The US dominates the globe, but some analysts are nervous because China is increasingly investing in its military.
In its recent assessment of Chinese military spending, the US Department of Defense warned that "much uncertainty surrounds the future course China's leaders will set for their country."
Some conservative analysts also predict war between these two great nations.
US warhawks are spoiled. Not since Rome has any power been so dominant. Unfortunately, US policymakers believed that the US government could do anything that it wished, leading to the debacle in Iraq. Most Americans still presume a world in which the US can boss, or "lead" in more polite parlance, other nations.
The People's Republic of China (PRC), however, is refusing to play by these rules.
The US Defense Intelligence Agency estimates that China's military expenditures this year range between US$85 billion and US$125 billion.
The Department of Defense report warns that the "lack of transparency in China's military affairs will naturally and understandably prompt international responses that hedge against the unknown."
However, China's ongoing military build-up is not hard to understand from Beijing's perspective. Once a great empire, China was humiliated, occupied and dismantled by Western powers and Japan over the last two centuries.
Over the last century, China has engaged in armed conflicts big and small with several neighbors. Today the globe's dominant superpower maintains bases along China's Pacific periphery, has routinely used military force to coerce other nations and has threatened to intervene in any conflict between China and Taiwan.
None of this necessarily justifies either past or present Chinese policy. The People's Republic of China (PRC) is an authoritarian state. Beijing's support for North Korea has had tragic consequences and war between China and Taiwan would be a disaster for all concerned. But it is foolish not to recognize what animates Beijing's actions.
The US undoubtedly factors into China's plans. US Director of National Intelligence J. Michael McConnell acknowledges that "threat perceptions" is one factor driving the PRC's military modernization. And Beijing may see no higher defense priority than deterring Washington.
China acquiring a deterrent military capability may be unpleasant for Washington, but isn't necessarily threatening to the US. Should the US worry?
It is an odd question for a country which accounts for half of the world's military spending. The US spent US$495 billion on its military in 2005. If the Bush administration has its way, defense outlays next year will be US$607 billion, a US$112 billion increase over three years -- roughly equivalent to what China spends on its military in a year.
The US nuclear arsenal dwarfs that of China and the US deploys 12 carrier groups to none.
Moreover, Washington is allied to or friends with all of the world's leading industrialized states and most of the PRC's neighbors. It will be years -- decades, actually -- before China can match Washington's global power.
Thus, Beijing almost certainly does not expect to be able to coerce the US. But it likely hopes to avoid being coerced by the US.
What should the US do? Maintaining robust military capabilities is obviously essential, but today Washington spends far more than is necessary to do that.
The US should also carefully assess its fundamental interests. Apart from a suicidal nuclear strike, it is hard to imagine how China could threaten US lives, territory or freedom.
In the longer-term, China could become a hostile peer competitor to the US, though cooperation would seem to be a better strategy than confrontation for Beijing to win international influence. Moreover, while the PRC has much promise, it also faces many challenges.
The PRC could also pose a regional challenge. But then China's neighbors, including Taiwan, India and Russia, would have an incentive to cooperate with each other.
Moreover, Japan, South Korea, Australia and Taiwan retain the nuclear option. The mere possibility of the spread of nuclear weapons provides the PRC with a persuasive reason to remain a good regional citizen. For China, other Asian nations and the US, accommodation makes more sense than confrontation where vital interests are not at stake.
While downgrading the potential for military conflict, the US should press China about concerns ranging from human rights to proliferation to Taiwan. Overall, Washington, along with its Asian and European friends, should seek to integrate China into regional and global institutions, rather than work to thwart the PRC's rise.
Ultimately, Washington must accept, however reluctantly, its new partner in Asia.
Doug Bandow is the Robert A. Taft Fellow at the American Conservative Defense Alliance.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS