Seoul, Korea
CNN
–
China is not ready for war, according to controversial reports from US think tanks. This argues that the main motivation for the broader push for military modernization of the ruling Communist Party is to take power rather than fighting overseas enemies.
Beijing is pursuing a military accumulation of head touring under Chinese leader Xi Jinping, during which the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) was not even one of Asia’s most powerful people in the past. In some categories, the US military has begun to outperform the US military. Analyst estimates.
Simulations by US defense experts repeatedly show the United States, widely regarded as the world’s most powerful military, with the PLA and the battles close to China’s coast, particularly in Beijing’s allegedly claimed on the Democratic Islands of Taiwan. I’m struggling to match.
However, a report released last month by Washington-based Rand Corp., despite an impressive accumulation, ruled both political considerations, and importantly, both the Communist military and Chinese society. He said the desire to do so could hinder PLA in combat, especially for peers. Enemies such as the United States.
“The PLA remains fundamentally focused on maintaining control of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) rather than preparing for war,” said the long-standing Rand titled “The Chinese Army’s Suspicious Battle Preparation.” written by Chinese expert Timothy Heath.
“The benefits of China’s military modernization are designed first and foremost to enhance the appeal and reliability of CCP rules,” added Heath.
One example of Heath cited for political considerations that are contrary to military purposes is to spend up to 40% of training time on a political topic.
“The tradeoffs that allow you to spend time mastering essential skills for combat operations raise further questions about how ready PLA is for modern warfare,” Heath said. said.
Heath said the PLA units are led not only by commanders but also by political commissioners who focus on party loyalty rather than combat effectiveness.
“A split command system reduces the ability of commanders to respond flexibly and quickly to new situations,” he writes.
The traditional war between the US and China is “distant potential,” he added, and pentagonal planners should focus on a broader range of Chinese threats than missiles and bombs.
However, other experts scoffed at his conclusions and said Xi had clarified his top military goals.
The accumulation of PLA points out that China is ready for it.
“There are ways to maximize security for the party, which is easier, cheaper and less riskier than the bespoke combat capabilities XI would work together,” says Andrew, professor of strategy at the US Navy War College. Erickson said.
John Culver, a former US intelligence agent in East Asia, also raised doubts about the report.
“War is not Plan A, but if an event is needed it is Plan B, and the PLA and China’s material capabilities for such events will be strong, and the getter will be strong,” he writes in X. .
Weapons and will
China has achieved rapid and uncontroversial military advances since XI introduced drastic reforms a decade ago.
Beijing’s intense shipbuilding program in recent years has produced the world’s largest naval/maritime combat forces that can now run more than ever from China’s coast, including Djibouti’s first overseas military base.
Meanwhile, China has advanced stealth aircraft and hi-sonic weapons, transforming vast areas of the inland desert into fields of missile silos.
However, Heath questioned whether Beijing’s new weapons would be effective in the war.
“History repeatedly shows that the military cannot effectively use advanced armament in combat,” his report cites war in Ukraine as the latest conflict where better troops could not win. did.
Critics of Heath’s report said it was stupid to see the same weaknesses of the PLA.
“XI has been repeatedly involved in difficult military restructuring efforts that prioritize improving realistic combat capabilities and impose some of the most demanding requirements of Chinese military forces,” said Erikson of the US Navy War College. states.
He said China is building both numbers — the Pentagon estimates that Beijing is increasing its nuclear warhead weapons by about 100 a year — and “a huge ambitious hyper-degree weapons.” “We will push global frontiers with this megaproject.”
It is rare to doubt that the PLA has made great progress in both the number and quality of weapons that can be fielded. For example, consider that warship led by a Type 055 destroyer, classified by many analysts as the world’s most powerful surface combatant.
The PLA Navy released the Type 10 055 last year, with six more expected over the next few years. Each requires a crew of approximately 300 sailors.
Corinco, a researcher at S. Rajaratnam International School of Studies in Singapore, said that building high-tech warships could be easier than making them crew. This is because modern warships require young seafarers to take on complex tasks, and therefore require extensive training.
“The Army could probably assimilate someone from the countryside… he may not have much education… and train him to become an infantryman. But the warship’s combat information center If you want to train people who can control control, launch missiles and maintain missiles, then you need a little more.
Meanwhile, PLA suffers from another HR problem: corruption. The December Pentagon report said widespread anti-corruption campaigns within the Chinese military and government’s senior levels are hampering Xi’s accumulation of defense.
“I think they identified it as a major risk to political credibility and ultimately to PLA’s operational capabilities,” the US Secretary of Defense said in December.
Concentration zooms in quickly into Taiwan when analysts talk about China’s military preparations. According to estimates from the US intelligence report, Xi ordered the PLA to be ready to invade the island by 2027 if necessary.
But Heath argues that while Chinese leaders have set that goal, he and other top party officials have not cooperated and pushed to prepare the Chinese people for battle. .
“China’s leaders have not praised the war, defended it, or made speeches that characterize it as inevitable or desirable,” Heath wrote.
Others warn against judging Beijing’s intentions based on Western thinking. They say it is unclear how Xi thinks of victory in Taiwan.
They say the amount of pain that PLA and Chinese society as a whole can maintain to take the island is known only in Beijing.
“We need to consider the use of force by Beijing at a level that could potentially be tailored to political needs,” Koh said.
That power could be a blockade to strangle the island without firing. It’s enough airstrikes to show Taipei and its supporters that China has an edge in the crossroads conflict. It could be a full-scale invasion and occupation.
Or it could be a continuation of Beijing’s relentless political pressure with the presence of almost constant Pla around Taiwan, including dozens of fighter jets and ships. This is a policy that has served the Communist Party quite well up until now, some analysts say.
So why use all your money as a new weapon?
“The interests of China’s military modernization are not designed to conquer Taiwan through military attacks. Instead, (they) carry out a more effective and long-standing mission by the PLA to support the CCP rules. It’s designed to do it,” writes Heath.
Essentially, the new warships and stealth fighter jets will impress the public, which will facilitate the society that controls society, he said.
Drew Thompson, a senior researcher at Lee Quan E Public Policy at the National University of Singapore, agreed. “Propaganda is more important than military outcomes that politics is a major tool,” he said.
However, Koh said that the benefits of PLA under Xi cannot be put aside simply by sending domestic messages.
“In spite of these known issues within China and the PLA, I don’t think military planners in the region will just dismiss the PLA as a paper tiger,” he said.
And Thompson said Pra is in fact a capable enemy to Taiwan and the United States.
“China was able to start a war and fight. Can they win? How do you define victory?” Thompson asked.
“Is it a zero sum or a series of trade-offs?”
