Advanced Search | Search Tips
March 2009

China's Military After Taiwan

by Ellis Joffe

Posted March 18, 2009

The recently concluded session of the National People’s Congress brought news of another double-digit boost to China’s official defense budget. While the 14.9% increase is a little less than the 17.6% rise in 2008, it is still substantial, especially in view of the looming economic difficulties and improving relations with Taiwan. Although the official line is that the money will go mainly for raising the living standard of troops, Premier Wen Jiabao in his speech highlighted the need for the continued buildup of the armed forces, which will presumably absorb much of the increase.

This fits with the existing trend of more than a decade, as the Chinese armed forces have been undergoing an intensive buildup that has substantially increased their combat capabilities. Although these capabilities had plummeted drastically during the Maoist period, no concerted modernization drive--primarily to acquire new weapons--was launched until after the Taiwan crisis of 1995/96, because the Chinese had perceived no strategic military threat to their security.

Joffe4 

This perception changed dramatically when the dispatch of two American carrier groups to the vicinity of Taiwan forced a humiliating Chinese retreat from missile firing exercises that had been designed to put pressure on Taiwan. This crisis convinced the Chinese that the U.S. would intervene if they attacked Taiwan and confronted them with a new and urgent strategic threat that became the impetus for a major force buildup and a focus for its direction.

This threat, stemming from China’s determination to block Taiwan’s moves toward separation, had been the catalyst for China’s efforts to build up its armed forces. Their focus was defensive: to acquire a capability needed to invade Taiwan and to deter the U.S. from intervening; failing that, to delay the advance of U.S. forces by protecting the maritime approaches to the Taiwan Straits and China.

However, relations between China and Taiwan have improved greatly following the election of Ma Ying-jeou as Taiwan president in March 2008. Although the unification issue remains unresolved, Mr. Ma has rejected his predecessor’s policy of pursuing de facto independence from China.

This dramatic change has removed the specter of war from the Taiwan Strait. It has also removed the primary rationale behind China's decade-long rapid military buildup and the vast investment of funds that it required. However, no letup in this effort should be expected.

The reason is that other factors beside Taiwan have become operative, and these will continue to drive the buildup. The first is the strategic defense of China, which has become an acute issue, paradoxically, as a direct result of the Taiwan tensions. After a decade of gradual post-Mao military modernization, the Chinese greatly accelerated war preparations in the mid-1990s, prompted by the dispatch of two U.S. carrier groups to the vicinity of Taiwan.

However, these preparations have been viewed as increasingly threatening by the U.S. which, in turn, has adopted a “hedging” strategy aimed at strengthening American military power in the Pacific. The Chinese, for their part, have looked upon this as a threat to their security, requiring continuous enhancement of their military posture. It also requires the Chinese to be constantly on alert against what they view as U.S. probing of their defenses, as demonstrated by the recent incident in which Chinese vessels harassed a U.S. Navy surveillance ship.

The second factor derives from the military’s mission of providing support for China’s nationalistically inspired great power aspirations: to obtain for China the international respect, recognition, and ranking that has been accorded to great powers. Although China’s global status received a tremendous boost from its economic surge, China still lacks the military capabilities that are also essential for great power status.

The Chinese are well aware that until now these capabilities have been beyond their reach. Although they possess a minimal but credible nuclear deterrent, they still do not have the conventional forces needed to project military power in wartime for extended periods at a distance from China's borders, and they have only begun to acquire the capabilities necessary for protecting the maritime approaches to China. For this reason, China’s leaders have not viewed their military power as relevant to China’s global aspirations.

This situation is changing. China’s new global standing combined with its Taiwan-driven military progress has convinced the Chinese that they can begin narrowing the gap between their economic standing as a great power and their military capabilities and to begin playing a military role on the international stage.

More important is the desire to assert China’s regional pre-eminence. Whereas China’s global aspirations are long term and require currently unattainable levels of military power, its regional objectives impinge directly on national security and require achievable military backing.

These objectives are to counteract the presence of a potentially unfriendly power in its neighborhood--most immediately, the United States, but also India, Japan and Russia over the long haul. Critical to these objectives is the development of military capabilities that will enable the Chinese to respond to what they might view as a threat to their growing continental and maritime regional interests--primarily sea lines of communication.

The final factor is the sheer force of momentum. The military buildup has set in motion a wide range of long-term programs backed by powerful interests--such as the military-industrial complex--which cannot be easily terminated. There is no reason to assume, moreover, that China’s leaders will want to terminate them, since they and the generals share nationalistically inspired global and regional aspirations. Most important, China’s leaders need the support of their generals and, barring a severe economic crisis, continuous military modernization is a price they will readily pay out of both conviction and self-interest.

These are basic long-term factors that are not likely to change and they will drive the modernization effort for decades. After Hu Jintao became chairman of the Central Military Committee in 2004, new objectives were introduced to underpin this effort and to make it more relevant to current needs. Touted as new “historical missions” and “diversified military tasks,” these objectives clearly reflect Hu’s desire to put his own imprint on the military and to bolster his position among the generals. After the rapprochement with Taiwan, they also provide an additional rationale for China’s continued military buildup.

While Taiwan remains the Chinese army’s main mission, the new “military objectives other than war” include anti-terrorist operations, maritime security, rescue missions, and peace-keeping duties. To carry out them out, it is necessary to divert resources and energies from “core military capabilities.” How much to divert has apparently become a contentious issue among China’s generals.

The most forceful proponents of such objectives are presumably the admirals. Since 2000, the navy has commissioned five nuclear-powered and 22 conventionally powered submarines, in addition to 10 destroyers and six frigates, and nearly 30 amphibious ships. In a Taiwan scenario, the role of the navy would be central: to transport assault troops to Taiwan, and, more importantly, to deny access to U.S. aircraft carriers and warships.

Now the Chinese admirals apparently want to move beyond defensive perimeters and to position the navy as the prime military supporter of China's aspiration to gain recognition as a great power. This was an angle highlighted by Chinese comments on the dispatch of Chinese warships off the Somalia coast to participate in international efforts to protect shipping from pirates.

More important have been renewed reports that the navy is embarking on a program to build aircraft carriers--an issue that has been unresolved for years. If the Chinese go ahead, it is clear that the mission of their aircraft carriers will not be to defend China against the U.S. or to protect sea lanes in wartime. The mission, at immense cost, will be to augment China’s dominant political and military presence in the region and to bolster its international prestige.

The preoccupation with new missions--demands have also been made to upgrade the People’s Armed Police for security purposes and military units for rescue missions--has aroused dissatisfaction in the military, probably among conservative ground force generals. Criticism has been directed at the damage to combat training caused by performance of other tasks; at the inability of the military to effectively carry out both traditional and non-traditional functions; and at inadequate attention to the military’s basic mission of coping with threats to the nation’s sovereignty and vital interests.

There have been no demands to abandon the new tasks, only to focus more on combat preparations. At several recent sessions of the top military policy-making body, the Central Military Commission, such a compromise has apparently been reached. However, if the navy is allowed to go ahead with grandiose development plans, the question is how long it will hold.

Mr. Joffe is a professor emeritus of Chinese affairs at Hebrew University of Jerusalem and has written widely on the Chinese military.

comments (13)
J.Su @ 2009-06-13 09:00:11
To understand Chinese military buildup, one must look at things from the perspective of a Chinese man. Chinese military buildup is not targeted merely at Taiwan only, but rather all the european and Japanese powers who have humiliated China before. Taiwan is simply the first step of the revenge process. China will increase its appetite as they increase their military capability. While its military power doesn't threaten Japan today, once it annexes Taiwan, Korea will become the next, then Japan, then US. and NATO. One should note that the Chinese is not capable of terminating this revenge process themselves, unless there is an internal regime chinage.
B T Tan @ 2009-05-27 12:40:15
This legacy of intertwined hate-love relationship between China and Taiwan may soon take a new perspective. A year ago, the DPP lost the Taiwan presidency to the KMT. Since then, it has relegated to become like “a plate of scattered sand”. Compounded by the immense pressure of the revelation of extensive money laundering and corruption of its former leader, the battered DPP is now struggling for survival and to redeem itself. Thus the protests linger on. The only issue the party members can still harp on lies in the movement for nation’s independence, to be free from any influence and hence harassment from the mainland. But President Ma looks keen to move closer to Beijing (albeit covertly), and the trend for collaboration has already been set and made clear. Political differences aside, let Taiwan and China work together for a win-win economic scenario. Why would anyone raise any qualm? (Tan Boon Tee)
Günter Whittome @ 2009-05-03 21:08:37
Dear Mr Nguyen: >>I personally listened with my own ears to the current Mayor of Taipei being interviewed by a Mandarin TV program in an English speaking country, and he specifically addressed the people of mainland China as "My fellow Mainland compatriots" (大陆 同胞).<< That, of course, comes as no surprise. Hau Lung-pin (郝龍斌) is a KMT mainlander, son of prominent KMT veteran Hau Po-ts'un (郝柏村). Of course, there are people who say that. But there are others who say what I described in my last comment, and these others are by now certainly more than the like of Hau Lung-pin. Despite their decades long one-sided Greater China indoctrination, in matters of national identification the KMT camp has continuously lost ground since the 1990s. Surveys are consistent in showing that most people nowadays feel themselves to be Taiwanese rather than Chinese.
Josie Nguyen @ 2009-04-08 09:41:53
@Günter Whittome I still have family members in Taiwan and I know where to find the best eateries in Taipei. I personally listened with my own ears to the current Mayor of Taipei being interviewed by a Mandarin TV program in an English speaking country, and he specifically addressed the people of mainland China as "My fellow Mainland compatriots" (大陆 同胞). By the way, I speak Chinese as one of my native tongues and I finished the entire Taiwanese high school program outside of Taiwan. To draw an analogy from recent history, Americans taught the South Vietnamese government during the 1954-1975 Vietnamese civil war that it was North Vietnam that invaded South Vietnam, as if these were two separate countries, but even South Vietnamese loyalists thought that was the stupidiest idea that the South Vietnamese government has ever adopted from the West. People can accept the notion of civil war but they will never accept somehow that South Vietnam was a country that is different from North Vietnam, from a nationalistic perspective, regardless of territorial (legal) status and political ideology. The same can be said about North and South Korea. They are never two countries in the mind of Koreans.
Ed Chan @ 2009-04-08 06:27:58
Mr./Ms. Wu Tzong Kwang, I merely pointed out the hypocrisy and arrogance of the western society. No one is supporting human right abuse and any atrocity practiced in any society, Asian or not. Freedom of speech is the foundation of democracy. Suppressing opinion as you advocated is one of the ruling tricks used by Imperialist Japan when they occupied Taiwan. It is sad to see someone actually enjoy the protection of a hooligan without feeling being humiliated. Anyhow as James Wong said it does not matter whether Taiwan is enjoying de facto independence at the moment. Sooner or later Taiwan will be reunited with China whether they like it or not. As the analysis of the article indicated, US and all other Imperialists who want to interfere with other nations’ internal affairs will be persuaded not to come to your aid for separation. Your faith in US is misplaced. You will be disappointed by the US. Their benefits is what really counts for them.
K. Zhang @ 2009-04-06 10:24:08
Well said Ed Chan. I can stand these westerners less and less. Either they don't know just how annoying they are, or they enjoy being despised by others, I really can't which is which. The upside of their behavior is that it helps Taiwanese and Mainlanders to realize we are on the same side of the civilizational divide. They are the reason that our unity is reinforced, and I hope it makes them sick to realize that.
Günter Whittome @ 2009-04-05 10:36:49
Dear Mr Nguyen, that's not true. I don't know whether you have been to Taiwan recently. Many Taiwanese, especially those from the Green camp, do not refer to people from the PRC as "tongbao" ("compatriots") but rather as "Zhongguoren" (中國人, ie "Chinese"). In the light of what other commentators have written here, I believe it should be respected how Taiwanese see themselved instead of justifying interference into Taiwan's internal affairs.
Wu Tzong Kwang @ 2009-04-03 10:48:02
I take offense to Ed Chan's comment to suggest "western society like to pretend they are masters of the world". Is he suggesting that past atrocities committed by western civilisations justify the abuse of human rights and democracy by Asian societies today? Does the enslavement of Inca/Aztecs by 'western civilisations therefore mean that it is ok for us Asians to enslave others? Chan's comment is laced with toxic xenophobia that should have no room in such fora. If not for the Taiwan Relations Act, our country would already have been 'invaded' by China, probably resulting in countless casualties. I think I speak behalf of most, if not all, Taiwanese that we cherish USA involvement in protecting our country and sovereignty. Judging by your name - Chan - you are not Taiwanese, so I think you should keep your cutting comment to yourself. I also wish to point out that China first ceded Taiwan to Japan in 1895 - since then, Taiwan has NEVER been a part of China. The USA only became involved in Taiwan affairs inadvertently when it bombed Japan which essentially marked the end of WWII. Japanese forces retreated from Taiwan which left the island reluctantly in the hands of the US. KMT was then granted permission to govern Taiwan as it retreated from Mainland China towards the end of the Chinese civil war. Let's not get WWII and Chinese civil war mixed - Taiwan was never a part of the Chinese civil war.
Josie Nguyen @ 2009-03-26 11:39:39
I don't know if Western observers on Taiwan-China issues have ever noticed one tiny but immensely significant cultural nuance between the two parties; that is Taiwanese politicians and ordinary people and Mainland politicians and ordinary people in China - all - and I mean all from both sides - address the people from the respective sides as "tung pao" in Chinese and that means 'my compatriots' in English.
Ed Chan @ 2009-03-26 10:16:44
After reading the comments, it seems all people in western society like to pretend they are masters of the world. They take the high moral ground when making statements on issues regarding democracy, freedom and independence to name a few. Many forget that they were the slavers and destroyers of civilization, the Inca and the Aztecs to name a few. They also suppressed others freedoms and religions whilst carrying out imperialism, genocide, and mechanized warfare on a scale that had never witnessed before. It is apparent that the setbacks the west suffered in Korea and Vietnam have done nothing to teach humility or respect for others points of view, maybe it is time that they have that lesson again in order to lose their hypocritical habits when they try to interfere other nation’s internal affair such as Taiwan.
JAMES WONG @ 2009-03-24 05:25:39
Whether Taiwan is enjoying de facto independence doesn't matter.In the long run ,it has to get along with China whether it likes it or not.This so called Taiwan problem was created by the US and the Americans will have to solve the problem. At this point in time,the PLA is not able to confront the US but over the next fifty years as the PLA gets more powerful, a face saving way will have to be found to extricate the US from the mess it created.
Günter Whittome @ 2009-03-22 18:36:42
Interesting article. However, some more preciseness in terminology would have been a plus. "Taiwan’s moves toward separation" ? Taiwan has been separated from China since 1895. "Mr. Ma has rejected his predecessor’s policy of pursuing de facto independence from China." ? "de facto independence" - Taiwan has enjoyed 'de facto' independence since 1949 and under a democratic system since the 1990s. What the DPP was pursuing was "de iure" independence. That's what the issue is all about.
Nick Goldman @ 2009-03-22 05:18:51
Mr. Joffe and Editor: You use the phrase "de facto independence" incorrectly. Taiwan already is a de facto independent country as you can see by all the usual tests: it has its own military and police force, democratically elected leaders, collects taxes, has its own diplomatic force, etc. The PRC has never governed Taiwan and though it threatens to invade, its military has never actually stepped foot in Taiwan, even briefly. There are many de jure countries that are less stable or exercise less power over their supposed territory than Taiwan. What Chen Shui-bian wanted to do was to strengthen the Taiwanese national identity (largely this has happened with or without government intervention) and to set the stage LONG-TERM for DE JURE independence. He did not take any substantive steps to pursue de jure independence, such as declare independence in a formal statement and pledged and kept his pledge not to. Ma Ying-jeou has a different view of Taiwan than most people in Taiwan. Ma identifies strongly as Chinese (he was born in China) and he believes in the old KMT propaganda line of Taiwan being the "real" free China with the CCP an illegal occupier. This, in a twist of historical irony, makes China very happy, since it views Taiwan long-term as a part of China, even if it also implies the CCP is an illegal party and traitors to China. But you must be careful when you try to extrapolate from Ma's views what Taiwanese are thinking. Taiwanese voted Ma into office largely because of disappointment in the Chen administration and because of perceived poor economic performance. But the trend of a strengthening Taiwanese national identity shows no signs of slowing down, and many of Ma's (former?) supporters strongly object to any kind of political or cultural unification. This is the problem with understanding a democracy. Just as Ma was swept into office for being thought to be better than the other guy, he can be swept out if and when he crosses the line on Taiwanese sovereignty. The underlying public opinion that supported Ma hasn't wavered in its support of continued de facto independence. That's something China and cross strait observers will need to think about for the coming few years.
 
Name:
Email:

Comment:

If you have trouble reading the code, click on the code itself to generate a new random code. For security reasons, please type the code you see in the image on the left.

 

Read Also

China at Sea

by Hugo Restall

FEER's editor on China's quest for a state of the art aircraft carrier and what it means for the balance of power in Asia and beyond.

read more

Tempting the Dragon

by Mark Valencia

Trouble in the South China Sea is the tip of the iceberg of maritime legal differences.

read more

Reviews

read more
SlimStats Ignoring Local User.