When it comes to security issues, the US and China are like a couple of boxers early in the bout, sparring and circling warily around the edge of the ring as they test each other.
From the US corner, a flurry of recent statements by US military leaders and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates have highlighted three themes.
First, the US seeks to deter China from aggression and particularly to dissuade the Chinese from underestimating US power and intentions.
Second, US military leaders see China as a potential adversary, but assert that open conflict is not inevitable.
Third, China's military forces are not capable of defeating the US conventionally or by using nuclear weapons.
Thus, Gates concluded: "I do not see China at this point as a strategic adversary of the United States."
During a discussion with reporters in Washington, however, he said: "We are simply watching to see what they are doing."
For their part, the Chinese announced during the National People's Congress (NPC) that military spending would rise 18 percent this year to about US$45 billion.
Most analysts outside of China contend that actual Chinese spending is at least twice that because so much is hidden. Moreover, Chinese costs are relatively low, which means they can buy more military power for less money.
In speeches before the NPC National People's Congress, which has just concluded, the belligerent tone that marked past Chinese pronouncements was notably absent.
Most speeches, as reported on Chinese Web sites, were routine, with Chinese President Hu Jintao (
The chief of the general staff, General Liang Guanglie (
As for Taiwan, a senior officer from the missile force, Liu Qide, reiterated the party line, saying: "We must get ready to deal with it and be resolved to foil anyone's intrigue to secede Taiwan from China."
Retired US Admiral Dennis Blair, former head of the US Pacific Command, was critical, as other US military leaders have been, of China's penchant for secrecy.
"The Chinese have been weak for so long that they have adopted the traditional tactic of the weak -- hide what you are doing so you don't expose weakness and others may think you are stronger than you are," he has said.
Interviewed by the staff of the Washington office of the East-West Center, a research and educational institute in Honolulu, Hawaii, Blair said: "It is not to China's advantage to hide its capabilities. In fact, the Chinese are scaring people by hiding their capabilities. China's neighbors and some in the US suspect that it has aggressive, very powerful military designs."
"The Chinese must be willing to show their neighbors and the United States that their military program makes sense from a point of view of defending the nation's interests," he said. "They must be willing to make clear that their military program is not designed to give China a capability for aggression toward its neighbors."
Similarly, Admiral William Fallon, who has just left the US Pacific Command in Hawaii to take over the Central Command that is responsible for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, said in his final report to the US Congress that the objective of Sino-US exchanges was "to increase transparency between our respective militaries."
Further, he said such military exchanges, which were gradually expanded during his watch at Pacific Command, were intended "to break down barriers to understanding and reduce the potential for miscalculation."
Admiral Timothy Keating, who is scheduled to replace Fallon later this month, told a congressional committee that he planned to continue "a series of robust engagements with, principally, the People's Liberation Army."
Referring to the friction between China and Taiwan, Keating said: "If we deal with some frequency at several levels with the Chinese, if we exercise with them -- all services -- if we ensure they are aware of our capabilities and our intent, I think we will go a long way to defusing potential strife across the Strait of Taiwan."
Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine General Peter Pace, told newsmen in the same discussion with Gates that deterrence has two elements, capability and intent.
He said the US must be ensure it has the military power to handle a threat "so that our potential adversaries don't miscalculate our capacities."
Richard Halloran is a writer based in Hawaii.
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
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS