PDA

View Full Version : US concerned with Chinese military build-up


CaJuNsOuLjA
11-17-2006, 09:32 AM
Rice: U.S. Concerned About Rising China

The United States has some concerns about a rising China, including a military expansion that may be excessive, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Friday.

Beijing has spent heavily in recent years on adding submarines, missiles, fighter planes and other high-tech weapons to its arsenal and extending the reach of the 2.3 million-member People's Liberation Army, the world's largest fighting force.

Its reported military budget rose more than 14 percent this year to $35.3 billion, but outside estimates of China's true spending are up to three times that level.

"There are concerns about China's military buildup," Rice told a television interviewer. "It's sometimes seemed outsized for China's regional role."

Beijing insists its multibillion-dollar buildup is defensive, but it has alarmed some Asian neighbors and U.S. military planners who see China as a potential threat to U.S. military pre-eminence in the Pacific.

Asked whether U.S. foreign policy toward China is aimed at containing China's ability to flex military power, Rice turned the question to politics and economics.

"U.S. policy is aimed at having China be a responsible stakeholder in international politics," she replied. "That means that Chinese energy, Chinese growth, Chinese incredible innovation and entrepreneurship, would be channeled into an international economy in which everybody can compete and compete equally."

Rice, in Asia with President Bush for a regional economic forum, said China's economic growth "has been a net gain for the international system." But she also ticked off a list of U.S. concerns including questions of economic fairness and China's record on human rights.

"There are concerns about a rising China, concerns about China's transition, concerns about whether the Chinese economy will in fact act in a way that is consistent with the level playing field that the international economy needs," Rice said in the interview with CNBC Asia.

U.S. concerns are manageable within a relationship she described as strong overall, Rice said. She visited China last month to shore up United Nations sanctions against China's ally, North Korea, and she credited Beijing with cooperation in opposing the North's nuclear development.

Bush and Rice were both meeting with their Chinese counterparts during this weekend's Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation summit.

A congressional advisory panel on Thursday questioned China's willingness to be a more responsible international player, saying world prosperity depends on China's abandoning a single-minded pursuit of its "own narrow national interests."

The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission made 44 recommendations in its annual report to lawmakers. It calls on the United States to combat Chinese attempts to isolate Taiwan by supporting the island's membership in various world bodies, and urges Washington to pressure Beijing to help end the bloody conflict in Sudan's Darfur region.

"While China is a global actor, its sense of responsibility has not kept up with its expanding power," said Larry Wortzel, chairman of the commission, which Congress created in 2000 to investigate U.S.-China issues.

The panel also admonished U.S. intelligence agencies, urging the United States to set up "a more effective program" for gathering information about China's military buildup and development.

In Beijing, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu said she had not seen the report, but "we are against the attempt by any country or any organization to interfere with China's internal affairs under the pretext of the Taiwan question and impede our reunification course."

The report said China's global reach extends beyond East Asia to the Middle East, Africa, South Asia and Latin America, where China "is coming to be regarded almost as a second superpower."

Gigolo Jason
11-17-2006, 09:42 AM
Yes, this has been a quiet issue for several years now.

China is preparing for an invasion of Taiwan, which has one of the largest economies in Asia. This annexation of Taiwan will have global economic consequences.

The Chinese see Taiwan as their territory and are planning on dealing with the US militarily as a consequence of a Taiwan invasion.

IMO a Chinese invasion if Taiwan is not a question of if but a question of when.

CaJuNsOuLjA
11-17-2006, 10:15 AM
Yes, this has been a quiet issue for several years now.

China is preparing for an invasion of Taiwan, which has one of the largest economies in Asia. This annexation of Taiwan will have global economic consequences.

The Chinese see Taiwan as their territory and are planning on dealing with the US militarily as a consequence of a Taiwan invasion.

IMO a Chinese invasion if Taiwan is not a question of if but a question of when.

I can do nothing but acquiesce...


How do you feel about preemption in this case?

Gigolo Jason
11-17-2006, 10:25 AM
I can do nothing but acquiesce...

How do you feel about preemption in this case?

I don't think a preemptive action will should be taken. I think this should be handled as Cold War Part II.

CaJuNsOuLjA
11-17-2006, 10:33 AM
Interesting...how about at the point of invasion? (which is pretty much inevitable...)

Gigolo Jason
11-17-2006, 10:39 AM
Interesting...how about at the point of invasion? (which is pretty much inevitable...)

You see, that is the interesting part.

No matter what we do I believe that Taiwan will be occupied and the Chinese military will prevail in a ground campaign on the island of Formosa.

That being said, should we make a token show of force with our Air force and Navy? Should we begin fortifying our other allies whom surround China in the region?

I think all options should be on the table, but which one is chosen when the time comes will be interesting to watch on the 5:30PM news.

CaJuNsOuLjA
11-17-2006, 10:45 AM
You see, that is the interesting part.

No matter what we do I believe that Taiwan will be occupied and the Chinese military will prevail in a ground campaign on the island of Formosa.

That being said, should we make a token show of force with our Air force and Navy? Should we begin fortifying our other allies whom surround China in the region?

I think all options should be on the table, but which one is chosen when the time comes will be interesting to watch on the 5:30PM news.

There are implications to fortifying and supplying allies in the region but I think that in the end, it is necessary to regulate Chinese aggression. It's not an end all be all solution but it would help in the event of invasion. I know that we should definately not be sitting idly by as the Chinese strengthen their military capabilities. This whole thing seems to be reminiscent of the late '30's early '40's...

Gigolo Jason
11-17-2006, 10:51 AM
This whole thing seems to be reminiscent of the late '30's early '40's...

Agreed. It is a scary parallel. What is even more scary is that China has 1/5 the worlds population.

There are dissident groups in China who do not agree with the actions of the central government. My hope is that they are able to effect internal affairs in China after the invasion of Formosa.

CaJuNsOuLjA
11-17-2006, 11:07 AM
...China has 1/5 the worlds population.

And the worlds largest standing military at 2.25 million (3.25 if paramilitary is included)...they are a pretty significant entity in that region and in the world as a whole.

Gigolo Jason
11-17-2006, 11:14 AM
Containment is the way to handle this when it happens.



"Never fight a land war in Asia"
-General Douglas MacArthur

CaJuNsOuLjA
11-17-2006, 11:33 AM
Containment is the way to handle this when it happens.

"Never fight a land war in Asia"
-General Douglas MacArthur

Yes a land war is OUT OF THE QUESTION....it's both unsustainable and foolish. As far as containment, what happens when they are no longer containable...confrontation, which given the manifestation of the former, such an undertaking would be that much more difficult. I'm not exactly sure what "the best" way to handle this situation would be, but the fact that numerous parallels that can be drawn to WWII is enough to make me believe that we should pay a little more attention to this topic than we do currently. I think that they do have some negative agenda towards the US because we have documented numerous intentional breaches (i.e. Spying, unlawful acquirement of classified US doc's, etc) of the Chinese govt. with that of the US.

andre3k
11-17-2006, 11:40 AM
There are dissident groups in China who do not agree with the actions of the central government. My hope is that they are able to effect internal affairs in China after the invasion of Formosa.

Don't worry, I'm sure the CIA will have a hand with that. Remember we're good at training insurgents, i.e . Bay of Pigs, Afghanistan, Columbia. All these incidents have come back to bite us in the ass though.

GLD
11-17-2006, 02:52 PM
Containment is the way to handle this when it happens.



That was a disaster with the communists (look how long the cold war lasted). If an invasion occurrs we will almost be entirely pressured to respond the extent of which is the question.

The saving grace may be the unknown number of dissidents inside China who will hopefully see an opportunity if there is any kind of extended conflict (>6 months)

Rick H.I.C.
11-17-2006, 03:03 PM
U.S. has become too dependent on these type of countries. Forced labor for low income. Driving down the cost of goods sold, resulting in america becoming more of a consumer country rather than a producing one. Sorry to say but America has had it's head up it's butt for far too long now the tables are turning and all other countries lavish in the thought of America going down the tubes. Time to give professional politicians and lawyers the boot and put people who are more concerned with America and not their career. :icon_bigg

Gigolo Jason
11-17-2006, 03:07 PM
That was a disaster with the communists (look how long the cold war lasted).

Look who won the cold war. Where is the USSR today?

If an invasion occurrs we will almost be entirely pressured to respond the extent of which is the question.

Yes, we will have to respond. A policy of containment and limited engagements, along the lines of the cold war, will give the best results in the long run. Remember that that the Chinese government is far less stable then ours and will be far more vulnerable to outside influences such as embargoes, trade sanctions, and international pressure and outrage for destroying Asia's 6th largest economy (Taiwan) and for potentially sending the world into an economic recession.

The saving grace may be the unknown number of dissidents inside China who will hopefully see an opportunity if there is any kind of extended conflict (>6 months)

I agree, the dissident groups should be supported but not within the confines of a US invasion of either Taiwan or mainland China. The US should not send in ground troops for either exercise.

falxzzr
11-17-2006, 03:22 PM
Whats scary is you two agreeing with each other haha.

pester
11-17-2006, 05:36 PM
You see, that is the interesting part.

No matter what we do I believe that Taiwan will be occupied and the Chinese military will prevail in a ground campaign on the island of Formosa.

That being said, should we make a token show of force with our Air force and Navy? Should we begin fortifying our other allies whom surround China in the region?

I think all options should be on the table, but which one is chosen when the time comes will be interesting to watch on the 5:30PM news.

we could fortify china's neighbords but. everytime we help someone with weapons. they always end up using them against someone else

and about attacking china i dont think we will come out that good

im sure they even have nuclear missiles so,, is a hard tought

Gigolo Jason
11-17-2006, 06:05 PM
we could fortify china's neighbords but. everytime we help someone with weapons. they always end up using them against someone else

WRONG

By arming our allies in the neighborhood, we give China's neighbors the ability to resist Chinese aggression against it's neighbors and allows us to better keep china contained within it's own borders.

and about attacking china i dont think we will come out that good

Who said anything about attacking? If we were to make a show of force against China during the Chinese invasion of Taiwan we would be defending the interests of our ally Taiwan. How far this show of force would go and how much of an engagement our navy and air force would partake in should be left up to the generals who know the situation on the ground best.

im sure they even have nuclear missiles so,, is a hard tought

This is the interesting card in the affair. They are a nuclear power, thus assuring a M.A.D. (Mutually Assured Destruction) situation if the situation came to nuclear war. We would not be the first to use nuclear weapons, but if they were to used, China would not be the last to use them.

I do not believe this will come to a nuclear war because China' interest is focused on territorial expansion and not a M.A.D. situation. They know the stakes of that poker game just as well as every other nuclear power.

pester
11-17-2006, 07:33 PM
WRONG

By arming our allies in the neighborhood, we give China's neighbors the ability to resist Chinese aggression against it's neighbors and allows us to better keep china contained within it's own borders.



Who said anything about attacking? If we were to make a show of force against China during the Chinese invasion of Taiwan we would be defending the interests of our ally Taiwan. How far this show of force would go and how much of an engagement our navy and air force would partake in should be left up to the generals who know the situation on the ground best.



This is the interesting card in the affair. They are a nuclear power, thus assuring a M.A.D. (Mutually Assured Destruction) situation if the situation came to nuclear war. We would not be the first to use nuclear weapons, but if they were to used, China would not be the last to use them.

I do not believe this will come to a nuclear war because China' interest is focused on territorial expansion and not a M.A.D. situation. They know the stakes of that poker game just as well as every other nuclear power.


i see your point, i just hope we dont get more enemies. we already have enough



and yes it would be a total nuclear mess, but remember if we used it someone else can

talking about let the generals decide. i hope u r kidding

if they still cant decide iraq. i hope someone else decide

AND PLEASE NOT GEORGE BUSH, :gesture:

we have so many countries with the finger on the button to start war somewhere else

i dont think we can maneage to confront everyone,

it is hard to see how it will end up, i just hope it doesnt happen

we already have enough troubles somewhere else

and about allies. well. we saw in the iraq invasion how many allies we really have. not many anymore, at least not the ones that will step out for us