China’s Military Spending to Double by 2015

Kurt said:

To clarify a very important aspect of modern Western democratic culture: It's NOT the job of the military to deal with such a situation, it's the job of paramilitary police forces and police forces. Obdience to this regulation is very strict in all Western societies and that China decided to handle the Tiananmen situation differently is the official reason for the Western arms embargo against China, forcing them to be best buddies with Russia.
There's one situation that could require the use of military forces in the interior if the enemy is considered a combatant according to the Geneva convention and the issue is a civil war.
.

Click to expand...

You're wrong, Kurt, I'm sorry to say and this is best shown at the example of the history of Northern Ireland over the last half century.

The Irish State was established after many troubles including a civil war in 1922 and didn't include six counties that were in majority Protestant in the North and which returned to the UK. The armed wing of the losing party in the civil war, the banned Irish Republican Army ( IRA ) continued with sporadic attacks on British border posts but this ended about fifty years ago. In the late sixties a non-violent civil rights movement was developed among the Catholic minority. This let to violence against the Catholics from the side of extremist Protestants and that to split in the IRA and the founding of the Provisional IRA in 1969 meant to protect its own community. During a large civil rights march in Londonderry on 30 January 1972 ( Bloody Sunday ) 14 unarmed men and boys were killed by fire from The Parachute Regiment. Only in 2010 did the UK government acknowledge that that had been unjustified.
In the later '70's I read in the International Herald Tribune an article that said that the shootings on Bloody Sunday were intended by "the British Army" for political reasons. There followed a period of a quarter of a century of violence in which the British Army and the police went out to murder suspects ( the so called shoot to kill policy ) and also used torture. These brutal methods proved to be excellent to provide recruits to their enemy, but that was only slowly recognized. The end came when all the main civilian and military of the Northern Ireland administration were wiped out by the crash of a Chinook helicopter with which they returned from a conference in Edinburgh due to buggy software in the FADEC of the aircraft ( Boeing refused to provide the source code of the FADEC so the UK government couldn't sue and still they buy more Chinooks ). Then the UK government choose to go for a peaceful solution. ( I'm aware that this is an extremely short and not well balanced account ).

This proves, Kurt, that you should be right but are not.

In other countries? In the US the National Guard is called out to "restore public order" long before the situation resembles civil war.
Marines were use to end the high jacking of a train in the Netherlands in 1977. In 1980 the Dutch government used Leopard tanks against the barricades of squatters in Amsterdam.

Of course each government tries to have enough police power to maintain its authority without using the army. You saw in the early nineties how East European countries massively increased the size and equipment of their police forces. But the first task of any army has always been to protect the government against its population however democratic it calls itself.

OT, but I can't resist. It is my conviction that hadn't the British government made space for the return of the six counties to their control in 1922 Ireland wouldn't have been neutral in WWII and the protection of the North Atlantic convoys had been more effective because of the use of Southern Irish air bases.

cn_habs said:

How come new Japanese "destroyers" never get much reaction but any Chinese military increase can make them cry "China threat" like there's no tomorrow.

Click to expand...

For one thing the "destroyers" I believe you are referring to are just helicopter carriers. Very useful for defensive, anti-submarine (or humanitarian) operations. Not much use for taking the fight to anyone.

Second, Japan has transformed itself from Asian military aggressor to a very peaceful nation.

The reality is that it's none of your freaking business to go around saying what China does need or doesn't need when 90% of the Western countries only pour more debt on the middle class taxpayers to fund their military-industrial complex.

Click to expand...

This is a military forum. If you don't like non-Chinese citizens outside of China discussing the Chinese military and voicing their opinions, you can petition for the forum to be closed.

Let's see who will be laughing in the end if you think most of your pension will be there when you retire (unless you work for the government)

Click to expand...

Sure. Give me your real name and postal address. I'll put you in my contacts folder.

CottageLV said:

If Japan had attacked you TWICE as recent as the last century, then why should you not feel threatened. Japan had been more and more hawkish in the last decade and this transformation is accelerating. They have been trying to change their constitution so they can send military abroad

Click to expand...

Japan has only become more "hawkish" in as far that previously it was so doveish that a pidgeon would look menacing in comparison. Japan is gradually moving towards being a normal country in terms of its military. Currently there are still restrictions on what Japan can do and when, and there is no timetable for sweeping all of that away.

But don't forget North Korea.

Click to expand...

As I said earlier, if North Korea wants to start a war China has no incentive to back it. North Korea would lose, and even if somehow China was able to force a stalemate like in the 1950s the diplomatic and economic fallout would destroy China's economy and reputation.

Another potential opponent/competitor is the polar bear to the north.

Click to expand...

Yes, that very threatening Russia that has been China's greatest ally in modernising its armed forces. I can see this is all part of a plot to lull China into a false sense of security.

Tibet is another topic that we cannot leave out.

Click to expand...

Yes, those Buddhist priests are very powerful with their spiritual powers. I recall seeing a documentary about their prowess - I think it was called "Bulletproof Monk". I can see that heavy tanks and cruise missiles are required to defeat them if they ever chose to rise up.

Then the list goes on. The disputes in the South China sea, the land dispute with Vietnam, the unification of Taiwan

Click to expand...

I thought China had pledged to resolve all of those issues peacefully. You're not going to tell me that, for example, if Taiwanese don't agree to unification with China, China will then bomb the crap out of them until they surrender and occupy them by military force? Isn't that how countries like Imperial Japan, Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia tried to resolve their differences with their neighbours?

Is this not enough?

Click to expand...

No, it isn't. All you've done is detail paranoid fears that Chinese leaders may or may not hold, as well as disputes China has with its neighbours. May I suggest that rather than massively rearming itself and scaring its neighbours, Chinese leaders resolve its disputes peacefully. In the case of the paranoid concerns that someone might be nasty to it one day, as I said earlier China can easily keep tabs on its neighbours and watch to see if they start arming massively too. If that fails to satisfy them, I can recommend a good psychiatrist....

---------- Post added at 01:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:43 PM ----------

escobar said:

R&D costs are not included in the official budget; so it is difficult estimate it.

Click to expand...

That's another reason why various countries don't trust China - its military spending is not transparent.

A Chinese military scholar on Monday disputed a global research group's report on China's defense budget growth, saying the motivation of the report was to play up China's military threat.......

Click to expand...

Wow, a rebuttal from the People's Daily. Why am I not surprised that they've got someone to parrot the Chinese government's line on its military buildup.

delft said:

You're wrong, Kurt, I'm sorry to say and this is best shown at the example of the history of Northern Ireland over the last half century.

The Irish State was established after many troubles including a civil war in 1922 and didn't include six counties that were in majority Protestant in the North and which returned to the UK. The armed wing of the losing party in the civil war, the banned Irish Republican Army ( IRA ) continued with sporadic attacks on British border posts but this ended about fifty years ago. In the late sixties a non-violent civil rights movement was developed among the Catholic minority. This let to violence against the Catholics from the side of extremist Protestants and that to split in the IRA and the founding of the Provisional IRA in 1969 meant to protect its own community. During a large civil rights march in Londonderry on 30 January 1972 ( Bloody Sunday ) 14 unarmed men and boys were killed by fire from The Parachute Regiment. Only in 2010 did the UK government acknowledge that that had been unjustified.
In the later '70's I read in the International Herald Tribune an article that said that the shootings on Bloody Sunday were intended by "the British Army" for political reasons. There followed a period of a quarter of a century of violence in which the British Army and the police went out to murder suspects ( the so called shoot to kill policy ) and also used torture. These brutal methods proved to be excellent to provide recruits to their enemy, but that was only slowly recognized. The end came when all the main civilian and military of the Northern Ireland administration were wiped out by the crash of a Chinook helicopter with which they returned from a conference in Edinburgh due to buggy software in the FADEC of the aircraft ( Boeing refused to provide the source code of the FADEC so the UK government couldn't sue and still they buy more Chinooks ). Then the UK government choose to go for a peaceful solution. ( I'm aware that this is an extremely short and not well balanced account ).

This proves, Kurt, that you should be right but are not.

In other countries? In the US the National Guard is called out to "restore public order" long before the situation resembles civil war.
Marines were use to end the high jacking of a train in the Netherlands in 1977. In 1980 the Dutch government used Leopard tanks against the barricades of squatters in Amsterdam.

Of course each government tries to have enough police power to maintain its authority without using the army. You saw in the early nineties how East European countries massively increased the size and equipment of their police forces. But the first task of any army has always been to protect the government against its population however democratic it calls itself.

OT, but I can't resist. It is my conviction that hadn't the British government made space for the return of the six counties to their control in 1922 Ireland wouldn't have been neutral in WWII and the protection of the North Atlantic convoys had been more effective because of the use of Southern Irish air bases.

Click to expand...

We can go about nitpicking examples to prove each other wrong. UK is constitutionally a very ancient and traditional place that allows for uses of the military that is not possible elsewhere.
There are legal provisions in all these Western democratic countries (including the USA since the Civil War aftermath) that limit military aid in internal matters to acts that don't involve firing guns in anger at their own population or kill them by other means and even 9/11 wasn't able to change that in Europe. The same degree of aid is provided by all other government agencies.

If for example a German soldier was ordered to protect the German government against the German population he would be violating his oath of loyality. However part of the military training for protecting objectives is how to deal with civilian dissenters, you're not allowed to shoot them unless it's self defense and have to stand trial for that afterwards, but you have the right of every citizen to physically deny access to an uninvited guest.

I wouldn't argue that military can't be used against the population, but then something is wrong with the people and their government and even more so with their military.

That's another reason why various countries don't trust China - its military spending is not transparent.

Click to expand...

if china were totaly transparent about the military budget do you think those various countries will trust china??

Kurt said:

To clarify a very important aspect of modern Western democratic culture: It's NOT the job of the military to deal with such a situation, it's the job of paramilitary police forces and police forces. Obdience to this regulation is very strict in all Western societies and that China decided to handle the Tiananmen situation differently is the official reason for the Western arms embargo against China, forcing them to be best buddies with Russia.
There's one situation that could require the use of military forces in the interior if the enemy is considered a combatant according to the Geneva convention and the issue is a civil war.

Click to expand...

Do people who burn armoured personnel carriers counts as combatants to you?
Would like to know what was your knowledge about the Tiananmen square incident. Or rather what you think it was.
Was martial laws declared long beforehand and ample warnings given? Do the army just decide to go into the streets shooting people one day? Were the students setting up roadblocks deliberately to block all forms of traffic? Did they throw molotovs at soldiers and beat some of them to death? Were there outside influences? etc etc.

Are the army personnel allowed to defend themselves if they are under attack. During vietnam war protests there were 4 students shot by national guardsmen who cracked, and they were under less pressure at that. The students actually got shot on their own campus grounds.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The Western media have already played up China's defense budget growth even before the convening of the annual sessions of the National People's Congress and the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference.
Jane's Defence Weekly has reportedly claimed that China will spend $120 billion on defense this year and predicts it will soar to $238 billion in 2015, indicating a combined annual increase of 18.75 percent. The report, which says "China's defense spending to double" has drawn worldwide attention amid the changing global balance of power. However, the reports have not mentioned the sources of the data, which downgrades their credibility.

China put its 2011 defense budget at about 601 billion yuan ($95 billion). Were the latest reports right about military spending this year, then the defense budget for 2012 would have increased by more than 26 percent. However, according to China Statistical Yearbook, military spending growth has slowed down in recent years and the growth rate dropped to 7.5 percent in 2010, the smallest rise over the past two decades. The nation may register double-digit annual growth, but the increase is unlikely to exceed the reported combined annual growth of 18.5 percent in the years ahead.

The United States has ushered in a new round of strategic contractions and is rebalancing toward Asia. Some US scholars are so eager to carve out a niche for the US' return to Asia that they accuse China of understating its defense spending, stir up tensions with neighboring countries and drum up the "China threat". They intend to justify the US' return, lobby other countries in the region and draw China into an arms race.

The approach also seeks to find excuses for the Pentagon to maintain high defense spending and help US arms dealers enter the Asian market, since the Pentagon is facing budget cuts as wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and the global financial crisis have sapped national strength.

Despite its economic boom, Asia remains sluggish in building up a solid regional security mechanism, and an effective mediation system to resolve the complex territorial, border and maritime disputes. External forces have stepped in and stoked up an arms buying spree in Asia, and India's planned purchase of 126 French-made combat aircraft is a case in point. The escalation of the arms race will jeopardize unity, mutual trust and the interests of Asian countries.

China, as the region's largest economy, has seen its military development attract regional and international attention.

As the world's third largest country in terms of area, covering 9.6 million square kilometers, 22,000 kilometers of land borders and 18,000 kilometers of continental coastlines, China has plenty of reasons to develop its defense capabilities.

The improved livelihoods of soldiers, diversified military operations at home and abroad and regeneration of equipment are key factors for military spending growth.

Chinese people can share the fruit of economic development and its 2.3 million soldiers should be no exception. The defense budget should cover expenses such as pay increases and training and the army would benefit from a fast-developing social security system.

Besides with more international responsibilities, the army should conduct diversified military operations, including joint military drills aimed at anti-terrorism and other non-war military operations such as rescues during natural disasters and escort missions in the Gulf of Aden and off the coast of Somalia. All missions at home and abroad come at a high cost.

Weaponry regeneration also inflates military spending. The Chinese army is advancing military modernization, along with research and development of heavy weapons such as the fifth-generation fighter and aircraft carrier, which is time-consuming and expensive.

However, the Western media focus on weaponry developments, while ignoring two other factors. China has many soldiers that even a slight pay increase will cause bulging defense spending. The West should stop over-painting defense budget increases and making a fuss over "China's military expansion".

China has shown restraint in not developing tactical nuclear weapons and pursuing a doctrine of minimal nuclear deterrence. The country issued a white paper, China's National Defense in 2010, pledging that, "China pursues a national defense policy which is defensive in nature" and "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 nation will never follow the path of Soviet Unions and the US to involve itself in any kind of arms race.

Nevertheless, we should admit that published figures concerning the defense budget is not detailed enough. The country is pressing on with a campaign to make public san gong expenses, namely money spent on overseas trips, receptions and vehicle purchases and maintenance by government officials. It is an irreversible trend that the country will tighten supervision over military spending, too.

The international community should keep patient and realize that progress takes time and China should phase in bolder measures to ensure military transparency to crush rumors circulating about its defense spending.

Mr T said:

For one thing the "destroyers" I believe you are referring to are just helicopter carriers. Very useful for defensive, anti-submarine (or humanitarian) operations. Not much use for taking the fight to anyone.

Click to expand...

Quoting from Jeff's website:

As suggested, it is likely that the vessel will be able to carry a minimum of 18 helicopters, and probably be capable of a mixed air wing that could include VSTOL jets, like the Harrier II jets, or the new F-35B Joint Strike Fighter being developed by the United States for deployment on US flat-deck amphibious assault vessels if the Japanese deck has been built to withstand vertical take-off jet exhaust.

The Hyuga has no stated provisions for amphibious assault, no well deck, but could clearly be utilized to conduct over the horizon air assaults as the ships size makes it clear that it could carry far more than the 350 crew identified by the JMSDF. This 350 number is, in all likelihood, the naval crew of the vessel alone and other air wing or marine troop capabilities are simply not being published for political purposes.

Click to expand...

Do I need to say more? Stop trolling with the statement above.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China will announce this year's defense budget at the upcoming annual two sessions - the National People's Congress and the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference.

We hope that the Chinese government will maintain an annual double-digit percentage increase regardless of the pressure from the West.

China's defense budget grew by 12.7 percent in 2011 after falling to 7.5 percent in 2010. The criticism of Western media on China's defense budget was more or less alleviated then.

But when the increase came to a double-digit percentage last year, the West renewed its criticism. China should avoid big fluctuations of its defense budget increase so public can keep stable expectation of it.

This year China will slow its economic growth, but the effective part of the economy will not contract. Government revenue will continue to increase. It has sufficient resources to support the military budget increase.

Both China and the West have become used to criticizing China for its rapid increase in military spending. The scale of the harm to China's security from these criticisms is far lower than the defense industry profits brought about by the increase.

We should be able to see that as China gradually rises, the international vigilance against China has reached its apogee.

Without a formidable national defense, those irrational sentiments against China would worsen. Some might even turn into action.

As the world's foremost military power, the US has made China the focus of its strategic defense. Its vigilance is not that inscrutable.

But history proves that the US is prone to hasty military actions. When the US is confident of winning, it tends to use its military pressure in direct fashion.

As China has stepped into the frontline of international political confrontations, it must speed up its national defense power.

The Taiwan question has not been solved. Disputes around China's neighboring islands may escalate. The involvement of great powers will add intensity to the Asia-Pacific situation. Right now, China cannot rely on diplomacy for defense.

If external elements view China as a weak country, it will lead to chaos. The relationship between China and the world should improve by facing this reality. This is one of the bases for long-term stability in the Asia-Pacific.

China should remain composed in dealing with questions raised from its military spending. The outside world should try to understand the necessity of this increase, but if not, they will get used to it.

China embraces peace. It has nothing to do with how much it spends on its military.

We look forward to a moderate and yet sufficient military spending increase this year.

China’s Military Spending in 2012: 670 billion Yuan, $106 billion

national people's congress press conference:

defense budget for 2012: 670.274 billion RMB, increasing by 11.2% over 2011.

military spending accounted for 1.28% of GDP and 5.53% of budget in 2011.

plenty of room for further increasing.

Re: China’s Military Spending in 2012: 670 billion Yuan, $106 billion



China Says Defense Spending Will Increase 11.2% to $106.4 Billion in 2012
By Bloomberg News - Mar 4, 2012 5:09 PM GMT+1300

China plans to increase defense spending 11.2 percent this year to $106.4 billion, as the country’s economic growth gives the military more money to spend on warships, missiles and fighter planes.
China’s defense spending is reasonable and appropriate, Li Li Zhaoxing, spokesman for China’s National People’s Congress, said ahead of a speech tomorrow by Premier Wen Jiabao to open the annual 10-day session of the country’s legislature, the National People’s Congress. “Our defense spending is relatively low compared to other major countries,” Li said.
Defense spending has more than doubled since 2006, tracking a rise in nominal gross domestic product from 20.9 trillion yuan to 47.2 trillion yuan in that time. The growing defense budget has stoked concerns among China’s neighbors and the U.S., which has announced a strategic shift toward Asia including deploying forces to a base in Australia.
The country will spend 670 billion yuan in 2012, Li told reporters today in Beijing. That follows an announced 601 billion yuan budget for 2011.
China now spends more on defense than any country in the world aside from the U.S., whose military spending is almost six times as much. Chinese defense spending as a percentage of GDP was about 1.3 percent in 2011, falling from about 1.4 percent in 2006. The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency estimates military spending is actually much higher than the public figure, at 4.3 percent of GDP in 2006.

Frontier Tension
China faces tensions on its many frontiers. The country has competing claims with Vietnam, the Philippines and Japan over oil- and gas-rich waters. Its neighbor North Korea is under United Nations sanctions over its nuclear weapons program, and China has lingering territorial disputes with India stemming from a 1962 border war.
“China’s got a lot of things that require a state to have military hardware for,” Geoff Raby, who was Australia’s ambassador to China until last year, said in a telephone interview. “China lives in a neighborhood where it doesn’t have any natural allies or friends.”
Raby said the growth of China’s military spending has inevitably changed “strategic calculations” in the region and the world.
In the past year, China began sea trials of its first aircraft carrier, a refurbished Soviet-era vessel acquired from Ukraine more than a decade ago. The U.S. is concerned that China is about to deploy a missile that will pose a threat to its own aircraft carriers.

Economic Interests
Increasing economic interests around the world, including 812,000 workers abroad at the end of 2011, mean China’s military is increasingly expected to deploy across the globe. China set a frigate to Libya last year to help evacuate thousands of Chinese nationals during the revolt that saw the overthrow of Muammar Qaddafi.
Ships have been deployed to protect sea lanes from Somali pirates in the Middle East, and peacekeepers now patrol as part of a United Nations mission in Sudan.
Beijing is also continuing a military buildup across the Taiwan Strait. The U.S. is obligated by a 1979 law to provide defensive weapons to Taiwan, which China claims as a province. A Pentagon report published last August said that as of December, 2010, China’s People’s Liberation Army had deployed between 1,000 and 1,200 short-range ballistic missiles to units opposite Taiwan even as cross-Strait ties have improved.

Jane’s Forecast
IHS Jane’s, a defense research company, forecast last month that China’s defense spending will double again by 2015, reaching $238.2 billion. IHS Jane’s assumes 2011 spending of $119.8 billion and estimates annual growth from 2011-2015 of 18.75 percent. Vietnam, Indonesia and Taiwan are also boosting defense spending, IHS Jane’s said in a report.
IHS Jane’s estimates Taiwan, for example, will boost defense spending by 10 percent a year through 2015. Last year the U.S. announced it would sell Taiwan $5.3 billion in upgrades for its 145 Lockheed Martin Corp. F-16 fighters.
Last year the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama announced a pivot toward Asia, entailing a strategic focus on the Asia-Pacific area and away from other areas such as the Mideast.
“China’s expanding defense budget has intensified concern among various governments,” Sarah McDowall, Asia Pacific desk head for IHT Global Insight said in a statement accompanying the Jane’s budget estimate. “Perhaps most importantly, it has prompted Washington to undertake a diplomatic campaign to reassert its profile in the Pacific.”

U.S. Defense Budget
The U.S., with an economy less than three times the size of China’s, has a military budget about six times as big. The Pentagon is asking for $613.9 billion next year, which also includes $88.5 billion in supplemental spending for wars. Unlike China’s, the U.S. defense budget is shrinking. The Pentagon’s request is $31.8 billion less than the amount enacted by Congress for 2012.
China’s defense spending increased an average of 16.2 percent a year from 1999 to 2008, according to figures from a defense white paper published in 2009. While building up spending, China has also proclaimed that it takes a nonconfrontational approach in the region.
“We hope the U.S. side will adopt an objective attitude to China’s development and work toward peaceful coexistence,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said last month. “The Pacific Ocean has enough space for both the U.S. and China.”
To contact Bloomberg News staff for this story: Michael Forsythe in Beijing at [email protected]; Yidi Zhao in Beijing at [email protected]
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Peter Hirschberg at [email protected]