China plans to spend 350.92 billion yuan (US$44.94 billion) on national defense this year, a 17.8 percent increase over last year. The rapid growth of China's military expenditure not only heightens tensions in the Taiwan Strait and unsettles its neighbors, but worries the world community as a whole.
News of double-digit growth in China's military spending is nothing new; after all, Beijing's military budget has been increasing more than 10 percent annually since 1993. But the curious thing is that China has no hostile neighbors and does not face any immediate threat, nor do there appear to be any potential ones. So what is Beijing's motivation for spending so much on military hardware when it faces a host of more pressing problems, such as declining health standards, inadequate education and social infrastructure. What is it pointing its guns at?
This is the real cause for concern.
China's military expansion is clearly not of a defensive nature, and Taiwan is planted firmly in its crosshairs. China already has more than 900 missiles aimed at Taiwan along its eastern seaboard and has established a legal pretext for using them -- along with other types of military force -- by passing the "Anti-Secession" Law in 2005.
Japan should also be worried. Concomitant with next year's Beijing Olympics, Chinese nationalism is reaching a fever pitch and Japan is China's first target in its quest for supremacy in the Asia-Pacific region. This, compounded by competition for oil reserves and influence in Southeast Asia, as well as continuing friction over Japan's role in World War II, has allowed the Chinese Communist Party to portray Japan as a national enemy. China can't be top dog until it has forced Japan into submission.
The US must object -- and intervene -- if Beijing ever decided to violate regional security by using military force against Taiwan or Japan. China has been striving to develop its own submarines in order to prevent the US from sending aircraft carriers into the Taiwan Strait, as it did after China launched missiles into the strait in 1996. In addition, Beijing's anti-satellite missile test in January demonstrated that it is also preparing for war in space. Since the US is the only state with appreciable military capabilities in space, one need not be a political scientist to figure out who China is gearing up to fight.
Such zealous development of "defensive" weaponry is certainly in conflict with China's "peaceful rise." This buildup is a threat to international peace, yet in its zeal to maintain business ties, the international community chooses to either turn a blind eye or to appease Beijing.
States all over the world should clearly express their opposition to China's military expansion. The EU, for its part, should continue to resist pressure to lift its military embargo against China. Meanwhile, Japan, the US and India will hold joint military exercises in the Pacific early next month. This is the first effort of its kind and a clear warning from the three countries of their intention to rein in China.
Taiwan's politicians are well aware of the threat China poses. They know that this nation's missile defense system and anti-submarine capabilities are inadequate against a Chinese attack, and yet some still choose to block arms purchases and hinder efforts to upgrade the military.
As China beefs up its offensive weaponry, the pan-blue camp's inability to acknowledge China as a threat only adds fuel to the fire. If Taiwan allows itself to be led down such a foolish path, the danger to our national security will be felt for years to come.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS