The reason that a strong military is critical to the success of any country was best explained in a commencement speech Defense Secretary Robert Gates made to the 2011 graduating class of the University of Notre Dame.
The ultimate guarantee against success of aggressors, dictators and terrorists in the 21st century is the size, strength and global reach of the United States military. …
Beyond the current wars, our military credibility, commitment and presence are required to sustain alliances, to protect trade routes and energy supplies, and to deter would-be adversaries from making the kind of miscalculations that so often lead to war.
Getting back to China and its drive to enhance its military capability on all fronts, NTI’s Global Security Newswire reported that,
China’s nuclear arsenal is being augmented through development of a missile that is capable of carrying a number of warheads and can be moved between different locations. The yearly Pentagon assessment of Chinese military capabilities estimates that Beijing holds as many as 75 long-range missiles tipped with nuclear warheads, along with 120 intermediate- and medium-range systems.
In August The New York Times, (U.S. Official Warns About China’s Military Buildup) reporting on the Pentagon’s annual report on China’s military, stated:
… numerous intrusions into computer systems around the world in 2010 appeared to have originated in China, and that developing capabilities for cyberwarfare “is consistent” with authoritative Chinese military writing. The report said that two Chinese military doctrinal writings — “Science of Strategy” and “Science of Campaigns” — identified “information warfare as integral to achieving information superiority and an effective means for countering a stronger foe.”
The Washington Times also reported on the Pentagon report quoting Steven Mosher:
“The report takes exquisite account of Chinese sensibilities, even when this leads to mischaracterizing and minimizing the China threat. … This does a disservice to the truth as well as to our country.” For example, the report’s use of the phrase “active defense” to describe China’s military doctrine is a euphemism for the plans by China to strike first in a crisis, he said. …
The Pentagon report, however, says this is only a possibility despite repeated assertions by Beijing that certain political acts, like Taiwan declaring independence, will prompt pre-emptive strikes.
“There is thus no question that ‘active defense’ is not defensive at all, but is a strategy of offense and expansion.”So … even with the Chinese Communists admitting that Taiwan’s declaration of independence would be sufficient reason for a pre-emptive strike, according to a more recent article in The Washington Times, “The president decided against selling Taiwan 66 advanced F-16 C/D model aircraft, despite several requests from Taipei and Congress, the officials said.” …
Supporters of the sale say new F-16s, produced by Lockheed Martin, are needed to bolster Taiwan’s defenses against China’s growing air power and to produce jobs for the U.S. aerospace industry. …
The Obama administration has made its policy of seeking closer military ties with China a high priority, one reason that the president rejected new F-16s in the latest arms sales package, the officials said.
Isn’t there something in our Constitution or our laws about aiding and abetting the enemy being treasonous? Just asking.
In March, an OP ED in the Washington Examiner titled, “Sunday Reflection: China’s military buildup could push U.S. out of Asia,” exposes the Navy’s concern for the security of the Pacific, while stating that some experts believe that the Chinese may be spending as much as 300 billion a year on their military instead of their officially announced military budget of 91 billion.
In 1996, President Clinton sent two American aircraft carriers into the waters off of Taiwan in response to a series of missile tests and military exercises by the Chinese designed to intimidate Taiwan as its 1996 presidential election approached.
He did so confident that U.S. naval power was sufficient to control any crisis and deter further Chinese attempts at military coercion. Today, faced with a Chinese arsenal of new planes, ships, submarines, and missiles, no American president could act with such surety.
Of course, it wasn’t supposed to be this way. Chinese leaders have long emphasized that Beijing’s “rise” would be “peaceful.” Alas, the nature of the Chinese military buildup poses the single most dangerous challenge to the security of the Asia-Pacific region since that of Imperial Japan. China’s huge missile arsenal, in particular, is extremely destabilizing.
Japan, too, is concerned about the Military ambitions of the Chinese. The Wall Street Journal – Japan News reported recently that, “Japan’s Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda voiced concern over China’s military buildup and increased maritime activity near Japan, …”. Regardless, Noda expects, “China to play an appropriate role as a responsible member of the international community.” Adding that Japan’s relationship with China needs to be deepened, as it is “important for the Asia-Pacific region as well as the whole world.”
There is great hope around the world that China will come to terms with its assured super-power status and decide to be a responsible member of the “international community.” For example, we’ve also seen this with Paul Krugman, the Pentagon, and the Obama Administration. … What if they’re wrong?
The CIA’s – The World Fact Book reports that Chinese families have often opted to abort females to assure that the single child is a male (preferred in Chinese culture). This has resulted in 45.5 million more males than females in the age range from 0-64 with 51.9 percent of this age range being male. However, this ratio is getting worse; the age range of 0-14 is 53.9 percent male. This means they have millions of excess males ready to be conscripted into their military.
In 1998, Colonel Larry M. Wortzel, Director of the Strategic Studies Institute for the U.S. Army’s War College, in an internal report titled, “China’s Military Potential,” reported that the People’s Republic of China’s “standing armed force of some 2.8 million active soldiers in uniform is the largest military force in the world … [with] … another 200 million males fit for military service available at any time.”
Finally, there is the increasing military presence of China in space. China Digital Times reports on recent interviews AOL Defense had with Naval War College professor Andrew Erickson, who explained with clarity the potential power struggle between the U.S. and China and the necessity of the U.S. not ceding space to China. While hopeful that the U.S. and China will be able to work together, Erickson is also well aware of the critical issues that the U.S. is facing as China gains worldwide, as well as out-of-this-world, power, influence, and capability:
Never before has the world witnessed the simultaneous presence of a powerful United States and a powerful China, let alone their interaction. Nearly as exceptional is the phenomenon of two great powers in the international system with two very different cultures, political systems, geographic regions and sets of national interests poised to [hopefully] avoid a great power war.
The fears and aspirations of the United States and China draw on powerful currents of national identity and experience. Consequently, they are easy to reinforce and difficult to moderate. In coming years, driving factors, such as their constant development of new high-end military capabilities, are likely to become more significant.
The [People’s Liberation Army] is acquiring a range of technologies to improve China’s space and counter-space capabilities.
Space-based platforms should not constitute a disproportionately-increased share of newly-developed assets. For the foreseeable future, however, space will remain indispensable for a variety of reasons. There are many military functions that are best performed from space, particularly to support C4ISR and long-distance power projection.
China’s military capabilities are improving across the board, with space being a particular “pocket of excellence”. But the United States maintains formidable capabilities here and elsewhere. Despite its current difficulties, it has bright days ahead.
We can only hope that the current direction our country is taking will change in time for his “bright days ahead” to be manifested.