China is modernizing its military forces faster than anyone expected only a few years ago, escalating the potential danger to Taiwan, to US forces and bases in Asia, and to the overall balance of power in the region.
"China adheres to the military strategy of active defense and works to speed up the revolution of military affairs with Chinese characteristics," says the white paper that Beijing issued in December, pointing to "leapfrog development" in high-tech weapons for its missile units, navy and air force. Where many US and Asian analysts said before that China would be able to mount a credible threat between 2010 and 2015, now they are saying it will come earlier, perhaps by 2006 and certainly by 2012.
Beijing seems driven by a perception that Taiwan is drifting toward formal independence, that the US is becoming a greater menace as it realigns and strengthens its forces in Asia, and that, more distantly, Japan has begun to assert itself militarily.
Behind this military progress has been the rapid growth of the Chinese economy that pays for this growth in military power. China's defense budget is estimated to have ballooned to US$80 billion, the world's third-largest after the US and Russia, and almost double that of Japan, which has Asia's second-largest defense budget.
The Chinese, who had insisted on self-sufficiency, have bought weapons and technology from abroad, notably from Russia. China could afford those purchases because Beijing's foreign exchange reserves, the world's largest, rose to US$610 billion by the end of last year, more than 10 times their holdings of US$53 billion 10 years ago. To buy even more, China has been urging the EU to lift the arms embargo imposed after the Tiananmen Square Massacre in 1989. Washington and Taipei oppose easing the restriction.
US military officers contend that the US has sufficient combat power, at sea, in the sky, and with nuclear weapons, to defeat China if hostilities should break out. Said one, however: "It sure complicates our planning."
This assessment of Chinese military power was drawn from the Chinese white paper, a recent defense report published in Taiwan, a Pentagon report to Congress and conversations with US and Asian analysts with access to intelligence reports.
The vanguard of China's military advance has been hardware. Military education and training has been improved as have logistics, but integrating the forces to invade Taiwan or to challenge the US has lagged.
China's missile force, called the Second Artillery, had been deploying 50 to 75 short range missiles a year; that has increased to more than 100 and next year it will have 800 missiles aimed at Taiwan. Accuracy has been doubled so that most missiles would hit within 18m to 27m of their targets. The missiles have also been made mobile to make them less of a target. In a training drill, a brigade moved 580km and was ready to fire in two days.
In the Chinese navy, submarines are leading the way. In the event of hostilities, they would be tasked with gaining control of the Taiwan Strait and fending off the US Navy.
China has bought eight Kilo class diesel-electric submarines from Russia and is planning to buy four more. It is building its own Song class of diesel-electric boats. Although these boats lack the range of nuclear-powered submarines, they are quieter and more effective close to shore. For long-range operations, China is building several nuclear-powered attack submarines.
China, which has become the world's third largest shipbuilder, has produced about 100 amphibious ships and four tank landing ships are under construction. That appears to have obliterated a US Navy joke that, because the Chinese lacked amphibious ships, the only way they could invade Taiwan was by swimming.
Richard Halloran is a journalist based in Hawaii.
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Recently, Taipei’s streets have been plagued by the bizarre sight of rats running rampant and the city government’s countermeasures have devolved into an anti-intellectual farce. The Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office has attempted to eradicate rats by filling their burrows with polyurethane foam, seeming to believe that rats could not simply dig another path out. Meanwhile, as the nation’s capital slowly deteriorates into a rat hive, the Taipei Department of Environmental Protection has proudly pointed to the increase in the number of poisoned rats reported in February and March as a sign of success. When confronted with public concerns over young
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
RSS