China's defence budget for 2013: RMB 740 billion, $118 billion, up 10.7% over 2012

Re: China's defence budget for 2013: RMB 740 billion, $118 billion, up 10.7% over 20

luhai said:

What's more need to structural change to its officer corps.

The first thing to go should be the entertainment corps, it's just not right for some to a) sings and dances his/her way into the rank of a general. b) making millions releasing commercial CD and appear on TV program while in commission. To entertain troops, PLA should just hire civilians to get the job done. They must be inside the government, at least transfer them to either Propaganda Department or State Media branches (like CCTV) rather than stay inside the military.

The second things needs to go is the political commissar system. The job performed by political commissars should really to be perform by MPs, NCOs and Warrant officers. But then, this is related to the bigger issue of party direct control of the military or state direct control of the military. Which would probably not be resolved in this administration or next. Let's just hope the political commissar wouldn't mess up and politicize the operational command too much.

Unless China start doing overseas deployments or involved in foreign conflicts, I would expect that defense spending to slow down to near inflation level in 10 years. Simply because there is only so many things you can spent on while in a de-mobilized state.

Click to expand...

there're some positive signs about cutting bureaucry. the news in circulation is the new gov't will announce a big cut of govern't in the coming days.

as for the PLA, they should reform the gigantic PLA army completely, the military region structure is obsolete, and should be abolished altogether, establish the PLA Army HQ, cut the army by half.

of cause they should get rid of those rediculous entertaining /sports corps.

Re: China's defence budget for 2013: RMB 740 billion, $118 billion, up 10.7% over 20

These increases seem to be the relatively standard when you compare them with the preceeding two decades. Perhaps now a little more, since China is pursuing more expensive military projects like 5th generation fighters and an aircraft carrier capability.

Re: China's defence budget for 2013: RMB 740 billion, $118 billion, up 10.7% over 20

US spends 5% of its GDP and 20% of its central government expenditure on defence.
China should also spend 5% of its GDP and 20% of its central government expenditure on defence.

US GDP: $15.6 trillion
China GDP: $8.2 trillion

US government expenditure: $3.5 trillion
China government expenditure: $2 trillion.

US defence spending: $700 billion
China defence spending: $118 billion.


If China spends the same % of GDP and same % of expenditure as the US does on defence, then China should be spending around $400 billion on defence.

Re: China's defence budget for 2013: RMB 740 billion, $118 billion, up 10.7% over 20

In a few days we'll get a detailed budget like this one from 2012. Then Defense is 10% of the overall central government budget, I don't think it has moved much since.



What one thing I find interesting that when the media is reporting Chinese defense spending growth, it is not adjusted for inflation, while it's reports on economy growth it is adjusted for inflation. Thus creating the illusion in the last decade Chinese defense spending is growing much faster than the economy, while in reality the opposite is the true.


If you look at Chinese GDP in nominal terms (same as defense spending) the economy grew closer to 17% per year over the last decade (and in dollar terms well over 20%), which is above the growth in military defense.

Re: China's defence budget for 2013: RMB 740 billion, $118 billion, up 10.7% over 20

10% for defense is still too high. For the size of economy of China around 5% could build a very credible defense force. The 10% should be spent on science, that's the real defense. I think one of the problem is the size of ground army needed to cover territory control. Once China master the stratigic airlift capability with Y-20, the size of army could be cut down to 1/5 of its present size, so, 500,000 professional soliders in active service. That togather with retiring all the obselete fighters and huge number of small fighting vessels would help the defense buget to shirink. Since weapon R&D is done within the internal research institute and universities, that's essentially science expense. All those togather would mean a much smaller Defense budget.

energy-conservation and environmental protection at 2.8% is low as well. The next world leader is going to be determined by the ability to ultlize clean and renewable energy. Climate change is comming, the end of fossil energy era is comming too, both at non-distant future. If China is going to feed its people into the 2nd half of this centry, or if CCP government wanted to survive at all, they better start invest heavily onto this areas.

Re: China's defence budget for 2013: RMB 740 billion, $118 billion, up 10.7% over 20

Disposeable income. Public spending is redistributing money to fulfill community purposes. Part of these purposes are more or less luxury. You can buy a certain level of security against invasions and destruction of the government system you have. Being able to do that to someone else is a lot more expensive. In other words, how much money would you spend to protect your house against burglary if heating and the content of your fridge are far from satistfactory? The US citizens have a higher PPP per capita income that allows them to dispose more of their income for their hobbies (policing the world, flying objects to Mars and so on).

Re: China's defence budget for 2013: RMB 740 billion, $118 billion, up 10.7% over 20

J-XX said:

US spends 5% of its GDP and 20% of its central government expenditure on defence.
China should also spend 5% of its GDP and 20% of its central government expenditure on defence.

US GDP: $15.6 trillion
China GDP: $8.2 trillion

US government expenditure: $3.5 trillion
China government expenditure: $2 trillion.

US defence spending: $700 billion
China defence spending: $118 billion.


If China spends the same % of GDP and same % of expenditure as the US does on defence, then China should be spending around $400 billion on defence.

Click to expand...

I'm not really sure the structure of US defense spending is the best thing to emulate. DoD spending is one of the worst bureaucratic tangles on Earth--it crosses the line from simply being corrupt to being completely wacked and dysfunctional (contractors have incentives to fuck up projects and make them last longer due to post facto, cost-plus pricing; military oversight on the other end is broken by the fact that generals can retire to directorships at defense firms and K street lobbying groups; Congress can and will meddle to shift military spending to less efficient locations in exchange for HoR/Senate votes; pensions and healthcare costs are inordinately high due to cozy relationships between bases and local HMOs, etc.)

Sure, China could afford to spend a bit more on defense, but China should stay far, far, faaar away from the Pentagon's R&D and defense contracting structure.

Re: China's defence budget for 2013: RMB 740 billion, $118 billion, up 10.7% over 20

t_co said:

I'm not really sure the structure of US defense spending is the best thing to emulate. DoD spending is one of the worst bureaucratic tangles on Earth--it crosses the line from simply being corrupt to being completely wacked and dysfunctional (contractors have incentives to fuck up projects and make them last longer due to post facto, cost-plus pricing; military oversight on the other end is broken by the fact that generals can retire to directorships at defense firms and K street lobbying groups; Congress can and will meddle to shift military spending to less efficient locations in exchange for HoR/Senate votes; pensions and healthcare costs are inordinately high due to cozy relationships between bases and local HMOs, etc.)

Sure, China could afford to spend a bit more on defense, but China should stay far, far, faaar away from the Pentagon's R&D and defense contracting structure.

Click to expand...

That is right. Xi already stopped the rampant Maotai drinking within the Chinese military. We don't want multi-million dollar toilet seats to pop up instead.

Re: China's defence budget for 2013: RMB 740 billion, $118 billion, up 10.7% over 20

luhai said:

What's more need to structural change to its officer corps.

The first thing to go should be the entertainment corps, it's just not right for some to a) sings and dances his/her way into the rank of a general. b) making millions releasing commercial CD and appear on TV program while in commission. To entertain troops, PLA should just hire civilians to get the job done. They must be inside the government, at least transfer them to either Propaganda Department or State Media branches (like CCTV) rather than stay inside the military.

The second things needs to go is the political commissar system. The job performed by political commissars should really to be perform by MPs, NCOs and Warrant officers. But then, this is related to the bigger issue of party direct control of the military or state direct control of the military. Which would probably not be resolved in this administration or next. Let's just hope the political commissar wouldn't mess up and politicize the operational command too much.

Click to expand...

I for one won't discount the improtance of propaganda and political commissars. They are good tranditions for PLA and should endure in the modern times. PLA was born in chinese civil war, Mao had built PLA as a "fighting team, working team and propaganda team." That' a far-sighted definition as we saw through chinese civil war, PLA had won against enemies more numerous, better equiped and better trained, by its ability to maintain a high morale in trying times, to self-sustain, and to project a positive image of itself. So, these "entertainment corps"(they are called cultural corp acutally) and political commissars are absolutely enssential because wars are, after all, political struggles. History had proven that political short-comming and low morale can completely nullify any military victory. As weapon techonology develop, people tend to disregard the political dimension of wars but they are ever present as we were reminded by wars as recent as Iraq and Afganistan. If "singing and dancing" can resolve conflict as good as million dollar UAV and missles can, who is to say someone good at it not deserve to be made a General?

As to the relation between CCP and PLA. Yes, they are so interwined that PLA only answers to CCP. So long as that relation remains, China would be under one-party system. However, that is a topic beyond the scope of this thread. For now, it is suffice to say, putting military under strict state control is not a bad thing at all, quite the opposite. Military should follow strictly the words of civilian leadership whoever that might be. Political commissars ensures that command structure is perserved at every levels. Thus, they have to be involved in the real operational decision-making. Like it or not, "operational command" is "politicized", military decision is never purely military. war, indeed, is too important to be left to generals.

Re: China's defence budget for 2013: RMB 740 billion, $118 billion, up 10.7% over 20

J-XX said:

US spends 5% of its GDP and 20% of its central government expenditure on defence.
China should also spend 5% of its GDP and 20% of its central government expenditure on defence.

US GDP: $15.6 trillion
China GDP: $8.2 trillion

US government expenditure: $3.5 trillion
China government expenditure: $2 trillion.

US defence spending: $700 billion
China defence spending: $118 billion.


If China spends the same % of GDP and same % of expenditure as the US does on defence, then China should be spending around $400 billion on defence.

Click to expand...

Yes, but given the amount of actual work that China gets for its dollars...ie. it does not have huge bureaucracies liks OSHA, or Union Labor, or all of the myriad of legal strings attached to every worker...then the scales are evened up some. Not all the way, but some.

No need in China to hold a pregnant woman's job for a year after she has the baby if she claims that level of maternity leave, no need for having to hold a job, or make a job for someone who becomes completely disabled even if not work related. China probably is not hiring to social quotas and giving such quotas disproportinate weight against their ability to actually do the job so that their design and manufacturing is full of people who have to be shuffled off to the side and paid because of the labor laws, but who are not producing anything.

All of this probably more than halves the US's ability to get the kind of productivity out of its work force.

Do not get me wrong, safety and health concern have their place, as does non-discrimination...but they have gone way beyond that in the United Stated to the point where those good tools, have turned into unwieldy burdens and bureacracies that completely weigh the system down.

$118 Billion in China probably buys close to $300 billion in the States is my guess.