of (Chinese) People's Liberation Army's development is altering security in the Western Pacific," Professor Babbage argues in the new paper, which has been obtained by The Weekend Australian.

Professor Babbage believes that China's massive military expansion is focused on "striking United States and allied forces in the Western Pacific" and that this has been accompanied by much more aggressive military and diplomatic behaviour by Beijing.

"Australia has to develop an effective response," he argues.

"The challenge posed by the rising PLA is arguably one of the most serious that has confronted Australia's national security planners since World War II," he says.

"China is for the first time close to achieving a military capability to deny United States and allied forces access to much of the Western Pacific rim."

Professor Babbage argues that this is not a question of distant threats to Australia's region but of direct threat to Australia itself, as it is within range of many existing Chinese weapons systems.

He identifies a vast range of Chinese military capabilities that are on a massive growth path. These include cruise and ballistic missiles, which can attack US and Australian ships and fixed targets; a massive investment in cyber-warfare capabilities, with reports of tens of thousands of Chinese cyber intrusions daily; new classes of both nuclear and conventionally powered submarines, including more than 40 new Chinese subs since 1995; a massive increase in Chinese nuclear weapons that will double or triple in number by 2030; a huge investment in space warfare so that China could destroy the communications satellites which are central to the Western way of war; and a massive increase in fighter bomber and other airborne strike capabilities.

Professor Babbage does not believe Australia can match these Chinese capabilities.

Rather, his strategic response consists of two elements.

One is Australia taking action to strengthen the US military position in Asia, such as by hosting more US military facilities.

The other is for Australia to do to China what China is doing to the US, which is to develop an "asymmetric" ability to use a smaller force to impose massive costs on China in the event of any conflict.

This would help to deter Chinese military adventurism and avoid conflict.

[rawcs]

* Greg Sheridan, Foreign editor
* From: The Australian
* February 05, 2011 12:00AM

THERE is an almost mathematical elegance to Ross Babbage's vitally important new paper, Australia's Strategic Edge in 2030, to be published on Monday.

The veteran defence analyst wants Australia to do to China what China is doing to the US. China recognises that it could never defeat the US in a full-on, force-on-force conflict. But it can make it incredibly costly and dangerous for the US to operate its military in the western Pacific.

China achieves this by adopting "asymmetric" warfare. Asymmetry simply means big versus small. Asymmetric warfare is a way for the weaker party in a conflict to inflict crippling costs on the strong party.

China is doing this to the US through cyber warfare, space warfare, submarines and missiles. The Chinese strategy is called anti-access area denial. It is aimed at destroying US computer-based capabilities through cyber warfare. It is aimed at destroying US satellites through space warfare.

As Babbage comments, the Western way of war depends on vast flows of digital information from the battle space via satellite so that precision weapons can be targeted at the enemy. If in a conflict China can destroy US satellites, it can destroy a good measure of US technical superiority and dominance.

Then there are missiles. China can use missiles, and submarines, to threaten US aircraft carrier battle groups that deploy in Asia.

Missiles have another particular application for China. Much of the US military position in Asia rests on the giant US bases in Okinawa and Guam.

If Beijing decided to strike the US pre-emptively, it could rain down missiles on these two islands, destroying many of the US's regional military assets.

All up, Babbage believes that the massive build-up of China's People's Liberation Army has transformed the strategic environment in Asia so that US military superiority in the region, and Australia's own security, are profoundly threatened.

Here is where the elegance in Babbage's thinking comes in. There are certain, vitally important, things we can do to help sustain the US position in Asia. One of the most important is to host more US forces here. This makes the US presence in Asia more dispersed, harder to hit, more survivable.

But the other thing we can do, according to Babbage, is to emulate the Chinese themselves. We cannot replicate the full range of Chinese military capabilities. We have neither the size nor the money to do so.

Instead, we should develop our own asymmetric approach to China, such that Australia could inflict massive cost and damage on China in the event of a conflict.

It is important to emphasise that Babbage is not advocating confrontation with China. He does not believe conflict between the US and China is either imminent or even likely. He favours the strongest positive engagement with China, and also with its neighbours.

But Beijing has built all these new military assets in order to give it the ability to strike and hurt the US, and perhaps cripple the US military in Asia, if it wants to.

In doing all this, Beijing has transformed the strategic environment. It can hardly object if other nations hedge against this possibility by developing their own capabilities.

In order to maximise our asymmetric position against China, Babbage proposes significant changes to our force structure.

He wants a massive investment in cyber warfare capabilities, in order to protect our own assets and if necessary attack Chinese systems. While the detail of this would be kept secret, the broad scope of the program would be known, and would give any potential adversary pause.

Babbage would like us to acquire a fleet of 12 nuclear-powered attack submarines from the US. This would have countless advantages for Australia. We wouldn't have all the financial and technical risk of developing our own orphan class of subs, as we did with the Collins class subs. Being well-established US kit, the maintenance of the nuclear subs would be straightforward.

Top-of-the-line US nuclear subs are the queens of the species. They run deeper, faster and quieter than conventional subs. They're hard to hit, and deadly. They also offer this particular advantage. They would be a massive force multiplier to the US position in the region. Indeed, Babbage thinks they would be a game-changer. And we would supplement them with smaller, unmanned submarine capabilities.

But if for some reason we ever did need to mount a serious operation on our own, without active US involvement, the nuclear sub fleet gives us an awesome capability of our own. They work for us with the Americans, or without.

And because they are an established part of an existing US capability, we would have a much greater chance of keeping nine or so of them in the water at any one time. This is in great contrast to the Collins subs, where we have often struggled to have one or two boats in the water out of a notional six.

In extremis, a fleet of 12 nuclear subs could do terrible damage to the Chinese navy, or to Chinese shipping more generally. It hardly needs be said that Babbage, like all civilised human beings, wants profoundly to avoid any conflict with China. The existence of an Australian fleet of nuclear submarines would help the Chinese avoid tragic miscalculation.

Another asymmetric capability Babbage would acquire is missiles; ballistic and cruise missiles that could be fired from Australian "arsenal ships".

The Chinese have made a massive investment in missiles as a quintessential asymmetric weapon. Missiles with conventional warheads offer many benefits to militaries. They allow very rapid, very powerful strikes on almost any part of any battlefield.

They can have a strategic effect when used in large numbers, as say the Chinese taking out US bases in Guam or Okinawa. But even in lesser numbers, they can have strategic effects - for example in degrading command and control structures, or even targeting a national leadership.

Above all, any potential adversary never knows in advance what you will do with your missiles.

Even Babbage's proposal for Australia to host more US bases has an asymmetric element. The US alliance is the most important element of Australia's security. If the US position in Asia weakens, however, there might be some doubt about US participation in a dispute involving Australia. The increased presence of US facilities here would make any potential adversary think it more likely that fighting Australia would also engage the Americans.

Put this, and much else that Babbage suggests, all together and Australia has a serious capacity, should circumstances ever require, to inflict substantial damage on China. This in itself would make conflict much less likely ever to occur.

While Babbage's recommendations for Australia's force structure are likely to gain most attention, it is actually his crisp, detailed and brilliant exposition of what the Chinese have done to the strategic environment that really deserves most consideration.

In fact, there is no single document on China that I would more strongly recommend all Australians to read than Babbage's paper.

His bottom-line strategic assessment is that the "challenge posed by the rising PLA is arguably one of the most serious that has confronted Australia's national security planners since the second world war".

Babbage does not consider at length the motivation of China's leaders for building such a vast military force. Chinese motivation is impossible to calculate definitively. And in any event motivation can change over time. For defence planners, capability is more important than motivation. It is also worth noting that seldom in history has a military the size of China's been built and not used.

But although it is widely known that China has expanded its military, few are aware of the staggering scale of this transformation.

Babbage reels off some of the changes the Chinese have wrought: "The assumption that the Unmated States and its close allies will continue to enjoy an operational sanctuary in space is in serious doubt. The PLA is actively engaged in programs to degrade or destroy the US command, control and communications, the intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, and the navigational systems that are mostly space-based and critical for US and Australian military operations."

Or: "The assumption that US operational bases in Guam, Japan and elsewhere will enjoy high levels of security is crumbling. This is primarily because the PLA is fielding ballistic and cruise missiles . . . designed to strike all these locations with precision."

Or: "US aircraft carrier strike groups and other surface vessels are becoming increasingly vulnerable up to 1200 nautical miles from China's coast."

A couple of other facts are worth noting. Babbage doesn't make much of it but China is on course to double or triple its nuclear weapons arsenal by 2030. Why is it, alone among the nuclear powers, doing this?

Already, Australia is in direct range of many Chinese weapons, so the PLA's expansion directly affects the defence of continental Australia.

While Babbage's report is very sobering, it is hardly as if the Americans are asleep while all this Chinese military activity is going on.

The Americans are developing their own air-sea battle plan that would seek to wipe out many of China's capabilities at the start of a conflict.

One of the areas Beijing is most active in is cyber warfare, with reports of tens of thousands of Chinese cyber infiltration attacks every day.

It is impossible to know how the cyber element of a conflict would play out. But it would be important. It could, as Babbage suggests, be as important as the enigma code-breaking efforts were in World War II.

Babbage has written one of the most important, deeply considered and logically compelling strategic documents ever seen in Australia.

It should be the starting point of a broad national debate.

[buglerbilly]

Taiwan detains general in China spy case

Benjamin Yeh

February 9, 2011 - 10:09PM

A Taiwanese general has been arrested over claims he spied for China, the defence ministry said Wednesday as it scrambled to limit the damage from what it called the worst espionage case in 50 years.

Army Major General Lo Hsien-che was recruited by China while stationed in Thailand between 2002 and 2005 and was detained late last month, the ministry said in a statement.

At the time of his arrest, the 51-year-old was head of the army's telecommunications and electronic information department, according to the statement.

"We don't know for sure, but there's no reason to believe that he stopped spying for China after returning home from Thailand," a ministry official told AFP, on condition of anonymity.

"This is definitely the worst Chinese communist espionage case in the past half century."

It was not immediately clear how much harm Lo had caused Taiwan's military, but given the sensitive affairs he was in charge of, "it could be serious," the official added.

Local media said prosecutors had seized highly confidential documents while searching Lo's office.

Some reportedly detail the Po Sheng (Broad Victory) system, a sophisticated command, control and communications network that Taiwan is purchasing from US defence contractor Lockheed Martin at a cost of Tw$46 billion ($1.6 billion).

China is believed to be very interested in learning more about the project as it enables the Taiwanese military to get access to US intelligence systems, the China Times newspaper said.

Other documents include the army's procurement of 30 Boeing-made Apache AH-64D Longbow attack helicopters and the army's underground optical fibre network system, it said.

The defence ministry has set up an ad hoc group in an effort to limit the possible damage, according to Lieutenant General Wang Ming-wo, acting director of the ministry's Political Warfare Bureau.

"He has brought shame to the military. Servicemen are supposed to be loyal to their country," Wang said.

The arrest of Lo came amid fast-warming ties between Taipei and Beijing following the 2008 election of Ma Ying-jeou of the China-friendly Kuomintang as president.

"Although tensions across the Taiwan Strait have eased over the past more than two years, the Chinese communists have not stopped their infiltration into Taiwan," said Wang.

"Instead, they have been stepping up their intelligence gathering, what we call the 'smokeless war,' against us."

Taiwan and China have spied on each other ever since they split in 1949 at the end of a civil war. Beijing still regards the island as part of its territory awaiting reunification.

Legislator Tsai Huang-lang from the main opposition Democratic Progressive Party, known for its anti-China stance, described the event as "a big military setback for Taiwan".

"Defence minister Kao Hua-chu and the ministry's chief of staff Lin Chen-yi should immediately step down to assume full responsibility," he said.

Military analysts warned that the espionage case may further delay the proposed US sale of next generation F-16 fighter jets and submarines, weapons Taiwan says it badly needs to defend itself against its giant neighbour.

"The case may give the United States second thoughts while evaluating the arms deals," said Wung Ming-hsien, a strategy expert at Tamkang University near Taipei.

Taipei applied to the US government to buy 66 F-16s in early 2007, but observers say Washington has held up the deal for fear of angering Beijing.

Now, the US government may also fear that a deal could cause military secrets to fall into Chinese hands, according to Wung.

"We're in touch with Taiwanese authorities on the case," said Sheila Paskman, a spokeswoman for The American Institute in Taiwan, the US de facto embassy in Taipei.

The United States has remained a leading arms supplier to Taiwan despite its switching of diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing since 1979 and is obliged by its own laws to supply arms to the island.

© 2011 AFP
This story is sourced direct from an overseas news agency as an additional service to readers. Spelling follows North American usage, along with foreign currency and measurement units.

[buglerbilly]

China’s Active Defense Strategy and Its Implications (excerpt)

(Source: Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments; issued Jan. 28, 2011)

Testimony Before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission
by Jim Thomas,
CSBA Vice President for Studies

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commission, thank you for inviting me to testify at today’s hearing.

I will focus my remarks on China’s recent actions and statements pertaining to the South China Sea and their implications for Southeast Asia. In my testimony today, I will briefly outline elements of recent Chinese behavior that are cause for concern in Southeast Asia and summarize the reactions of various Southeast Asian states. I will then propose measures the United States might consider to help bolster the defenses of Southeast Asian countries and assist them in ensuring their sovereignty, while preserving a stable military balance in the region.

Strategic Implications

This Commission’s work is critical because the stakes in the South China Sea could not be higher. The South China Sea is a region of growing strategic interest for many countries in the world, including the United States. More than one-third of the world’s seaborne trade flows through its contested waters. Its fisheries are an important source of revenue for the countries it adjoins. While the potential oil and gas reserves that lie underneath the South China Sea are difficult to quantify, they are likely significant. U.S. regional interests, however, extend beyond the shorelines around the South China Sea and encompass the independence and sovereignty of the countries of Southeast Asia.

“The United States,” Secretary of State Hilary Clinton has declared, “like every nation, has a national interest in freedom of navigation, open access to Asia’s maritime commons, and respect for international law in the South China Sea.” In the last year, however, China has made a series of provocative moves that, when coupled with the continuation of its arms buildup and development of naval power projection capabilities, have raised concerns throughout the region about its intentions and potential expansionist designs in the East and South China Seas.

A brief overview of some of China’s statements and actions suggests the need for a more proactive U.S. approach in the region. (end of excerpt)

Click here for the full text (5 pages in PDF format), on the CSBA website)

http://www.csbaonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011.01.27-Chinas-Active-Def.pdf

-ends-

[buglerbilly]

MARCH 3, 2011, 8:44 A.M. ET.

South China Sea Tensions Rise

By JAMES HOOKWAY

The Philippines' armed forces sent two military aircraft to the disputed waters of the South China Sea after a Philippine oil-exploration vessel said it was confronted by two Chinese patrol boats, Philippine officials said Thursday.

The run-in, which took place Wednesday, is the latest incident to complicate the delicate balance of power in the waters, which are claimed in whole or part by China, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan.

Last year, relations between Vietnam and China deteriorated badly after Vietnamese fishing vessels were apprehended by Chinese vessels in waters which China claims as its own. Beijing, meanwhile, was angered last year when U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told a regional security forum in Hanoi that a peaceful, multilateral resolution of the competing territorial claims in the South China Sea was in America's interest.

The waters straddle some of the world's busiest shipping lanes and rich fish stocks. In addition, they are also believed to lie atop substantial oil and natural gas reserves.

The latest incident involving China and the Philippines underscores the sensitivity of the resource-rich area, especially as the Philippines in recent months has been trying to improve relations with China.

In December, Philippine President Benigno Aquino III chose not to send a representative to the ceremony awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo. Mr. Aquino said at the time his decision was part of a diplomatic effort to save the lives of three Filipinos facing the death penalty in China for allegedly trafficking drugs. Their executions, scheduled for February, were postponed.

Philippine Lt. Gen. Juancho Sabban, though, told the Associated Press Thursday that if the Philippines felt its territory was being violated, it would push back. "It's clearly our territory," Lt. Gen. Sabban said. "If they bully us, well, even children will fight back."

A news office official at China's Foreign Ministry declined immediate comment.

Lt. Gen. Sabban said Wednesday's incident occurred on the Reed Bank near the Spratly Islands, which both the Philippines and China claim along with other countries. Officials from the Philippines say the Reed Bank is well within Philippine territory, but when an oil exploration vessel began preparation to probe the geological potential of the area, it was warned off by two Chinese patrol boats.

Lt. Gen. Sabban then said he dispatched an OV-10 light-bomber plane and Islander light aircraft to scan the area, but Chinese vessels had left the area by the time the Philippine planes arrived.

Write to James Hookway at james.hookway@wsj.com

[buglerbilly]

China's defence budget to rise 12.7% in 2011

Dan Martin

March 4, 2011 - 4:04PM

China's defence budget will rise 12.7 percent in 2011 to 601.1 billion yuan ($91.7 billion), a government spokesman said on Friday, amid persistent concerns about Beijing's military build-up.

The figure was contained in a budgetary report submitted to the National People's Congress, the parliament's spokesman Li Zhaoxing told a news conference on the eve of the opening of the annual NPC session.

"China has always paid attention to controlling the size of defence spending," Li told reporters, describing spending as "relatively low" compared with the rest of the world.

Li, a former foreign minister, said the figure represented six percent of the total national budget in the world's second-largest economy.

The number however represents a return to double-digit increases, which have alarmed the United States and several of China's Asian neighbours. That trend had been broken last year when the defence budget rose 7.5 percent.

The People's Liberation Army -- the world's largest -- is hugely secretive about its defence programmes, but insists its modernisation is purely defensive in nature.

"This will not pose a threat to any country," Li said.

For Willy Lam, a China analyst at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, the published military budget -- which he said was likely only one-third to one-half of total spending -- will be poured into next-generation equipment.

"The return to this double-digit PLA budget reflects the growing power of the PLA," Lam told AFP. "They are trying to close the gap with Russia and the United States."

Experts say the spending hike also reflects a desire to keep the pressure on Washington, Tokyo and others in the region.

"The Chinese communist leadership needs to increase its military intimidation of the United States, Taiwan and neighbours like Japan and India," said Rick Fisher at the International Assessment and Strategy Center in the US.

"Spending increases advance this goal by ensuring that programmes entering their expensive procurement phase, like aircraft carriers and nuclear missile submarines, can proceed without delay," Fisher told AFP.

Tokyo has repeatedly questioned Beijing's military intentions, especially after collisions in disputed waters in September between two Japanese coastguard boats and a Chinese fishing vessel that sparked a major row.

"We regard the modernisation of China's military power and its growing and intense activities as concerns," top Japanese government spokesman Yukio Edano said Thursday, after two Chinese planes approached a contested island chain.

"Our country will continue to pay close attention to moves by China's military."

Japan has said it plans to send more forces to its scattered southern islands and away from Cold War-era locations in the north near Russia, citing Beijing's increased assertiveness in the East and South China Seas.

India's defence minister last month expressed "serious concern" over China's growing military might, pledging to boost its own forces.

The two countries have long-standing border disputes in the Himalayas.

On Monday, India announced a nearly 12 percent jump in defence spending to $36 billion in its annual budget -- up from a four percent hike last year.

In January, US Defense Secretary Robert Gates visited Beijing to patch up frayed military ties -- and was instead greeted with the maiden flight of China's first next-generation stealth fighter.

Last month, the Pentagon proposed a record "base" defence budget -- excluding the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan -- of $553 billion for fiscal 2012.

"Advances by the Chinese military in cyber and anti-satellite warfare pose a potential challenge to the ability of our forces to operate and communicate in this part of the Pacific," Gates said after his China visit.

But he added that Washington and Tokyo were well-placed to counter the threat with high-tech hardware and that it was not a foregone conclusion that China would turn into a military rival.

© 2011 AFP
This story is sourced direct from an overseas news agency as an additional service to readers. Spelling follows North American usage, along with foreign currency and measurement units.

[buglerbilly]

MARCH 7, 2011, 10:12 A.M. ET.

Taiwan Spy Case Centers on Lockheed System .

By PAUL MOZUR

TAIPEI—A general at the center of Taiwan's worst spy case in 50 years is suspected of leaking sensitive details to China about an electronic defense system being sold to the island by U.S. contractor Lockheed Martin Corp., according to a senior member of Taiwan's parliamentary national defense committee.

Maj. General Lo Hsien-che was arrested in late January for allegedly leaking military secrets to China, highlighting a "smokeless" intelligence war across the Taiwan Strait that defense analysts say is deepening, despite flourishing economic ties over the past several years.

Analysts say that a surge in trade and travel between the two former enemies has made it much easier for the two former Cold War rivals to spy on each other. This has created a dilemma for Taiwan's Kuomintang government, which needs the economic boost from growing business links with China but is also deeply concerned about national security. China is determined to unify Taiwan with the Chinese mainland—and has never renounced the use of force to achieve this.

The island is heavily dependent on U.S. arms sales for its defense, and the spy case has sparked concern in Taiwan about the willingness of the U.S. to continue selling advanced weapons systems to Taiwan given the risk that their secrets could fall into Chinese hands.

The lawmaker, Lin Yu-fang , a member of the ruling Kuomintang, said Gen. Lo is suspected of handing over details about Taiwan's Po Sheng—or Broad Victory—program, a system to integrate ground, naval and air forces with command centers that is being sold to Taiwan by Lockheed Martin. A Lockheed Martin spokesman said the company had no additional information.

The 51-year-old general was recruited by a Chinese agent while he worked as a military attaché in Thailand in 2004 according to Taiwan's Ministry of National Defense.

Mr. Lin said the government has worked fast to respond to the most recent flare-up in the intelligence war, instituting new measures to polygraph test every Ministry of National Defense official after they return from trips abroad. He added that because Gen. Lo was not an engineer, and was unable to gain access to critical software and hardware components of the Po Sheng program, preliminary assessments are that the damage from the case is limited.

Wendell Minnick, the Asia bureau chief of Defense News, an independent defense trade periodical, said he believed that Gen. Lo could have caused damage in other ways because he had access to sensitive international military cables while working as an attaché. He may also have worked as a "talent spotter" recruiting other officers to spy for China, Mr. Minnick said.

China has long sought details of the Po Sheng program. The technology featured prominently in a 2008 case in which an employee at a U.S. Department of Defense agency, Gregg Bergersen, gave out secret information about the program to a naturalized U.S. citizen from Taiwan named Kuo Tai-shen with the understanding the leaks would lead to business opportunities for Mr. Bergersen. But Mr. Kuo sent the information to a Chinese official in Guangzhou, according to an affidavit relating to the case. He was sentenced to more than 15 years in prison while Mr. Bergersen received a 57-month sentence and three years supervised release.

The Chinese focus on the Po Sheng program shows its intense interest and progress in developing the capability to disrupt Taiwanese communications ahead of an attack, according to Mr. Minnick. He added the arrest itself was also an impressive achievement for Taiwan's counterintelligence.

A spokesperson for the American Institute of Taiwan, the de facto U.S. embassy in Taiwan, said it was working with Taiwanese authorities on the case. Taiwan's Defense Ministry said an investigation into the case is ongoing and no more details are available at this time. China's Taiwan Affairs Office was unavailable for comment.

Although it remains to be seen what impact Gen. Lo's case will have on a new round of U.S. arms sales, Taiwan's penetration by China has already affected what types of arms the U.S. is willing to sell to Taiwan, according to former deputy defense minister Chong Pin Lin.

U.S. Defense Department spokeswoman, Cmdr. Leslie Hull-Ryde, declined to comment directly on whether the episode had jeopardized U.S. arms sales to the island, saying it would be inappropriate to comment on an ongoing investigation. She said that "in accordance with the Taiwan relations Act, we make available to Taiwan defense articles and services necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defense capability." She was referring to the Congressional act that governs U.S. relations with Taiwan.

Military analysts say that although an intelligence war has been going on for decades, Taiwan's recent opening to China has given mainland spies new opportunities.

"I go to your home and you come to my home, and that's what's happening right now, they have spies here and we have spies there....and this will continue to happen, we have to be very careful," says Mr. Lin, the KMT legislator.

[buglerbilly]

China Issues White Paper On National Defense to Enhance Transparency

(Source: Xinhua news agency; published March 31, 2011)

BEIJING --- China on Thursday issued a white paper on national defense, aiming to enhance its military's transparency and boost the world's trust in its commitment to peaceful development.

The document, the seventh of its kind the Chinese government has issued since 1998, says China will never seek hegemony, nor will it adopt the approach of military expansion now or in the future, no matter how its economy develops.

The white paper, titled "China's National Defense in 2010," gives an overall picture of the country's national defense ranging from the security environment and national defense policy to defense expenditure and arms control.

Peaceful Development

The basic purpose of the white paper is to deepen trust and dispel misgivings with the manifesto of the national defense policy, said Chen Zhou, a research fellow with the PLA's Military Science Academy.

China's commitment to peaceful development and a national defense policy which is defensive in nature have been underlined in all the seven editions of the white paper since 1998.

The pursuit of a national defense policy which is defensive in nature is determined by China's development path, its fundamental aims, its foreign policy, and its historical and cultural traditions, the latest edition of the white paper says.

The white paper says the world remains peaceful and stable at large, but the international security situation has become more complex and military competition remains fierce. "China is meanwhile confronted by more diverse and complex security challenges."

It defines the goals and tasks of China's national defense in this new era as safeguarding national sovereignty, security and interests of national development; maintaining social harmony and stability; accelerating the modernization of national defense and the armed forces; maintaining world peace and stability.

Defense Expenditure

In the face of concerns over China's growing defense expenditure, the white paper says the increase has been kept at a reasonable and appropriate level.

China's defense expenditure grew by 17.5 percent in 2008 and 18.5 percent in 2009. The defense budget for 2010 is 532.115 billion yuan (81.2 billion U.S. dollars), up 7.5 percent from 2009.

"The growth rate of defense expenditure has decreased," says the white paper.

China's defense expenditure mainly comprises expenses for personnel, training and maintenance, and equipment, with each accounting for roughly one third of the total.

Making public the share of equipment spending in defense expenditure, the white paper serves to allay concerns that China's increased defense expenditure may trigger a regional arms race, observers said.

The share of China's annual defense expenditure in the state financial expenditure has declined from 8.66 percent in 1998 to 6.49 percent in 2009, according to the white paper.

In the past two years, the increase in the defense expenditure has been used to improve support for troops and accomplish diversified military tasks, ranging from earthquake rescue and escort operations in the Gulf of Aden and waters off Somalia.

In view of the upward trend of purchasing prices and maintenance costs, China has moderately increased funding for high-tech weaponry and equipment and supporting facilities for that weaponry, the white paper says.

Confidence-Building

China works to create "equal, mutually beneficial and effective" mechanisms for military confidence-building, says the white paper.

Military confidence-building is an effective way to maintain national security and development, and safeguard regional peace and stability, the white paper says.

Qian Lihua, director of the Foreign Affairs Office with the National Defense Ministry, said the international community has paid great attention to China's national defense and military development, but misunderstandings and worries also rise.

"There are views assuming that China's defensive national defense policy might be changing," Qian said. "Therefore, the publication of the white paper aims to create a security environment featuring mutual trust and cooperation."

He said many countries consider the white paper as an important document to systematically study China's defense policy and military strategy.

The PLA had conducted 47 joint military drills with foreign armies, an effort to "deepen international military exchanges and cooperation," Qian said.

According to the white paper, in recent years, China has held extensive strategic consultations and dialogues with relevant countries in the field of security and defense to enhance mutual understanding and trust, and to strengthen communication and coordination.

To date, China has established mechanisms for defense and security consultation and dialogue with 22 countries.

In the last two years, senior PLA delegations have visited more than 40 countries, and defense ministers and chiefs of general staff from more than 60 countries have visited China.

Contribution to World Peace

China has consistently supported and actively participated in UN peacekeeping operations, making a positive contribution to world peace, the white paper says.

As of December 2010, China dispatched 17,390 military personnel to participate in 19 UN peacekeeping missions. Nine Chinese have lost their lives while serving in the missions.

As of December 2010, the PLA had 1,955 officers and other personnel serving in nine UN mission areas. China has dispatched more peacekeeping personnel than any other permanent member of the UN Security Council.

The Chinese government takes a prudent attitude toward the export of military products and related technologies, and has established a non-proliferation mechanism at its three levels of government, which covers producers and export companies.

The rise and fall of great powers over the past 500 years is a history of wars and hegemony. However, "China will take a different path of peaceful development and make contributions to world civilization," Chen Zhou said.

Click here for more detailed coverage of the White Paper by the Xinhua news agency.

http://eng.mod.gov.cn/Press/2011-03/31/content_4235473_2.htm

Click here for the White Paper’s full text (browsable HTML format) on the Chinese MoD website.

http://eng.mod.gov.cn/TopNews/2011-03/31/content_4235292.htm

(ends)

IDSA Comment: White Paper on China’s National Defence 2010

(Source: Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses; issued April 1, 2011)

China issued its latest biennial defence white paper on March 31, 2011. Titled “China’s National Defense in 2010,” the seventh such document published since 1998, it provides an overview of China’s understanding of its security environment and its national defence policy.

Assessing China’s domestic achievements and reviewing the international environment, Hu Jintao had declared at the Fifth Plenum of the 17th CPC Central Committee in October 2010 that China was still in a period of strategic opportunity. That China views the second decade of the 21st century a period of “strategic opportunity” is borne out by the assessments of the security situation made in the white paper.

The focus on economics is apparent. Not only is “the international balance of power” believed to be changing through “economic strength”, but “reform in international systems” is identified as the prevailing trend, with steady progress in the establishment of “mechanisms for the management of the global economy.” A not-so-oblique criticism of American economic policies is apparent in the statement that “deep seated contradictions and structural problems behind the international financial crises have not been resolved.”

Despite the familiar lament over arms sales to Taiwan, the United States’ involvement in the Asia-Pacific and the reinforcement of American military alliances in the region, China’s assessment of its Comprehensive National Strength is very positive. The current white paper claims that China’s “comprehensive national strength has stepped up to a new stage.” Unlike the previous white paper, which simply states that “China would not seek hegemony or engage in military expansion…no matter how it develops,” the current document changes this almost banal proclamation to “China will never seek hegemony…, no matter how its economy develops.”

The watch word then in assessing the international environment and China’s prospects is obviously ‘economy’, and China is well aware of the threat perceptions that its unprecedented economic growth have engendered. That China would be more confident after weathering the economic storms of recent years was expected. The surprise lies in the apparent self-assurance in the face of increasing “suspicion about China, interference and countering moves against China from the outside” and pressure in preserving China’s territorial integrity and the maritime rights and interests of its “vast territories and territorial seas.”

The white paper sets four tasks for national defence:
-- Safeguarding national sovereignty, security and interests of national development;
-- Maintaining social harmony and stability;
-- Accelerating the modernization of national defence and the armed forces;
-- Maintaining world peace and stability.

The defence of security interests in “cyber space” has been included in the tasks for national defence for the first time and is an indicator of its high priority. This is especially relevant given that the creation of a joint operation system has been declared as the focal point of PLA modernization. The document also states that a “step-change development has been achieved in information infrastructure” within the armed forces with the total length of “the national defense optical fiber communication network” being increased by a “large margin.” This forms a new generation information transmission network where optical fibre communication is the mainstay and satellite and short-wave communications are supplementary.

Tracing the history of PLA modernization to the series of reforms in military command, organization, training and regulation after 1949, rather than the 1970s and 80s as was the earlier practice, the current document presents the military modernization drive as a rational extension of a process already underway.

According to the white paper, the PLA has made great progress in its modernization and informationization objectives. As in previous years, the building of new combat capacity to win local wars in conditions of informationization and strengthening capabilities in fire power, mobility, protection and support is emphasised. The document states that the PLA Army has developed new types of combat forces, optimised organisation and structure, accelerated digitised upgrading and retrofitting of battle weaponry and deployed new weapon platforms. The transformation of the PLA Air Force is said to be focused on air and missile defence, and strategic projection for which training in complex electromagnetic environments and different tactical contexts is conducted.

The document also reviews modernization of the PLA Navy which is seen to have evolved “in line with the requirements of offshore defense strategy.” However, an enunciation of this “offshore defense strategy” is not forthcoming. What is made clear is that the PLA Navy seeks new methods of logistics support for sustaining long-term maritime missions while continuing investment in a shore-based support system.

With regard to the PLA Second Artillery Force, two more capability indices of ‘protection’ and ‘survivability’ are added to the four capabilities (‘rapid reaction,’ ‘penetration,’ ‘precision strike,’ and ‘damage infliction’) mentioned in earlier documents. In assessing the military modernization process, a “notable improvement in the PLA’s capabilities of equipment support in long-distance and trans-regional maneuvers, escort operations in distant waters and complex battlefield environments” is declared. Continuing with the model of integrated civilian-military development, the Chinese government is working to “integrate combat-readiness as an element in the national transportation grid” and aims at synchronized construction of military transportation facilities and urban development.

It is noted that the percentage increase in the defence budget for the year 2010 had been lower than previous years and the primary heads of expenditure are identified as: improved support conditions for the troops; diversified military tasks; Revolution in Military Affairs, including purchase and maintenance of equipment.

For the first time, the latest white paper includes a separate section titled “Military Confidence-Building”, highlighting China’s engagement in strategic consultations and dialogues, confidence-building measures undertaken in border regions (agreements signed with India in 1993, 1996 and 2005 are mentioned), cooperation on maritime security, participation in regional security mechanisms and China’s military exchanges. Although this information is not entirely absent from previous white papers, it is presented comprehensively in the latest document.

What does the white paper on China’s National Defense 2010 ultimately imply?

First, it suggests that China is increasingly confident of its economic and military strength, and foresees an international environment conducive to the growth of its tangible and intangible assets.

Second, the emphasis on force projection capabilities along with the focus on China’s involvement in UN-mandated missions, its constructive role in regional security, as well as the designation of “maintaining world peace and stability” as a task of national defence, seem to indicate a willingness to undertake a leadership position in global affairs.

Third, the document underlines the absolute leadership of the Party over the armed forces, clarifying any ambiguity that may have been perceived over the control of the people’s army, and highlighting the improvement of ideological and political qualities as the foundation for high-calibre military personnel.

Fourth, special mention is made of the “Military Legal System”, underscoring the observance of international treaties and relevant laws of the PRC by China’s armed forces. Far from mitigating conflict, strengthening adherence to the laws of the PRC could well mean a clash with customary international law and be part of “legal warfare” advocated in China’s policy of “active defense”.

To paraphrase from the previous white paper, one can say that the fear is that China would be attaching more importance to supporting diplomatic struggles with military as well as economic means. Aimed at strengthening confidence through greater transparency, the white paper does not quite succeed in mitigating this perception.

-ends-

[buglerbilly]

Sizing Up China's Military Capabilities

Apr 4, 2011

By Richard D. Fisher, Jr., Bill Sweetman
Washington, Washington



It is no secret that long-term U.S. Air Force and Navy planning is focused on China. This alone is straining U.S.-China relations, as well as triggering U.S. domestic criticism from those who regard war with China as inconceivable, and an internal squabble between China-focused planners and “boot-centric” Army and Marine Corps leaders.

The U.S. focus on China—and from all outward signs, China’s military focus on the U.S.—has been driven by several factors since the mid-1990s. China’s rapid economic and technological progress gives it the resources to compete militarily with the U.S. The Taiwan Strait crisis of 1995-96—in which China’s apparent goal of persuading Taiwanese voters to reject its pro-independence government was frustrated, in part, by a U.S. show of force—was one factor that triggered drastic reforms and modernization of China’s non-nuclear forces. The Taiwan issue, and the broader concern of military power in what Chinese leaders have historically considered home waters, have led to a visible direction in China’s military modernization toward changing the balance in the Western Pacific.

A decade ago, many U.S. analysts were unimpressed by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). One heard snickers about the “million-man swim” required to invade Taiwan. By 2011, such hubris has given way to palpable concern: The PLA has made great strides toward implementing a strategy described in Pentagon documents since 2005 as “anti-access” or “area denial,” or the shorthand “A2/AD,” to deter or defeat U.S. forces in the Western Pacific.

The elements of this capability include:

•Information exploitation. Digital connectivity, now available from troops to top command levels, has helped implement and refine new joint force operations, especially between the second artillery missile force, the PLA air force and the PLA navy (PLAN). Networks of optical, radar and electronic surveillance satellites, new over-the-horizon (OTH) radar, AWACS and electronic intelligence aircraft plus new passive counter-stealth radar and soon, a 30-plus navigation satellite constellation, enable precision targeting at increasing distances.

•Information attack. In the mid-2000s, U.S. intelligence agencies identified the Advanced Persistent Threat (APT), a pattern of cyberespionage largely traceable to China and aimed mainly at the U.S. defense industry and armed forces.

•Precision air and missile attack. China is developing (and offering for export) an expanding range of guided rockets conforming to the range limits of the Missile Technology Control Regime, while domestically producing guided air-launched weapons—bombs and cruise missiles—and ballistic missiles capable of threatening U.S. bases and naval forces.

•Growing sea denial. PLAN has Asia’s most formidable sea-denial capability built around a growing force of 50-80 conventional submarines (SSKs). Soviet-era boats are being replaced by the Song and Yuan classes and imported Russian Kilos (see p. 15). A yet-undesignated new SSK similar in shape to the Kilo was revealed in September. The Songs and Kilos carry sub-launched YJ-82 antiship cruise missiles and the Kilos carry the formidable Novator 3M-54 Club cruise missile family.

In the Soviet era, it was commonplace for U.S. intelligence agencies to exaggerate Soviet capabilities and predict that new systems would enter service sooner and in larger numbers than actually happened. A consistent trend in analysis of China’s military capabilities is to do the reverse. The emergence of the DF‑21D antiship ballistic missile (ASBM) program (around 2007) startled the U.S. Navy, triggering a crash program to retrieve SM-2 Block IV missiles from storage to establish an initial terminal ballistic missile defense (BMD) capability (for a report on antiship missiles, see p. 41).

Late in 2010, U.S. Pacific Command leader Adm. Robert F. Willard made the surprise declaration that the DF-21D had reached initial operational capability, indicating not only that the missile and its guided reentry vehicle had been tested but were ready to be used with targeting systems such as OTH radar and ocean reconnaissance satellites. (Around the same time, Chinese documents emerged describing the use of submunitions to disable a carrier and damage its aircraft.)

The same trend has been seen with China’s aircraft carrier program, where Western leaders were slow to acknowledge that the former Soviet carrier Varyag was being rehabilitated as (at least) a test and training carrier until Chinese Internet imagery showed this was the case.

Even a conservative estimate of the J-20 fighter (DTI February, p. 32) casts doubt on U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates’s assertion in 2009 that China would have no operational stealth fighters before 2020. In the Western Pacific context, the J-20’s size and design suggest that one mission could be to threaten U.S. aircraft such as the E-3 AWACS, or Rivet Joint signals intelligence aircraft and tankers, without which U.S. tactical air assets would be rendered useless.

U.S. officials have tended to view this increasing A2/AD force through the prism of a potential conflict over the future of Taiwan or a contest for dominance in the Western Pacific. In the event of a conflict, it is assumed the PLA would launch cyberstrikes against regional U.S. and allied military facilities and U.S. political and military leadership, while directing air, naval and special forces strikes against nearby American facilities in Okinawa and Guam. Should Washington refuse to sue for peace, and deploy forces into the theater, the PLA would fashion joint missile, air and submarine strikes to deter or defeat naval and air forces.

U.S. options in response do not include the rapid development and deployment of major new weapons, with limited R&D and procurement resources under increased pressure from Joint Strike Fighter cost overruns (see p. 28 for issues surrounding development of a new bomber). The emerging AirSea Battle concept, consequently, relies on the reorientation of current programs and the use of networking to ensure freedom of operation in A2/AD environments—the euphemism for a hostile Western Pacific.

The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) has issued some of the key documents behind the AirSea Battle. They should not be taken lightly since former CSBA staff, including Deputy Navy Secretary Robert Work, occupy key positions in Washington. CSBA’s most comprehensive report stresses that “AirSea Battle, as a doctrine for the operational level of war, cannot and should not be seen as a ‘war-winning’ concept in itself. Nor should it be viewed through the lens of a particular scenario, for example, the defense of Taiwan. Instead, it should be considered as helping to set the conditions at the military operational level to sustain a stable, favorable conventional military balance throughout the Western Pacific region.”

So it is not about fighting China, but maintaining a military balance to sustain stability in the region—but it is a military concept for combat operations, which responds to visible Chinese developments and China’s lack of transparency about strategy and intentions. Some of the key “air-sea” linkages mentioned by CSBA and others include:

•Air Force counter-space operations to blind PLA space-based ocean surveillance systems and prevent targeting of ASBMs. (This may be why USAF is developing the X-37B agile space vehicle and why, according to the Heritage Foundation’s Dean Cheng, Chinese defense bloggers are upset about it.)

•In January, it was announced that the Air Force Joint Stars (Surveillance Target Attack Radar System) aircraft had completed a demonstration of the Network Enabled Weapon architecture, in which moving ships were tracked by Joint Stars and hit with AGM-154C glide bombs released from F/A-18s.

•Navy Aegis ships in the BMD role would provide a front line of defense for USAF forward bases and permit shoot-look-shoot engagements of incoming missiles. Sea-based BMD has driven a shift in Navy fleet planning in recent years, with curtailment of the DDG-1000 and its replacement by a BMD-optimized version of the Burke-class frigate.

•Long-range penetrating strikes would destroy PLA ground-based, long-range maritime surveillance systems (such as OTH radars) and missiles aimed at ships and bases. Concurrently, Navy submarine-based strike support against PLA integrated air-defense systems would pave the way for Air Force strikes.

Another example of air-sea collaboration would be the development of an airborne infrared sensor capability for BMD based on long-endurance, land-based unmanned aerial vehicles, to fill the gap until a space-based system is available in the 2020s. Either system allows the new Burke, armed in the future with the Next Generation Aegis Missile (formerly the SM-3 Block IIB), to be as or more effective than the now-abandoned CG-X missile cruiser.

The U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s (Darpa’s) Long-Range Anti-Shipping Missile (LRASM) project is also aimed at air-sea warfare deficiencies. LRASM is a three-part program that encompasses two airframe/propulsion approaches, both developed by divisions of Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control, and a common multimode seeker from BAE Systems of Nashua, N.H., the former Lockheed Sanders.

One set of demonstrations will focus on air launch and the other on surface-ship launch, but both teams will define air- and ship-launched versions, confirming that the plan would be to take only one weapon into full-scale development. LRASM-A is being developed by the Strike Weapons unit in Orlando, Fla., and is based on the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile Extended Range airframe. Its demonstration program will culminate in two air-launched demonstrations.

LRASM-B is run by Tactical Missiles of Grand Prairie, Texas, and uses “prior ramjet development activities” to provide a supersonic-cruise missile with stealth qualities. The ramjet technology comes from Pratt & Whitney. LRASM-B will wind up with four boosted launches out of Vertical Launch System tubes. The program is due to be complete by April 2013.

BAE Systems’ role suggests that the core of the sensor suite is based on passive radio-frequency technology. However, previous discussion of LRASM has made it clear that it will use multiple sensors to autonomously select warship targets even in a cluttered sea lane while operating in a GPS-denied environment.

However, if it is indeed the case that China’s technology is advancing more quickly than the West expects, there is a chance of technological surprise.

Some potential developments are being hinted at. The PLA’s preparations to carry out the new “historic mission” given by the Chinese Communist Party in December 2004, which includes a mandate to defend the party’s international interests, takes the PLA’s challenge beyond its increasing A2/AD capabilities in Asia. The beginning of distant activities is seen in the PLA’s deployment of joint-force packages for exercises in Russia (2008) and Kazakhstan (2010) and its participation in counter-piracy patrols off Somalia since late 2009.

In some cases Washington’s initial A2/AD response is meeting challenges. For example, one counter to the DF-21D 2,000‑3,000‑km (1,240-1,865-mi.)-range ASBM has been the Navy’s UCAS-D unmanned combat aerial system program, for which the Northrop-Grumman X-47B made its first flight on Feb. 2. The X-47B has an initial range of about 2,100 nm., but may not enter the fleet until 2020. On Feb. 20, China’s Global Times carried a public disclosure that by 2015 the PLA would deploy a new family of 4,000-km intermediate-range ballistic missiles. This family, the paper said, would carry out offensive missions, likely nuclear and non-nuclear strike, and defensive missions, probably meaning it will carry improved terminally guided antiship warheads.

Chinese sources have referred to future DF-25/26/27 missiles: One may be the new 4,000-km missile. Future PLA medium- and short-range ballistic missiles and cruise missiles will be faster and more maneuverable to counter defenses. A new air- and missile-defense interceptor family, sometimes called the HQ-19 (HHQ-26 for the naval version), reportedly has performance goals similar to the 400-km Russian S-400.

By the 2020s the U.S. hopes to resolve technology challenges for deployment of energy weapons. Indicators point to the possibility that the PLA is not far behind in development of tactical lasers, high-power microwave weapons and rail guns. There is also heavy Chinese investment in research centers for electromagnetic launch technology, the basis for rail guns, electromagnetic aircraft catapults and spacecraft launchers.

China is working on counter-stealth and counter-network technology. At IDEX in February (see p. 17), China released details of the meter-wave (VHF) HK-JM and HK-JM2 radars, both mobile and with detection ranges of 330 and 500 km, respectively. The radars could cue more accurate tracking systems. China also unveiled the DWL002 ground-based electronic surveillance measure system, which could be deployed as a passive coherent-location radar, using long-range broadcast signals to detect non-emitting targets.

But these newer trends in Chinese power are not sufficiently reflected in U.S. government documents—like the annual China Military Power report—that influence debate over strategy and spending priorities. One possible result is that U.S. weapons timelines will increasingly trail rather than lead PLA developments.

Photo: Northrop Grumman

[buglerbilly]

China moves towards networked force

April 04, 2011



The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) of China is moving towards becoming an ‘informationised force’, according to its ‘China's National Defence in 2010’ white paper released on 31 March.

The paper said that significant progress had been made in building information systems for ISR, command and control, and ‘battlefield environment awareness’.

‘A preliminary level has been achieved in interoperability among command and control systems, combat forces, and support systems, making order transmission, intelligence distribution, command and guidance more efficient and rapid,’ the white paper said.

China plans to raise its defence budget by 12.7% to 601 billion Yuan (US$91.5 billion) in 2011. Although this is up from the 7.5% increase that was reported in 2010, the growth rate of defence expenditure has decreased.

‘In the past two years, the increase in the defence expenditure has been used to improve support for troops and accomplish diversified military tasks, ranging from earthquake rescue and effort operations in the Gulf of Aden and waters off Somalia,’ Beijing’s official press service said in a statement.

‘In view of the upward trend of purchasing prices and maintenance costs, China has moderately increased funding for high-tech weaponry and equipment.’

The government said that the total length of the national defence optical fibre communication network had been increased by a ‘large margin’, forming a new generation transmission network with optical fibre communication as the mainstay, and satellite and short-wave communications as secondary.

‘Information systems have been widely applied in logistics and equipment support,’ the statement said.

The US Department of Defense (DoD) issued its own report on the Chinese military’s capability in 2010, which said the PLA was pursuing the dual ideas of mechanisation and ‘informatisation’ (the application of information technology to military operations).

‘As a consequence, and in recognition of the high costs of force-wide refitting with state-of-the-art weapons systems, the PLA is selectively acquiring new generation technologies in some areas, while deferring new acquisitions in others in favour of upgrading older, but capable, systems for networked operations,’ the DoD said.

Beth Stevenson, London

[buglerbilly]

Expansion of China's Ballistic Missile Infrastructure Opposite Taiwan

Posted on Monday, April 18, 2011 by Mark Stokes

By Mark Stokes, Executive Director of the Project 2049 Institute



The Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Second Artillery Force appears to be in the midst of a significant expansion of its ballistic missile infrastructure opposite Taiwan. Public statements made by senior authorities in the U.S. and Taiwan indicate that the PLA has formed its first unit equipped with an anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) system. Looking beyond a first generation ASBM, the Second Artillery also is investing in a new generation of conventional medium range ballistic missile (MRBM) systems. The Second Artillery’s expansion appears to include incorporation of two ballistic missile brigades previously under the PLA Army.

The Qingyuan ASBM Brigade?

The first noteworthy example of the Second Artillery’s expansion is the apparent deployment of a follow-on variant of the DF-21 MRBM that is capable of engaging moving targets at sea out to a range of 1650 kilometers. In a December 2010 interview with Japan’s Asahi Shimbun, Pacific Command (PACOM) Commander ADM Robert Willard asserted that the Dongfeng-21D (DF-21D) has reached an “initial operational capability” (IOC). Quoting an unnamed PLA official, China’s English language Global Times claimed that the country’s first generation ASBM system is “deployed with the army.” In March 2011 testimony before the Legislative Yuan, Taiwan National Security Bureau (NSB) Director Tsai Der-sheng also asserted that the DF-21D ASBM is “deployed.”

A Project 2049 Institute Asia Eye post published in August 2010 outlined two possible candidates for receiving the ASBM, both newly established units in Guangdong Province. A recent Defense News report indicates that the initial ASBM brigade is located in the area of Guangdong's Qingyuan City. A number of sources suggest that the report has merit. The Qingyuan brigade, known by its cover designator of the 96219 Unit, is administratively subordinate to the 53 Base, which operates in Southern China. Headquartered in Kunming (Yunnan Province) and commanded by Major General Zhou Yaning, the 53 Base oversees two DF-21 MRBM brigades, a DH-10 land attack cruise missile (LACM) brigade, and a brigade-level training complex. Before his 53 Base command assignment, Major General Zhou served as 52 Base Chief of Staff. A new brigade equipped with a maritime variant of the DF-21 would bring the total number of MRBM brigades under 53 Base to three, and a total of 10 DF-21 brigades in the Second Artillery. The operational training facility under 53 Base is located in Guizhou Province, with a detachment on Hainan Island. Missile brigades are supported by training, transportation, nuclear warhead, repair, and communications regiments that report directly to the 53 Base command staff.



The Qingyuan brigade was formed as a regimental-level test and training unit as early as 2006. The unit was originally collocated with a DF-21 brigade in the Chuxiong area, west of Kunming (NOTE: The DF-21 brigade command staff has likely relocated to newer facilities in Yuxi City). The test and training unit appears to have converted to an operational brigade as early as 2009. At the same time, the unit began the move to its permanent home in Guangdong Province. Elements of the brigade have been noted in Yingde City and Qingxin County, both within Qingyuan City’s jurisdiction. A Second Artillery engineering regiment responsible for construction of pre-surveyed launch sites has been present in Yingde as recently as late 2010. Reliable sources indicate that between 10 and 12 missile rounds are available to the brigade’s subordinate battalions for training and familiarization. In 2009, Second Artillery headquarters team certified a training simulation system developed by the test and training unit.

The Qingyuan brigade is commanded by Senior Colonel Zhang Weimin, and its political commissar is Colonel Chen Zhihao. Key engineers responsible for technical aspects of the new missile variant’s introduction into the operational inventory include Zeng Weidong and Hu Xianfeng, who in 2007 was credited with discovering design shortcomings in a new missile system. The brigade’s Equipment Department, directed by Lu Kangwen, also likely played a key role in integrating the new missile variant. The operational test and evaluation team included battalion commander Li Shaogang, a graduate of Northwest Polytechnical University and the Second Artillery’s only battalion commander with a PhD. Dr. Li carried out extensive liaison work with relevant R&D institutes and the manufacturer. The ASBM brigade appears to have conducted one of its first major field exercises at an unspecified joint training center in early Spring 2011.

The specific organization of the brigade is unclear at the present time. However, if structured like other MRBM units, a Second Artillery ASBM brigade could have six launch battalions, a technical battalion, a site management battalion, a communications battalion, a technical service battalion, and an electronic countermeasures (ECM) battalion. The technical battalion would prepare the missile for launch, including inspection and testing of assemblies and components, mating, targeting, loading, launch control, and other tasks. Missile preparation work may be carried out in a fixed central depot, possibly an underground facility maintained by the site management battalion. The site management battalion could oversee as many as six subordinate companies. Responsibilities could include underground facility management, including power and electricity, water, air conditioning, and ventilation. A service battalion likely would provide support functions such as security, camouflage, concealment, and deception, as well as weather reporting. The ECM battalion or group would help defend brigade assets, especially the brigade's central depot and launch positions, against air strikes.

While speculative, a brigade equipped with the DF-21D could also include a similar variant in its inventory, such as the DF-21C. Inclusion of both maritime and land strike variants could present a brigade commander with a wider range of targeting options. At least two brigades are believed to be equipped with the 1650 kilometer-range, terminally guided DF-21C -- the 822 brigade (96117 Unit) at Laiwu (Shandong Province; 51 Base) and the 823 Brigade (96365 Unit; 56 Base) at Korla (Xinjiang Province). In addition to the DF-21C, the 823 Brigade's inventory is said to also include the 1650 kilometer-range DF-21B variant. Few details about the DF-21B are available at the current time. As a side note, the 808 Brigade at Yuxi (Yunnan; 53 Base) appears to be the only unit equipped with the original 1800 kilometer range DF-21 variant, while the 806 Brigade in Hancheng (Shaanxi; 51 Base), 816 Brigade at Tonghua (Jilin; 51 Base), 807 Brigade at Chizhou (Anhui; 52 Base), 811 Brigade at Qimen (Anhui, 52 Base), 802 Brigade at Jianshui (Yunnan; 53 Base), and 809 Brigade at Datong (Qinghai; 56 Base) are likely equipped with the 3000 kilometer range DF-21A variant.

Other Systems

The Second Artillery is looking beyond the DF-21D. In his presentation before the legislature, Taiwan’s NSB Director referenced the introduction of a new ballistic missile system into the active inventory – the DF-16. The DF-16 is said to have a range of over 1000 kilometers. Specific technical characteristics of this missile system are unavailable at the current time. However, China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation (CASIC) and China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation (CASC) do indeed appear to be developing new designs for the Second Artillery. One is a two stage solid-fuelled “tactical” missile system, which is said to incorporate a high strength carbon fiber motor casing. A new two-staged solid rocket motor, developed by CASC's Fourth Academy, was successfully flight tested on September 25, 2010. CASIC's 066 Base in Hubei Province has been investing in optical and imaging infrared terminal guidance technology development. A Wikileaks cable refers to a medium range ballistic missile under development (NATO designation CSS-X-11), which served as a target for a January 11, 2010 missile defense test. The intercept was made at an altitude of 250 kilometers, indicating a range of at least 1000 kilometers. As a side note, a Xinhua news release, quoting an unnamed PLA official, highlighted the development of a new generation 4000-kilometer range missile system that could be completed by 2015.

Update on the Shaoguan Missile Brigade

Another recent development is the Second Artillery's establishment of a new launch brigade (96166 Unit) in the area of Shaoguan, just north of Qingyuan. The unit is subordinate to the 52 Base, the army-level command that operates in Southeastern China. The launch unit was initially collocated with an existing DF-21 brigade in Anhui Province's Chizhou City. A Second Artillery engineering regiment responsible for tunneling was operating in the Shaoguan area in early 2009. The 96166 Unit moved to new permanent facilities in Shaoguan in July 2010. The unit’s leaders appear to have extensive experience with the 600 kilometer-range DF-11A short range ballistic missile (SRBM) system. Two brigades under 52 Base are believed to be equipped with the DF-11A -- the 817 Brigade in Yong'an (Fujian Province) and the 818 Brigade in Meizhou (Guangdong Province). Former 96166 Unit Commander, Senior Colonel Tang Qixing, and Deputy Commander Tang Guozhong previously served with the 817 Brigade. Former Meizhou brigade Chief of Staff, Colonel Liu Chuanguo, was assigned as the Shaoguan brigade commander in July 2010. While possibly being equipped with follow-on variant of the DF-11, the Shaoguan brigade could be a candidate for a new MRBM system, such as the DF-16. Two subordinate launch battalions have been identified to date.

Transfer of Army Tactical Missiles to Second Artillery?

As a final note, there are indications that two tactical missile brigades under the PLA Army have transferred to the Second Artillery. The Nanjing Military Region’s First Missile Brigade, based in Fujian Province's Xianyou County, may now be assigned to the Second Artillery's 52 Base (cover designation of the 96180 Unit). The Guangzhou Military Region’s Second Missile Brigade, based in Puning City’s Hongyang Village, may now have a designation of the 96212 Unit, and subordinated to 53 Base. A February 11, 2011 Second Artillery publication reported that the Puning brigade conducted the Second Artillery’s first live fire training exercise in 2011. The units’ older 300 kilometer-range DF-11 SRBM systems may be replaced with more modern extended range variants. The Second Artillery also would incorporate the brigades’ inventory of unmanned aerial vehicles, which would be particularly useful in a Taiwan scenario.

Comments

The expansion of the Second Artillery's infrastructure in Southern and Southeastern China has been driven largely by the PLA's desire to coerce Taiwan into a political settlement on unfavorable terms. The expansion also reflects PLA interest in undercutting the capacity of the United States to assist Taiwan in a conflict against China, and enforce other territorial claims around its periphery. Trends suggest that existing SRBMs targeting Taiwan may gradually be replaced with MRBM systems with ranges greater than 1000 kilometers. Higher re-entry speeds associated with extended range ballistic missile systems, such as the DF-16, could reduce the effectiveness of PATRIOT PAC-3 missile defense systems expected to come on line over the next few years. Operations from launch areas further inland also enhance survivability. A relative erosion of Taiwan’s military capabilities could create incentives for Beijing’s political and military leadership to assume greater risk in cross-Strait relations.

[buglerbilly]

Gillard's defensive talk adds to China tensions

John Garnaut Tokyo

April 22, 2011 .


Vision... Julia Gillard addresses a lunch in Tokyo. Photo: AFP

THE Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, has moved to strengthen defence ties with Japan and will seek to elevate links with South Korea, adding to China's unease about new US-anchored security networks emerging on its borders.

Ms Gillard and Japan's Prime Minister, Naoto Kan, emerged from talks last night to instruct their governments to ''take forward … a vision for bilateral security and defence co-operation'', pledging to complete an intelligence-sharing agreement before the next foreign and defence ministerial consultations.

Ms Gillard indicated the pair would discuss security implications of China's rise over dinner.


Diplomacy at work . . . Julia Gillard speaks with Emperor Akihito, third from left, while Tim Mathieson talks to Empress Michiko at the imperial couple's home. Photo: AFP

''Australia and Japan have a shared perspective in our region,'' she said. ''We certainly are constructively engaged with China and we share the view that we want to see China become a full participant in the rules-based global order.''

Mr Kan was glowing about Australia's ''heartwarming'' support after the tsunami, in the context of the simmering nuclear crisis.

''Prime Minister Gillard's visit to Japan shows Japan is safe … her visit is more powerful than 1000 words,'' he said.

Ms Gillard will also seek to entrench regular defence talks with South Korea, probably based on the Japanese model, when she meets the Prime Minister, Lee Myung-bak, in Seoul on Monday, according to Tokyo sources.

''What Australia is trying to do is bring the security relationship with South Korea up to the standard with Japan,'' said Rory Medcalf of the Lowy Institute.

After that meeting Ms Gillard will fly to China, whose booming economy has insulated Australia from the global financial crisis and now accounts for more than a quarter of Australian exports.

''Yes, of course China is nervous,'' said Zhu Feng, professor of international relations at Peking University. ''We are afraid such bilateral arrangements will expand into a multilateral alliance system.''

China's display of a more aggressive foreign policy and military posture, especially last year, has prompted neighbours to respond with new US-anchored security networks and to strengthen existing ones.

Tomohiko Satake, a researcher at the National Institute for Defence Studies, wrote recently it was possible to interpret rapidly strengthening Japan-Australia security co-operation as a kind of ''hedging'', a strategy in preparation for the rise of China.

He noted Chinese analysts were concerned the triangular relationship, with the US at its core, could develop into an ''Asian version of NATO''.

Ken Jimbo, an associate professor at Keio University in Tokyo, said Ms Gillard's show of support to tsunami-ravaged Japan could help push forward plans for a four-way security dialogue involving the US, Japan, Australia and South Korea.

''Australia should be at the core of Japan's expanding sphere of defence co-operation,'' said Professor Jimbo, a security expert. ''This could be a very promising framework and, inside that, intelligence sharing will be the thing that moves it forward.''

This week China's Rear Admiral Yang Yi told the Herald that Australia's growing US-anchored defence links were not in Australia's national interest. But Professor Zhu at Peking University said such links would have ''some positive effect on China'' because it would make China's foreign policy actors less likely to be seduced into ''risk-taking policies'' in the region.

Last week the chief of US forces in the Pacific, Admiral Robert Willard, told a US Senate committee that China's navy had been less aggressive in its operations this year than last.

Ms Gillard told the Herald this week strong security links with the US did not have to come at the expense of relations with China.

The focus of Ms Gillard's visit to Japan is to show Australian solidarity with its people after the devastating tsunami and during the continuing nuclear plant crisis at Fukushima.

Ms Gillard and her partner Tim Mathieson were granted a rare reception yesterday in the residence of Emperor Akihito and Empress Michiko, rather than at their palace.

''We met in the private residence because their majesties have taken the view … that it's appropriate for them not to also have the palace in operation, but instead to receive people in their private residence. So that is a power-cutting exercise,'' Ms Gillard said.

''They've determined to do in solidarity with the Japanese people who are experiencing periodic power disruptions,'' Ms Gillard said.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/gillards-defensive-talk-adds-to-china-tensions-20110421-1dqmu.html#ixzz1KAWxGEj0

[buglerbilly]

Chinese Buildup Upsets Strategic Balance

Apr 29, 2011

By Michael Fabey
Washington



Defense analysts and U.S. Navy brass agree—China’s recent successes in developing an anti-ship ballistic missile and a more robust navy have made the powerhouse Asian nation a much greater military force to reckon with.

China’s muscle-flexing, they say, will most certainly upset the balance of power in the region and force the U.S. to rethink its long-term military and geopolitical strategies for Asia and the Pacific Rim.

Opinions diverge, though, over the real implications of China’s growing super-charged military might.

To be sure, the U.S. is unlikely to be so quick to send another aircraft carrier battle group to the Taiwan Strait as it did in 1996 when the USS Nimitz plowed into those waters.

But no one’s certain about China’s true capability—or will—to take out a U.S. carrier. There’s even less certainty about just what China plans to do with its pumped-up military forces. While some feel the Asian leader will expand its reach in a fashion similar to the old Soviet Bloc, others say China will use its growing force to secure the home front, shipping lanes and what it claims to be its national assets.

Certainly, China is determined to protect its homeland and avoid another political collision. The key to that was the development an anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM)—the so-called carrier killer, the DF-21D.

Months ago, the missile achieved the equivalent of what for a U.S. weapon would be called initial operational capability (IOC). The Pentagon has played down that milestone a bit, pointing out that the missile is yet truly untested in any battle scenarios, real or simulated; and analysts wonder about the true capability or lethality of the DF-21D.

“Assessing this carrier-killer missile, as with the J-20 fighter, is impossible without knowing more about China’s true and network capabilities,” says Richard Aboulafia, analyst and vice president of the Teal Group consultancy. “A platform, or a weapon of any kind, is only as good as the targeting information it receives.”

Christian Le Miere, International Institute for Strategic Studies research fellow for naval forces and maritime security, says: “There are questions about its terminal guidance system. The mobility of the carriers is a problem, but you can fire toward a basket of coordinates and guide the terminal stage. This is why the accuracy of the guidance system is so crucial.”

The Pentagon recently noted in its annual report on China’s military: “The navy is improving its over-the-horizon targeting capability with Sky Wave and Surface Wave OTH radars. OTH radars could be used in conjunction with imagery satellites to assist in locating targets at great distances from [Chinese] shores to support long-range precision strikes, including by anti-ship ballistic missiles.”

With small numbers of carrier groups or ships and a comparable number of Chinese ASBMs to counter, U.S. forces should be fine, says defense analyst John Gresham, an author of several books on military tactics and equipment. But carriers and other ships face greater risks as the Chinese grow the inventory and improve their targeting capability.

The real question, though, is whether China would take a gamble and take out a carrier. As the Congressional Research Service (CRS) notes in a recent report, the Asian giant has developed too many entanglements—especially financial ties—with the U.S. to commit such an act of war.

“They’re more likely to use those missiles to threaten other ships, ones that are a threat to their shipping lanes” Gresham says. “They’d use a missile to make a point—to send a signal—to, say, a tanker fleet using a transit lane they claim as their own, or some ship that threatens one of their ships.”

The CRS reported: “Some observers say that China may be building, or may want to eventually build, a series of naval and other military bases in the Indian Ocean—a so-called string of pearls—so as to support Chinese naval operations along the sea line of communication linking China to Persian Gulf oil sources.”

And it’s this “string of pearls”—along with the Chinese homeland, Taiwan and rather large, claimed territorial waters—that China has built its navy and missile batteries to protect. The big concern on the minds of many, though, is whether the U.S. and its allies have to worry about China turning those defensive capabilities into an offensive expansion force the way the Soviet Union did during the Cold War.

China, La Miere says, does not have quite the ideological opposition to the U.S. as it did to the former Soviet Union. “So the relationship is very different; but in terms of being a potential strategic competitor to the U.S., then, yes, Washington may well consider China in the future as its greatest challenge since the Cold War.”

As the CRS reported, “Chinese maritime military forces could influence the political evolution of the Pacific, which in turn could affect the ability of the United States to pursue goals relating to various policy issues, both in the Pacific and elsewhere.”

[I]Photo: Chinese Internet

[buglerbilly]

Taiwan to delay buying arms from US: lawmaker

2011-05-10 16:35

TAIPEI, May 10, 2011 (AFP) - Taiwan plans to delay buying weapons from the United States to save money so that it can phase out its decades-old conscription system, a senior lawmaker and media said Tuesday.

Taiwan's defence ministry intends to push back the due date for buying Patriot missiles from 2014 to 2017 and postpone buying Black Hawk helicopters from 2016 to 2019 or 2020, according to a statement from lawmaker Lin Yu-fang.

Lin, a defence expert, said the delay was due to the huge price tags of the weapons as well as Washington's later than expected approval of the arms sales.

Local media said the military is tightening its spending to raise money to hire professional soldiers so that it can scrap conscription in the next few years.

The United States last year unveiled a $6.4 billion arms package for Taiwan, including the Patriot missiles and Black Hawk helicopters, triggering an angry protest from Beijing.

Washington has recognised Beijing officially over Taipei since 1979, but remains the island's main arms supplier.

China considers Taiwan part of its territory awaiting reunification, by force if necessary, although the two sides have been governed separately since the end of a civil war in 1949.

It has warned Washington repeatedly against arms sales to the island.

A defence spokesman said he could not immediately confirm the reports.

[buglerbilly]

MND Denies Media Report of ‘Watered Down’ Arms Deal

(Source Taipei Times; published May 23, 2011)

The Ministry of National Defense yesterday denied it would seek a “watered down” arms deal to expedite the process and said it was still pursuing its bid to buy eight submarines and dozens of F-16 fighters from the US despite improving relations with Beijing.

The Chinese-language China Times reported yesterday that Taiwan had decided to accept a US proposal of just four conventional submarines to help expedite the arms deal, which has been in limbo since 2001.

“The report is not true. The country’s position to seek [eight] diesel-powered submarines and F-16C/Ds has never changed,” the ministry said in a statement. “The deal is still in the US government’s screening process. The ministry will keep pushing for the deal so as to meet Taiwan’s self-defense demands.”

In April 2001, then-US president George W. Bush approved the sale of eight conventional submarines as a part of Washington’s most comprehensive arms package to Taiwan since 1992.

However, since then, there has been little progress as the US has not built conventional submarines for more than 40 years, and Germany and Spain reportedly declined to offer their designs for fear of offending China.

Taiwan also applied to the US government to buy 66 F-16C/Ds early in 2007, but observers say Washington has held up the deal for fear of angering Beijing.

The ministry’s statement came after a week-long visit to the US by People’s Liberation Army Chief of General Staff Chen Bingde. Chen said the main source of friction was over Taiwan and renewed his objection to any US arms sales to Taiwan.

The US in January last year approved a US$6.4 billion arms package to Taiwan, prompting Beijing to halt military exchanges and security talks with Washington.

-ends-

[buglerbilly]

JUNE 2, 2011, 10:52 A.M. ET.

Gates: U.S. Won't Try to Block China's Growing Influence.

By JULIAN E. BARNES

ABOARD A U.S. MILITARY AIRCRAFT—The United States will not try to block the growing influence of China, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Thursday, as he counseled patience in building relations with Beijing.

"We are not trying to hold China down," Mr. Gates said. "China has been