Source: US Dept of Defense or here
[Annual Report on The Military Power of the People's Republic of China, 2002]
Report to Congress
Pursuant to the FY2000 National Defense Authorization Act
Section 1202 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2000, Public Law 106-65, provides that the Secretary of Defense
shall submit a report on the current and future military strategy of
the People's Republic of China. The report shall address the current
and probable future course of military-technological development on
the People's Liberation Army and the tenets and probable development
of Chinese grand strategy, security strategy, and military strategy,
and of the military organizations and operational concepts, through
the next 20 years.
I. Introduction: Gaps and Uncertainties
II. Goals and Trends in Chinese Strategy
III. PRC Military Modernization
IV. Cooperation Between the Former Soviet Union and China
V. Security Situation in the Taiwan Strait
VI. Conclusion
This annual report addresses (1) gaps in knowledge of China's military power; (2) China's grand strategy, security strategy, and military strategy; (3) developments in China's military doctrine and force structure, to include developments in advanced technologies that would enhance China's military capabilities; (4) China's relations with the former Soviet Union; and, (5) the security situation in the Taiwan Strait.
The report addresses the current and probable future course of military-technological development on the People's Liberation Army (PLA) and the tenets and probable development of Chinese grand strategy, security strategy, and military strategy, and of the military organizations and operational concepts, through the next 20 years. This report to Congress addresses specific questions in four sections on Chinese strategy, Chinese military forces, China's arms sales from the former Soviet Union, and the security situation in the Taiwan Strait.
This report begins with a cautionary note that was first outlined in
the Office of the Secretary of Defense, Net Assessment's Report to
Congress on Implementation of the Taiwan Relations Act in 2000. The
Net Assessment report surveys how little is known about the most
significant aspects of Chinese military power. Chinese secrecy is
extensive. China reveals little in its Defense White Paper about the
quantity or quality of its military forces. China's defense spending
may be some four times larger than its public announcement in March
2002 of a defense budget of about $20 billion. Since the 1980s,
U.S. military exchange delegations to China have been shown only
showcase
units, never any advanced units or any operational training
or realistic exercises.
The Department of Defense (DoD) has identified three gaps in U.S. knowledge about Chinese military power. First is PRC military power juxtaposed to that of Taiwan. There is much more the United States can learn about both sides' ideas of statecraft, their approaches to the use of force, their perceived vulnerabilities, and their preferred operational methods, as well as about the political and military organizations that produce military assessments and plans. Second are intangible PRC capabilities -- training, logistics, doctrine, command and control, special operations, and mine warfare. Finally, although DoD has identified emerging methods of warfare that appear likely to be increasingly important in the future -- particularly missiles and information warfare -- it is difficult to assess confidently how these developments will affect the overall military competition.
Over the last few years, DoD has identified improvements in China's military capabilities in a significant number of areas. Recent developments in China's military power include:
-- Doctrine of Preemption and Surprise. Chinese doctrine is moving toward the goal of surprise, deception, and shock effect in the opening phase of a campaign. China is exploring coercive strategies designed to bring Taipei to terms quickly.
-- Military Budget. In March 2002, China announced a 17.6 percent or $3 billion increase in spending, bringing the publicly reported total to $20 billion. Total spending is closer to $65 billion, and annual spending could increase in real terms over three- to four-fold by 2020.
-- Improvements in Training and Joint Operations. Beijing's military training exercises increasingly focus on the United States as an adversary.
-- The PLA's Three Attacks and Three Defenses
air defense
training concentrates on attacking stealth aircraft, cruise
missiles, and helicopters, while defending against precision
strikes, electronic warfare, and enemy reconnaissance.
-- In 2001, PLA training emphasized maritime and amphibious operations, integrating conventional ground units with marines, airborne, and special operations forces. Exercises included more combat units improving the PLA's abilities to deploy and sustain its forces.
-- Missile Development
-- China has approximately 350 short range ballistic missiles (SRBMs) already in its deployed inventory, increasing at about 50 missiles per year. The accuracy and lethality of this force also are increasing. The PLA is developing variants of the CSS- 6 that enable attacks against Okinawa when forward-deployed or against Taiwan when deployed further inland.
-- All of China's known SRBM assets are believed to be based in the Nanjing Military Region (MR). The number of conventional ballistic missiles deployed opposite Taiwan is expected to increase substantially over the next several years.
-- China is replacing the CSS-4 Mod 1 intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) with the longer range CSS-4 Mod 2. China also is replacing all of its approximately 20 CSS-4 Mod 1 missiles and developing two follow-on, extended-range versions of the DF-31: a solid propellant, mobile ICBM and a solid propellant submarine-launched ballistic missile.
-- Air Power
-- China has acquired Su-30MKK fighter aircraft from Russia. China also is producing Su-27 front-line fighter aircraft. Over the past two years, the Su-27s and Su-30s have been more rapidly integrated into operational units.
-- To bolster strike capabilities further, China reportedly is developing an improved version of the FB-7 supersonic fighter-bomber.
-- PLA Air Force (PLAAF) and PLA Naval Air Force (PLANAF) tactical forces also are developing and acquiring precision guided munitions (PGMs). The Su-30 is equipped to use anti-radiation missiles (ARMs).
-- China reportedly has developed electronic warfare variants of several of its larger aircraft, and may have several programs underway to deploy new standoff and escort jammers on bombers, transports, tactical aircraft, and unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) platforms.
-- In 1999, China introduced an airborne early warning (AEW) aircraft, the Y-8AEW. China is also looking to acquire the A-50 MAINSTAY AWACS aircraft from Russia.
-- China has been upgrading its air facilities along the Taiwan Strait.
-- Air combat tactics continue to evolve and training is becoming more advanced. PLANAF fighters and tanker aircraft successfully transferred fuel during aerial operations over the South China Sea in April 2000.
-- Naval Forces. Naval enhancements included greater familiarization and crew proficiency on recently acquired platforms and associated weapon systems, as well an increase in the PLA Navy's (PLAN) maritime surveillance capability.
-- PLAN is making efforts to improve its force-projection options by improving the capability to deploy submarines on extended patrols, and outfitting surface ships with more capable air defense assets and more lethal anti-ship cruise missiles.
-- China has replaced its World War II-vintage landing ships with newer ships produced in China. In addition, China has a large fleet of about 600 military and civilian landing craft, which could be used for ship-to-shore operations. China also has a large civilian merchant fleet that could be pressed into service to support amphibious operations.
-- The PLAN's first Russian-made SOVREMENNYY-class guided missile destroyer arrived in China in February 2000. China has signed a contract for two additional SOVREMENNYY destroyers and could acquire additional Russian-made major surface combatants.
-- China has produced the diesel-electric SONG submarine, the first Chinese submarine to have a skewed propeller. The SONG also is the first Chinese submarine designed to carry the developmental YJ-82, China's first encapsulated anti-ship cruise missile (ASCM) capable of launching from a submerged submarine.
-- China has purchased from Russia the KILO SS, one of the quietest diesel-electric submarines in the world. Armed with such weapons as the wire-guided Test-71ME heavyweight torpedo and the 53-65KE wake-homing torpedo, the KILO provides Beijing with access to previously unavailable quieting and weapons technology.
-- China will acquire a new nuclear-powered attack submarine class, the Type 093 Class SSN, which will carry wire-guided and wake-homing torpedoes and cruise missiles.
-- Air Defense and Detection
-- The SA-N-7, provided by Russia, provides the most capable short-range surface-to-air defense system for the PLAN in the near term. Technology from the SA-N-7 probably could assist with the development of an indigenous naval SAM system. Over the next ten years, the PLAN likely will develop a naval missile roughly equivalent to the shore-based SA-10s purchased from Russia.
-- The land-based version of the long-range HQ-9 surface-to-air missile is in development and probably will incorporate technology from the Russian SA-10 medium-range surface-to-air missile. Based on precedents, China will probably produce a naval variant of the HQ-9 incorporating Western technology.
-- Land Forces and Armor. During the past year, the PLA ground force revealed incremental improvements, evidenced by an increase in training tempo and equipment upgrades.
-- The PLA has begun a program to upgrade the main gun on its mainstay Type 59 main battle tanks, as well as maintain over 1,000 tanks already equipped with the 105-mm gun.
-- Several new or updated armor assets are gradually making their way into the PLA ground force inventory, to include a light tank, an amphibious tank, and an amphibious armored personnel carrier (APC).
-- Production of the Type 96 tank continues, with 1,800 expected to be deployed by 2005.
-- Since the mid-1990s, the army has shrunk from about 100 divisions to approximately 50, with many of the units downsizing to brigades, freeing more resources for modernization.
-- The PLA has improved its amphibious attack capabilities in recent years and is steadily expanding its ability to transport ground forces by air.
-- Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and Intelligence (C4I). China has steadily improved its C4I capabilities and may be negotiating with the Belarusian firm Agat to produce C4I software and equipment capable of performing joint battle management.
-- Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance. China's procurement of new space systems, airborne early warning aircraft and long-range UAV, and over-the-horizon radar will enhance its ability to detect, monitor, and target naval activity in the Western Pacific Ocean.
-- China may have as many as three over-the-horizon (OTH) sky-wave radar systems, which China aspires to use against aircraft carriers.
-- Information Warfare. To improve its skill base, the PLA has been recruiting specialists via its reserve officer selection program in order to design, comprehend, and execute a full-spectrum information operations/information warfare (IO/IW) campaign.
-- Electronic Warfare. China's electronic warfare efforts are focused on technology and design development, accomplished mainly through cooperation with Western companies and by reverse engineering. China's newer designs show significant improvements over older systems.
-- China is procuring state-of-the-art technology to improve its intercept, direction finding, and jamming capabilities. It also may be developing jammers, which could be used against Global Positioning System (GPS) receivers.
-- Laser Weapons. China is pursuing a robust research and development program for laser weapons. In 1999 the Chinese displayed a probable laser-based, anti-tank guided missile (ATGM) countermeasure on its Type 90-II tanks.
-- Radiofrequency Weapons. Chinese scientists have written about, and China probably has in place, a program to develop explosively driven RF weapons technology that potentially could be used in missile warheads or aircraft bombs.
-- Space Warfare
-- Beijing may have acquired high-energy laser equipment that could be used in the development of ground-based anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons.
-- In July 2001, Moscow and Beijing signed a five-year space cooperation agreement pursuant to which: China and Russia will establish special departments on joint development of a regional missile defense system; China and Russia will set up cooperation organs to develop a new generation of high-tech weapons and equipment with funding up to $500 million.
China has not publicly articulated an authoritative, official
statement of its grand strategy.
Chinese military strategists
define grand strategy as the overall strategy of a nation or an
alliance of nations in which they use overall national strength
to
achieve national political goals, especially those related to national
security and development.
China's grand strategy attempts to balance two often competing
objectives: one is developing what it calls the nation's
comprehensive national power
(CNP). The other is exploiting to
maximum advantage the existing strategic configuration of power
or
shi,
to preserve
national independence and enable China to build momentum
in its
effort to increase national power.[1] The relative priority that the
national leadership places on these two objectives is subject to
adjustment and change, depending on how China assesses the
opportunities and challenges in the strategic configuration of
power.
Comprehensive national power
(CNP) is the concept by which China's
strategic planners evaluate and measure national standing in relation
to other nations. The concept of CNP first appeared in conjunction
with former paramount leader Deng Xiaoping's national development
strategy in the early 1980s. It represents an adaptation of Western
methodologies for monitoring and assessing national power, fused with
traditional Chinese concepts of statecraft and strategy, which placed
a heavy emphasis on calculations and estimates of relative power among
nations. The current approach applies quantitative and qualitative
evaluations of politics, economics, military, science and technology,
and foreign affairs to determine relative CNP.[2]
While China's national leadership is focused primarily on national
development, it is constantly assessing the broader strategic
configuration of power
for potential challenges or threats that might
prompt it to adjust or change its grand strategy, as well as for
opportunities to advance national interests. In particular, China's
leaders believe that three essential conditions
-- national unity,
stability, and sovereignty -- must exist if China is to survive and
develop as a nation. Among these conditions, Beijing judges that
national unity is the most important. Beijing's preoccupation with
maintaining unity is driven by China's internal and external security
environment and national condition, historical experience, national
goals, and, perhaps most importantly, challenges to the Chinese
Communist Party's (CCP's) legitimacy.
Ensuring domestic stability and a secure international environment is crucial to Beijing's national development strategy. Senior leaders currently are focused on the short-term task of ensuring regime stability by maintaining domestic order and leadership control while dealing with several sources of internal unrest and instability. Chinese leaders also believe they must maintain conditions of state sovereignty and territorial integrity. This is reflected in China's response to a range of international issues, including human rights and democracy, and territorial and resource disputes with its neighbors.
Should China become involved in a major war, the relative priority it
places on its national goals is likely to change. Deng Xiaoping and
current CCP General Secretary and State President Jiang Zemin have
indicated publicly that the goal of reestablishing a favorable
strategic configuration of power
would override the goal of
developing national power if
[1] There is no Western equivalent to the concept of shi.
Chinese
linguists explain it as the alignment of forces,
the propensity of
things,
or the potential born of disposition,
that only a skilled
strategist can exploit to ensure victory over a superior
force. Similarly, only a sophisticated assessment by an adversary can
recognize the potential exploitation of shi.
[2] This definition of Comprehensive National Power is used primarily by the PLA Academy of Military Science (AMS). However, the China Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) uses a slightly different set of measures: politics, economics, science and technology, and foreign affairs. See Chapter 5 of China Debates the Future Security Environment, (National Defense University Press, 2000).
China faced a fundamental threat to its national unity, internal
stability, or sovereignty. Such circumstances were defined as
situations in which China faced the credible prospect of a military
invasion of the mainland, or the nation was involved in a large-scale
war, such as a major war between China and Taiwan that included direct
U.S. military intervention. While Deng and Jiang indicated that
ensuring a favorable strategic configuration of power
would be the
primary national goal in such situations, they also clearly emphasized
that one of China's war aims would be to end the war on favorable
terms as soon as possible so that Beijing could refocus on the goal of
developing national power.
China's grand strategy has been influenced primarily by a combination
of the ancient tenets of Chinese statecraft as well as more modern
national development theory. While ancient Chinese statecraft and
national development theories are dominant, other factors also shape
China's grand strategy. China has had a longstanding geopolitical
challenge in maintaining control over the heartland of China and major
elements of Inner Asia,
and in securing a vast periphery of coastal
and land boundaries as well as maritime territory in a region
populated by traditional rivals and enemies. These challenges shape
how China approaches grand strategy, especially its emphasis on
maintaining a favorable domestic and international strategic
configuration of power.
Moreover, Maoist and Marxist ideology, as
well as lessons from the Sino-Japanese war and the civil war, are
prevalent in China's approach to grand strategy. Finally, the Chinese
study how other nations approach international security affairs, to
include grand strategy, in an effort to enhance their own approach to
the issues of strategy, security, and development.
Beijing has sought to describe its long-term political goals of
developing CNP and ensuring a favorable strategic configuration of
power in positive, passive, cooperative, benign, and peaceful
themes. These themes include China's emphasis on peace and
development,
the non-use of force in settling international disputes,
non-intervention in the internal affairs of other countries, the
defensive nature of China's military strategy, its no-first-use of
nuclear weapons
declaration, its support for nuclear-free weapons
zones, and claims that China would never deploy its military forces on
foreign soil.
These principled themes should not, however, obscure the ambitious nature of China's national development program and the nature of China's approach to the use of force, which is contingent, rather than inherently passive or defensive, as Chinese commentators often vigorously assert. In particular, Beijing probably calculates that ambiguity in international discourse helps to buy China time in developing its national power.
One of Deng Xiaoping's key directives to China's security and
development establishment was the so-called 24 character strategy:
keep cool-headed to observe, be composed to make reactions, stand
firmly, hide our capabilities and bide our time, never try to take the
lead, and be able to accomplish something
(emphasis added). This
often-quoted maxim not only suggests a desire to downplay China's
ambitions; it also affirms a long-term strategy to build up China's
CNP with a view to maximizing China's options in the future.
From Beijing's perspective, strategic ambiguity, including strategic
denial and deception, is a mechanism to influence the policies of
foreign governments and the opinions of the general public and elites
in other countries. China's leaders believe that ambiguity and
stressing the just nature
of PRC actions have the effect of drawing
out
those who oppose and those who support China's interests
abroad. Once China's leaders make the distinction between friends and
adversaries, they can develop and tailor themes to counter opposition
and advance their overall agenda. Moreover, such distinctions position
China to reward friends
abroad, or alternatively, punish enemies
to enhance its own position in the balance of power.
As with its grand strategy,
China has not publicly articulated a
national security strategy
in a format similar to that used by the
United States. China's efforts to accomplish its security goals
involve an integrative strategy that applies diplomatic,
informational, military, and economic instruments of national
power. China's national security leadership structure is based on a
traditional Leninist model in which the party apparatus mirrors the
state system and plays the dominant role in strategy and policy
formulation and oversight. The party function is facilitated by cross
leadership
-- the practice of dual hatting
party cadres with
government positions. For example, Communist Party General Secretary
Jiang Zemin also serves as the State President.
While seeing opportunity and benefit in interactions with the United
States -- primarily in terms of trade and technology -- Beijing
apparently believes that the United States poses a significant
long-term challenge. China's leaders have asserted that the United
States seeks to maintain a dominant geostrategic position by
containing the growth of Chinese power, ultimately dividing
and
Westernizing
China, and preventing a resurgence of Russian
power. Beijing has interpreted the strengthened U.S.-Japan security
alliance, increased U.S. presence in the Asia-Pacific region, and
efforts to expand NATO as manifestations of Washington's
strategy. Most importantly, China has adopted an ambivalent if not
skeptical attitude toward the U.S. presence in the Asia-Pacific
region. As China's 2000 Defense White Paper states:
There are new negative developments in the security of the Asia-Pacific region. The United States is further strengthening its military presence and bilateral alliances in this region advocating the development of the TMD system and planning to deploy it in East Asia. Japan has passed a bill relating to measures in the event of a situation in the areas surrounding Japan. All this goes against the tide of the times. Joint military exercises have increased in the region to detriment of trust between countries...Encroachments on China's sovereignty and interest in the South China Sea are not infrequent, and some extra-regional countries are attempting to interfere in this issue...
Beijing apparently calculates that U.S. efforts to develop missile defenses will challenge the credibility of China's nuclear deterrent and eventually be extended to protect Taiwan, degrading the coercive value of its growing conventional theater ballistic missile capability opposite the island.
Chinese analyses indicate a concern that Beijing would have difficulty in managing potential U.S. military intervention in crises in the Taiwan Strait or the South China Sea. There are even indications of a concern that the United States might intervene in China's internal disputes with ethnic Tibetan or Muslim minorities. Chinese concerns about U.S. intervention likely have been reinforced by their perceptions of the U.S. response to the 1995-1996 Taiwan Strait crises, Operation ALLIED FORCE in Kosovo, and more recent U.S.-led military operations to combat international terrorism. Over the longer term, China often expresses concern over the prospects for the expansion of Japanese military power in the region.
Beyond these more traditional security concerns, China's strategic
planners are beginning to recognize global and transnational threats
such as HIV/AIDS, international crime and narcotics trafficking,
terrorism, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. In
addition, in part stemming from over two decades of reform and
opening up,
China's leaders increasingly perceive threats to
economic security,
information security,
and the erosion of
national independence as a consequence of globalization. These
concerns will only grow in future years with China's entry into the
World Trade Organization (WTO).
While assuming the primacy of economic power, China's leaders view the military as necessary to ensure that China's economic power will rise; to protect important national interests; and, to support China's eventual emergence as a great power and the preeminent power in Asia. Nevertheless, Chinese leaders since Deng have placed military modernization behind other priorities such as development in agriculture, industry, and science and technology. This placement is based on a calculation that broad-based modernization will raise overall levels of industry, technology, and human resources to sustain long-term military modernization.
Debate over the proper ordering of China's national priorities has surfaced periodically -- particularly in the face of external challenges to China's security interests. For example, following Operation ALLIED FORCE in 1999, Beijing seriously considered upgrading the priority attached to military modernization. While the senior leadership has since reaffirmed its stress on economic growth and development, it nevertheless agreed to provide significant additional resources and funding to support accelerated military modernization.
A key variable in assessing long-term trends in the PRC's security
strategy is Taiwan. One of Beijing's priority security interests is to
prevent further steps by Taiwan toward permanent separation from the
mainland and to secure the eventual resolution of the Taiwan issue on
the PRC's terms. Taiwan's integration under mainland authority is
considered to be an essential step toward completion of national
reunification.
China's leaders will remain determined to secure
unification on Beijing's terms.
Beijing assesses that the permanent separation of Taiwan from the
mainland could serve as a strategic foothold for the United States. At
the same time, securing control over Taiwan would allow the PRC to
move its defensive perimeter further seaward. The PRC's Taiwan
strategy will continue to emphasize a coercive approach toward Taipei,
and Beijing's decision-makers have affirmed that they will resort to
force if Taiwan's present de facto separation becomes official, either
through a declaration or international recognition as such. Moreover,
China's leaders have threatened force if they fail to make progress
toward reunification
objectives.
In addition to preventing Taipei's moves toward de jure independence, Beijing seeks to counter what it perceives to be Japan's growing military cooperation with the United States and to prevent a rebirth of Japanese militarism. At the same time, it will continue to value the economic benefits it derives from access to Japanese technology, trade, and foreign investment. Beijing's other important security goals in East Asia include preventing the development and implementation of a regional theater missile defense system, particularly one involving Taiwan; coping with challenges to its claims in the East and South China Seas; and supporting its economic interests through bilateral and multilateral mechanisms, such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) process, and the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF).
The United States will remain central to these regional priorities. Consequently, China's actions in the region will be shaped by its assessment of U.S. policies, particularly our regional alliance and defense relationships. While seeking a stable relationship with Washington, Beijing will continue to seek opportunities to diminish U.S. regional influence.
Three key factors likely will remain fundamental in shaping Chinese security policy over the long term, regardless of the outcome of a Taiwan conflict or the change in the nature of the Chinese regime.
First, China's leaders will be unlikely to maintain a monolithic state. Future leaders probably will continue to pursue economic growth and technology, which, combined with the information revolution and bureaucratic professionalization, will reinforce this trend. Second, globalization and China's linkage to the outside world will continue and expand. Third, there will be pressure for political change. China will continue to face economic and internal challenges; the demands on the regime from both internal and external sources will persist. Consequently, China will continue to perceive challenges from the West. Beijing will continue to seek technology, wealth, and power associated with the Western system, but will maintain that Western political concepts and culture are antithetical to its interests.
China's leaders believe that the control and use of the armed forces
and other coercive instruments of power are essential components of
their security strategy. China does not have
a document directly equivalent to the U.S. National Military
Strategy.
The closest approximation is a document referred to as the
National Military Strategic Guidelines for the New Period.
PLA strategists are beginning to discuss in professional journals issues such as the efficiency accrued through limited applications of force to accomplish political goals. Moreover, advances in military technologies will provide China's leaders over the long term with an expanded set of options. These enhanced capabilities have given rise to and will sustain a trend in which China's warfighting strategies increasingly favor coercive over annihilative approaches.
The principal area where China appears to be making advances in
coercive military capabilities involves airpower, to include missiles
and information operations. Military coercion also can be effected
through the use of blockades or quarantines. Further, the use of
ground forces may provide the shock value
necessary to weaken the
adversary's will. Finally, China's leaders also may employ economic
coercion through the manipulation of stock and currency exchanges and
banking, as well as political and psychological intimidation.
Preparing for a potential conflict in the Taiwan Strait is the primary driver for China's military modernization. Beijing is pursuing the ability to force Taiwan to negotiate on Beijing's terms regarding unification with the mainland. It also seeks to deter, deny, or complicate the ability of foreign forces to intervene on Taiwan's behalf. Beijing has been influenced by the emerging revolution in military affairs and is seeking the means to counter advances the United States could make in this area. PRC doctrine stresses surprise, deception, and preemption as a means to offset weaknesses in equipment and other areas. Currently, China's conventional short-range ballistic missile force is its most credible and immediate threat to Taiwan.
The evolution of PLA operational doctrine has mirrored changes that have taken place in PRC security and military strategy since the mid-1980s.
Impact of the Revolution in Military Affairs. China's more forward-looking strategists note the Persian Gulf War's role in bringing the emerging revolution in military affairs (RMA) into sharp focus for the PLA. In particular, PLA observers witnessed how quickly the force, equipped with high-tech weapons systems, defeated the Iraqi force that resembled the PLA in many ways. The force and capability displayed by the coalition during that conflict prompted PLA theorists to alter their perceptions of the character of future wars, highlighting the role of air and air defense operations, electronic and information warfare, and long-range precision strikes.
At the same time, the PLA observers judged that the technological advances surrounding the RMA also increased the demands on military forces in other areas, to include greater emphasis on command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR), joint service and combined arms operations, the need for professional, technically qualified personnel to operate and maintain advanced equipment, and the need, especially, for a professional corps of non-commissioned officers.
U.S. observations of the RMA also have migrated into PLA thinking on
the impact of the RMA on future warfare. As an example, Zhou Fangyin,
of the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations,
appeared to pull from U.S. academic writing when he indicated that
war in the information age will be manifested not as
`platform-centered warfare,' but rather as `network-centered
warfare.'
The internalization of RMA concepts, over time, is manifest
in actual changes in doctrine, strategy, tactics, and equipment.
China's military planners are working to incorporate the concepts of
modern warfare attributed to the revolution in military affairs
and
have placed a priority on developing the technologies and tactics
necessary to conduct rapid tempo, high-technology warfare in Asia.
On balance, PLA authors assess that the current RMA holds the
potential for producing radical new forms of warfare, enhanced
information warfare, networks of systems, and digitized
combat
forces. At the same time, however, based on observations and lessons
learned from the Gulf War and, later, Operation ALLIED FORCE, Beijing
perceives certain weaknesses in the U.S. over-reliance on the advances
offered by the RMA. Consequently, revised PLA doctrine, rather than
seeking to capture and pursue RMA advances, emphasizes measures to
target and exploit its weaknesses.
Evolution Since the Persian Gulf War. Operation ALLIED FORCE in 1999 appears to have had at least as much impact on PLA thinking as the Persian Gulf War, although more as a validation of earlier assessments of the trends of modern warfare than as a catalyst for change. PLA commentary on NATO's Kosovo air operation concluded that a superior enemy's situational awareness and precision-strike systems could be stymied through effective, and often low-tech, counter-reconnaissance measures such as camouflage and concealment, simple decoys, dispersion, and frequent movement of forces. NATO air operations reinforced the PLA's focus on the use of underground facilities, landline communications, and well- concealed supply depots.
The Serbs' survival in a modern battlefield against a superior force reportedly impressed PLA observers. These observers, however, also noted that the Serbs suffered from inferior equipment, inadequate defense of civilian installations, and poor logistics.
The PLA implemented lessons from Operation ALLIED FORCE in the
restructured Three
Attacks, Three Defenses
air defense training regime. Three Attacks,
Three Defenses
concentrates on attacking stealth aircraft, cruise
missiles, and helicopters, while defending against precision strikes,
electronic warfare, and enemy reconnaissance. Many PLA training events
also now incorporate this new training regime.
Doctrinal literature is developed by the PLA Academy of Military Science (AMS) under the authority of the CMC and in close coordination, probably, with the PLA General Staff Department (GSD). The AMS is responsible for the development of theoretical and applied military strategy, operational theory and methodology, and combat tactics for China's armed forces. Service-specific tactics, techniques, and procedures are developed variously by the PLA Navy, Air Force, and Second Artillery; however, each service must adhere to the greater context and guidance for military strategy and operations at the theater level of war and above promulgated by the AMS. Officers from the AMS Campaign and Tactics Department had a major role in developing the new operational regulations. This department also is responsible for drafting and writing documents and manuals that are the functional equivalents of U.S. Joint Publications and Field Manuals. Very little is known about the actual substance of the new operational directives that emerged in 1999.
PLA operational theory reflects the transition undertaken during the
1990s to shift from predominately annihilative to coercive
war-fighting strategies. Shock and surprise are considered by PLA
strategists as crucial to successful coercion. Accordingly, PLA
operational theory emphasizes achieving surprise and accruing shock
power
during the opening phase of a campaign. The pre-eminent role
that surprise and pre-emption have in potential conflicts is best
illustrated in the fundamental principles of Actively Taking the
Initiative
and Catching the Enemy Unprepared
in PLA operational
doctrine.
-- Actively Taking the Initiative
stresses the necessity of
attack at the optimal point and time to catch the enemy
unprepared.
-- Catching the Enemy Unprepared
emphasizes the role of
concealment of intentions and capabilities through camouflage,
deception, feints, and the use of stratagem to allow a
relatively small amount of force to dominate the enemy through
surprise.
Throughout the 1990s, PLA writers have highlighted pre-emptive strikes as a means to offset advantages that a technologically superior power brings to the fight. Lessons from Kosovo added impetus to developing a capacity for offensive operations against targets at the operational and strategic levels of warfare. PLA writers have asserted that offensive strike assets, which are more cost effective than defensive assets, must focus on an opponent's ability to carry out strikes and/or conduct counterattack operations. The measure of effectiveness, in this context, is not the capture of territory but the effects the strikes have on an enemy's ability to resist. The defender is thrown into a state of passivity due to his inability to conduct operations.
The PLA believes that surprise is crucial for the success of any future campaign, and it likely would not be willing to initiate any military action unless assured of a significant degree of strategic surprise. With no apparent political prohibitions against pre-emption, the PLA requires shock as a force multiplier, to catch Taiwan or another potential adversary such as the United States, unprepared. Observers such as PLAAF Chief of Staff LTG Zheng Shenxia have noted that without adopting a pre-emptive doctrine, the chances of a PLA victory are limited.
PLA writings indicate a number of methodologies that could enhance the success of surprise, including strategic and operational deception, electronic warfare, and wearing down or desensitizing an opponent's political and military leadership. At least one objective would be to reduce indications and warning of military action.
The relative technological inferiority of the PLA and the overarching
primacy of economic development have led to the exploration of
asymmetric methods enabling the inferior to defeat the superior.
PLA writings suggest that China's armed forces remain relatively confident of their ability to defeat a regional military force of comparable technological development with traditional battles of annihilation, or operations that rely on mass and attrition to attack the enemy forces, formations, and troops directly. The PLA also is convinced that this traditional approach to campaigns will not suffice against an enemy with advanced technologies. Consequently, there is an emphasis on conducting operations that will paralyze the high-tech enemy's ability to conduct its campaign, including operations to disrupt and delay the enemy campaign at its inception, and operations that are highly focused on identifying the types and locations of enemy high-tech weapons that pose the greatest threat. After identifying those weapons, the PLA must then attempt to neutralize them, either through hard-kill methods (e.g., firepower, special operations, etc.) or soft-kill methods also termed technological interdictions. Degrading a high-tech adversary's ability to process or gather information is viewed as an absolutely essential task if the weak is to defeat the strong, especially if that high-tech adversary is perceived to be overly dependent upon information systems to enable its own operations.
Captain Shen Zhongchang from the Chinese Navy Research Institute, for
example, envisions a weaker military defeating a superior one by
attacking its spaced-based communications and surveillance
systems. The mastery of outer space will be a requisite for military
victory, with outer space becoming the new commanding heights for
combat.
He also noted that lightning attacks and powerful first
strikes will be more widely used in the future.
In future wars, Shen
highlights radar, radio stations, communications facilities, and
command ships as priority targets vulnerable to smart weapons,
electronic attack, and electromagnetic pulse
(EMP) weapons.[3]
[3] See Chinese Views of Future Warfare (National Defense University Press, 1998).
Ultimately, the PLA seeks to level the technological playing field at the outset of a campaign in order to enhance its chances of operational success. Consequently, PLA operational theory calls for operations aimed at:
-- Destroying the enemy command system;
-- Crippling the enemy information systems;
-- Destroying the enemy's most advanced weapons systems;
-- Crippling the enemy support (logistic) systems; and
-- Disrupting the critical links in the enemy's campaign systems (i.e., denying the enemy the synergies that accrue from its technological superiority).
China retains the world's largest military, yet it lacks the technology and logistical support to project and sustain conventional forces much beyond its borders. Military modernization is directed towards training and equipping the services to be capable of fighting short-duration, high-intensity conflicts. Recognizing that comprehensive modernization will take many years, the PLA is pursuing force multipliers.
Air. Although the PLA has approximately 3,400 aircraft, only about 100 are considered modern, 4th-generation fighters. Development and acquisition efforts have been aimed primarily at defeating the regional air forces, defending against aircraft at long ranges from China's coast, defeating high-value air assets, denying U.S. naval operations, and striking other targets such as airbases and air defense sites. A force-wide modernization focused on the acquisition of advanced systems, improved training realism, new tactics to complement modern technology, and technically proficient personnel is intended to improve combat capability over the next decade and help to extend operations farther beyond land and sea borders. By the end of the decade, China is expected to have a more robust fleet of 4th- generation fighters augmented by modern missiles, electronic countermeasures, and several AWACS-type aircraft. Although PRC pilot capabilities will remain poor by Western standards, improvements across the board will increase their potential.
Navy. The PLA Navy (PLAN) is making efforts to improve its regional force projection options by improving the capability to deploy submarines on extended patrols, and outfitting surface ships with more capable air defense assets and more lethal anti-ship cruise missiles. In addition, the Navy is attempting to address weaknesses in anti-submarine warfare. Despite incremental gains, the PLAN still lacks fleet air defense, over-the-horizon targeting, and sufficient sea/air lift for major amphibious operations. The PLA is addressing these deficiencies, but does not appear likely to make significant gains in those areas until at least 2005. Regardless, the PLAN will remain a large force that could pose a threat to regional navies.
Ground. Force reductions and selective new equipment acquisitions are creating a more mobile, combat-ready core within the larger ground force. Since the mid-1990s, the army has shrunk from about 100 divisions to approximately 50, with many of the units downsizing to brigades. The PLA also has three Airborne divisions and two Marine brigades. However, the army's ability to project force much beyond China's land borders remains limited due to a shortage of amphibious ships, heavy cargo carrying aircraft, long-range transports, and other logistical shortcomings. Although the PLA has improved its amphibious attack capabilities in recent years, there are no signs that Beijing is serious about increasing its heavy lift capacity or conducting sustained ground operations.
Conventional Missile Forces. Modernization and training developments in recent years highlight China's continuing effort quantitatively and qualitatively to improve the capabilities of its conventionally-armed SRBM force. There are approximately 350 SRBMs already in the deployed inventory; this number is increasing at about 50 missiles per year. The accuracy and lethality of this force is expected to increase through the use of satellite-aided guidance systems.
The PLA Air Force (PLAAF) and PLA Naval Air Force (PLANAF) are equipped with approximately 3,400 fighters of mostly obsolete Soviet design. Modernization efforts through the 1990's were highlighted by the purchase of Su-27 and Su-30 FLANKER fighters from Russia and a license agreement to produce additional Su-27s in China. Beijing also has continued to pursue domestic aircraft programs, including the FB-7, and upgrades to the F-7 and F-8 fighters.
Combat aircraft. The PLA has used some of its increased modernization funding to purchase modern arms from Russia, to include Su-27 air defense fighters and Su-30 multi-mission fighters. Domestic production of the Su-27 is proceeding, albeit very slowly. China also continues to upgrade fighters already in the inventory. The primary focus is on improving sensors, weapons, electronic warfare capabilities, and information connectivity on aircraft in order to increase the lethality of the otherwise outdated airframes. To bolster strike capabilities, China reportedly is developing an improved version of the FB-7. The twin- engine FB-7 is an all-weather, supersonic, medium-range fighter-bomber with an anti-ship mission. Improvements to the FB-7 likely will include a better radar, night attack avionics, and weapons. Over the next 20 years, production efforts for the air forces are expected to focus on an indigenous 4th generation-type aircraft, the improved FB-7 fighter-bomber, and possible upgrades to the Su-27/Su-30.
Special Mission Aircraft. Since the Gulf War, China has sought to improve the capabilities of its special-mission aircraft, with a focus on electronic warfare aircraft, C4ISR platforms and tankers. China reportedly has developed jamming versions of several of its larger aircraft, and may have several programs underway to deploy new standoff and escort jammers using bombers, transports, tactical aircraft, and UAV platforms.
[twice the size]
The PLA Air Force is building up its multi-role fighter force. The
most powerful strike-fighter deployed in the Taiwan theater is the
PLAAF's Russian-built Sukhoi Su-30MKK, which can deliver
precision-guided missiles in all weather conditions.
China has been actively pursuing an advanced airborne surveillance and control aircraft since the early 1990's. In 1999, it introduced an airborne early warning (AEW) aircraft, the Y- 8AEW. The cancellation last year of the more capable PHALCON program forced Beijing to pursue other alternatives, to include the possible acquisition of A-50 MAINSTAY AWACS aircraft from Russia.
Air-to-Air Refueling. China began developing its air-to-air refueling capability in the mid- 1980s using a converted B-6/BADGER bomber as an aerial tanker. PLANAF fighters and tanker aircraft successfully transferred fuel during aerial operations over the South China Sea in April 2000, suggesting that the PLANAF has achieved a very limited, clear weather, daytime aerial refueling capability. Training, however, remains rudimentary and it will be several years before either the PLAAF or the PLANAF incorporate aerial refueling into routine operations.
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). China is investing considerably in the development of UAVs. China already has a number of short-range and longer-range UAVs in its inventory for reconnaissance, surveillance, and electronic warfare (EW) roles. Research efforts also are underway across a range of UAV technologies with several developmental UAV programs underway related to reconnaissance, surveillance, communications, and EW.
Munitions. China's approach to the development of conventional munitions for its air forces has been altered irrevocably since the Gulf War, where precision-guided munitions (PGMs) were introduced on a large and effective scale. Ensuing campaigns such as Operations ALLIED FORCE and ENDURING FREEDOM have demonstrated an increasing use of PGMs that has reinforced Beijing's desire to develop its own cruise missiles. The PLANAF has operated the B-6/BADGER as a weapons platform for the C-601/KRAKEN anti-ship cruise missile for over ten years. Another variant of the B-6/BADGER is being developed to carry land-attack cruise missiles (LACMs) in the future. PLAAF and PLANAF tactical forces also are developing and acquiring PGMs. The Su-30 is equipped to use anti-radiation missiles (ARMs), and eventually could carry laser, TV, and radar-guided missiles and munitions. Future aircraft also are expected to employ a variety of both indigenously produced and Russian-made LACM, ASCM, and ARM PGMs.
Evolving Capabilities. Since China received its first 4th-generation fighter, the Su-27, in 1992, training, tactics and operational concepts progressed slowly as China integrated the new technologies and capabilities into the force structure. This protracted learning phase has allowed China to prepare for the introduction of larger numbers of 4th-generation aircraft into its inventories. Over the past two years, new Su-27s and Su-30s have been more rapidly integrated into operational units. Meanwhile, air combat tactics continue to evolve and training is becoming more advanced. By 2010, the PLA will have all the elements of a modern air force and should have developed the operational concepts and the training needed to fight as an integrated force. Although not all the PLAAF and PLANAF will be equipped with modern weapons by that time, a core of units will be in place to allow the PLA to execute the type of regional combat operations envisioned by its current military doctrine.
The PLA Navy (PLAN) numbers 290,000 personnel, with approximately 60 destroyers and frigates, about 50 diesel and six nuclear submarines, and some 40 amphibious landing ships. Approximately 350 auxiliary and smaller patrol vessels, as well as a naval air arm of over 500 fixed-wing aircraft and 50 helicopters, complement this force. Over the last decade, the Navy has streamlined and modernized its forces by eliminating large numbers of older ships and replacing them with fewer, more modern units. The number of submarines has declined by about one-half. The Navy's entire inventory of U.S.-built, World War II-vintage landing ships has been replaced by newer ships produced in China. In addition, there is a large fleet of about 600 landing craft, both military and civilian, that could be used for ship-to-shore operations, as well as a handful of air cushion vehicles. The PLAN also has hundreds of smaller landing craft, barges, and troop transports, all of which could be used together with fishing boats, trawlers, and civilian merchant ships to augment the naval amphibious fleet. The size of the major surface combatant fleet has been relatively stable, with older ships slowly being replaced by newer Chinese-built destroyers and frigates.
The PLAN seeks to push its maritime defense perimeter further seaward. This change in operations will require newer, more modern warships and submarines capable of operating out to the Ryukyu Islands and into the South China Sea. At these extended ranges, the platforms will have to be better armed to enable defense from all methods of attack. The Navy has been conducting research and acquiring foreign technology in an effort to improve the broad range of naval warfare capabilities; it also is acquiring new classes of ships that will be better suited for operations out to the limits of the East and South China Seas.
[twice the size]
A PLA Navy Russian-built Sovremennyy-class destroyer leads a line of
warships during exercises last year. China's navy now has two Russian
Sovremennyy-class destroyers that fire a supersonic anti-ship missile
that cannot be shot down by any Asian navy.
Major Surface Combatants. The acquisition of two Russian-built SOVREMENNYY Class destroyers has improved China's surface fleet capabilities. These ships are equipped with SS- N-22/SUNBURN ASCMs and the SA-N-7 SAM system. The SOVREMENNYYs also are fitted with the AK-630M 30-mm Gatling gun and 130-mm dual-purpose gun.
China's best domestically constructed surface combatant, the 6,000-ton LUHAI Class destroyer, is equipped with C-802 ASCMs. It also is equipped with a naval variant of the HQ- 7 SAM system.
China has signed a contract for two additional SOVREMENNYY destroyers and could acquire additional Russian-made major surface combatants. Not only would these foreign acquisitions provide China with immediate improvement to its warfighting capabilities; they also would provide the PLAN with the opportunity to reverse-engineer more modern weapons and associated systems
By 2010, another new destroyer class probably will begin to enter the fleet, as could a new frigate. By 2020, China is expected to have its new destroyer classes in full production, with several in service or on the way. The new frigate likely will experience a similar rate of production. As they go into service, these platforms will replace the older JIANGHU I/II Class frigates. By 2020, China probably will have phased out most of the LUDA Class DD.
Aircraft Carrier. While continuing to research and discuss possibilities, China appears to have set aside indefinitely plans to acquire an aircraft carrier.
Air Defense. The PLAN continues to have longstanding concerns about its capability to engage enemy aircraft, cruise missiles and precision-guided munitions. This problem is becoming more significant as the Navy strives to operate away from the protection of land- based air defenses. PLAN surface combatants have a limited, and primarily self-defense, anti- air warfare (AAW) capability. Only about twelve of its destroyers and frigates are outfitted with SAM systems; the others are armed only with AAA and possibly man-portable air defense systems. In addition, PLAN warships lack the modern air surveillance systems and data links required for area air defense missions. The combination of short-range weapons and lack of modern surveillance systems limits the PLAN to self-defense and point-defense anti-air warfare only. Consequently, except in unusual circumstances, no PLAN ship is capable of conducting air defense of another ship. Additionally, the PLAN could not reliably defend against either current or projected anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCM). China has recognized the importance of countering low-observable aircraft and cruise missiles. Engineering efforts to develop air defense systems capable of detecting and eventually engaging these systems are underway.
Air defense improvements include the development of SAMs to provide area defense. This effort has led to continuing exchanges with Russia on air defense-related radars and missiles. The SA-N-7 provides the most capable system in the near term. Technology from the SA-N-7 probably could assist with the development of an indigenous naval SAM system. Over the next ten years, the PLAN could develop a naval missile roughly equivalent to the shore-based SA-10s purchased from Russia. While indigenous SAM development is preferred, it is uncertain if China will be able to build its own equivalent within an acceptable period of time, and purchase of additional, more advanced Russian weapons may be required.
The land-based version of the long-range HQ-9 is in development and probably will incorporate technology from the Russian SA-10. Based on precedents, China will probably produce a naval variant of the HQ-9. HQ-9 is designed to be a long-range SAM to counter high-performance aircraft, cruise missiles, air-to-surface missiles (ASMs), and tactical ballistic missiles (TBMs). Technology from advanced Western systems may also be incorporated into the HQ-9.
Submarines. The PLA Navy likely intends to maintain a large submarine force. China is producing more modern submarines and is acquiring Russian technology to improve future units, with likely upgrades to the current fleet accomplished during overhauls. Although the force is oriented principally toward interdicting surface ships using torpedoes and mines, development of the YJ-82 ASCM for the SONG submarines eventually will give the Navy a submerged-launch cruise missile. A second major improvement likely will entail the use of advanced mobile mines to augment the Navy's large inventory of submarine-laid mines. While the primary mission of China's submarine force remains anti-surface warfare, China's ASW capabilities also will continue to improve in light of the acquisition of Russian-built KILO Class submarines.
[twice the size]
A new advanced version of the SONG-class conventional submarine is
expected to incorporate advanced air- independent
propulsion. SONG-class submarines, equipped with submerged launched
cruise missiles, could play a significant role in countering
U.S. aircraft craft battle groups operating in the Western Pacific
Ocean.Diesel Electric Submarines. In addition to the roughly 30 obsolete Soviet-designed ROMEO Class submarines remaining in the force, China has produced two domestically designed diesel-electric attack submarine classes: the MING and the SONG Class SS. China has launched 21 MINGs and three SONGs. The MING essentially is an improved version of the ROMEO. The SONG, on the other hand, is China's first new-design, conventionally powered submarine.
The SONG is a blend of Chinese and Western technology and has several key features that point to a major shift in diesel submarine design philosophy. It is the first Chinese submarine to have a skewed propeller. The SONG also is the first Chinese submarine designed to carry the developmental YJ-82, China's first encapsulated ASCM capable of launching from a submerged submarine. SONGs are probably fitted with flank-array sonars of French design. Chinese diesel submarines are fitted with German MTU diesel engines.
The PLAN has taken delivery of four Russian-built KILO Class SS. Two are standard export version Project 877 EKM KILO SS and two are Project 636 KILO SS (the improved KILO design). In purchasing the KILO SS, the PLAN has acquired one of the quietest diesel-electric submarines in the world. Armed with such weapons as the wire-guided Test-71ME heavyweight torpedo and the 53-65KE wake-homing torpedo, the KILO provides Beijing with access to previously unavailable quieting and weapons technology. China most likely will try to incorporate aspects of this submarine into its domestic programs, although it will take several years before these technologies could be used effectively. By 2010, China will have withdrawn the ROMEO Class submarines from service. By 2020, China's non-nuclear submarine inventory probably will include MING, SONG, and KILO SS. China will continue using Russian technology to improve quieting, propulsion, and submarine design; it also is incorporating foreign technology into its existing submarines. China also will benefit from the maturation of its domestic submarine research and development (R&D) infrastructure to achieve a capability to design and manufacture modern submarines domestically.
[twice the size]
Wake homing torpedoes are a fire-and-forgetweapon that can sense and follow a vessel's wake. Even crews with minimal proficiency can deploy this weapon effectively. China's acquisition of wake homing torpedoes makes its submarines potent anti-ship platforms.
Nuclear-Powered Submarines. The PLAN has five HAN nuclear attack submarines (SSNs) in its inventory, all launched between 1970 and 1990. China's sole nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) -- the XIA Class -- was overhauled in 1995-1998 and most likely will be extended through at least 2011. Next-generation nuclear submarine programs will reflect Russian influence and technology. China will acquire a new nuclear-powered attack submarine class, the Type 093 Class SSN, which will have technology similar in quality to the Russian VICTOR III SSN. The Type 093 Class will carry wire-guided and wake-homing torpedoes and cruise missiles. The first Type 093 Class SSN probably will be operational soon after 2005. It eventually will replace the HAN Class SSNs, all of which China will withdraw from service by 2020. The Type 094 SSBN is expected to carry an advanced submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM).
Mines. China likely has enough mine warfare assets to lay a good defensive and a modest offensive minefield using a wide variety of launch platforms. China is believed to have a variety of mine types available including bottom and moored influence, mobile mines, remotely controlled mines, and propelled-warhead mines. China recently has begun advertising some advanced mines, indicating it may have even more sophisticated mines in its inventory.
Torpedoes. China's modernization efforts likely are focused on developing torpedoes with state-of-the-art homing and propulsion systems capable of operating in acoustically challenging shallow-water environments. China also may seek advanced torpedo countermeasures like mobile decoys and hard-kill anti-torpedo torpedoes to increase the survivability of its surface ships and submarines.
Submarine Sonars. Most PLAN submarines are believed to have obsolete sonar systems based on older analog designs. A limited number of Chinese submarines have more modern digital sonar systems based probably on 1980s Western technology. The Chinese have an extensive research and development infrastructure in shallow-water acoustics and have experience using modern commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) computer processing technology. It is likely that current Chinese sonar designs are similar to commercially available Western submarine sonar systems and feature modern COTS processors and displays.
Submarine Quieting. PLAN submarines are assessed to incorporate a wide range of quieting technologies, most of which are imported. China nonetheless desires to develop the capability to produce indigenously quiet submarines. The main submarine quieting technologies are machinery mounts, hull coatings, and propellers. Future PLA Navy submarine designs are expected to incorporate lower propeller rotational rates and more advanced propeller designs, machinery mounts, and hull coatings. China's apparent goal is to design and construct quiet submarines independently of other countries. This effort is evident in China's large investment in research, development and manufacturing.
China's ground forces are divided among approximately 20 group armies,
more than 40 maneuver divisions, and some 40 maneuver brigades. More
than a dozen of these divisions and several of these brigades are
designated rapid reaction
units. China completed a 500,000-man force
reduction in 2000 in an effort to streamline the force further and
free up funding for modernization. This reduction was achieved
primarily through the deactivation of several group army headquarters;
the transfer of personnel to the People's Armed Police; and the
downsizing of approximately 30 combat divisions to brigades. Recent
improvements also have focused on increasing the capability of reserve
and militia units. The size of the PLA ground forces suggests that
continued modernization will remain slow, deliberate, and limited
through at least 2010. By 2020, infantry, airborne, armor and army
aviation units will comprise a much larger percentage of the force.
Armor Modernization. The PLA has begun a program to upgrade the main gun on its mainstay Type 59 main battle tanks, as well as maintain over 1,000 tanks already equipped with the 105-mm gun. In addition, several new or updated armor assets are gradually making their way into the PLA ground force inventory, to include a light tank, an amphibious tank, and an amphibious APC. Production of the Type 96 tank continues, with 1,800 expected to be deployed by 2005, according to open sources.
Fire Support Modernization. Artillery research, development and production have continued to emphasize qualitative improvements to the PLA's artillery forces over quantitative production. Progress on an advanced multiple rocket launcher and a self-propelled amphibious howitzer continues.
Special Operations Forces. In addition to conventional warfare modernization, the PLA has devoted considerable resources to the development of Special Operations Forces (SOF). SOF units are an integral element of ground force modernization. They are expected to play an important role in achieving objectives in which limited goals, scale of force and time would be crucial to victory. SOF missions likely include conducting surveillance and battle damage assessment; locating or destroying C4I assets, transport nodes, and logistics depots; capturing or destroying airfields and ports; supporting invasion forces; destroying air defense assets; and, conducting denial and deception and information operations.
Army Aviation. China's Army Aviation forces can provide only minimal support to ground or amphibious operations despite a slowly growing inventory of helicopters, which currently numbers about 300 aircraft. Army Aviation has been acquiring small numbers of attack and medium lift helicopters over the last several years, but still lacks a dedicated attack helicopter.
While PLA ground forces continue to make advances in several areas, they remain faced with several key challenges, including:
-- Downsizing and Restructuring. China's leadership still considers
its ground forces as too infantry-heavy.
Beijing probably
believes that further troop reductions accompanied by
additional restructuring are required in order to make the
force a more appropriately balanced combined arms force with
increased mobility, lethality, and survivability.
-- The Pace of Modernization. Recent fielding of new equipment has thus far been in limited numbers and, therefore, has not improved appreciably the capabilities of most of the PLA's ground forces. Even with the consolidation of ground force assets into progressively fewer units, the army remains so large as to impede rapid equipment modernization throughout its force structure. However, new equipment, while not being deployed throughout the whole of China, is being deployed to the PLA's strategically important areas, especially the southeast.
Beijing's growing conventionally armed missile force provides China with a military capability that avoids the political and practical constraints associated with the use of nuclear- armed missiles. The CSS-6 and CSS-7 SRBMs provide China with a survivable and effective conventional strike force, as will future conventionally armed CSS-5s and LACMs.
[twice the size]
China maintains various types of conventional ballistic missiles.
China currently lacks a coherent, national, strategic-level integrated air defense system (IADS). It has a variety of major defensive weapon systems; however, the bulk of China's air defense system is based on obsolete weapon systems, which, when combined with an antiquated and inefficient C3 system, allow for routine operations, such as providing point air defense for major cities and other high-value assets, but does not allow for an in-depth or flexible air defense throughout the country.
China's air defenses consist of strategic assets operated by the PLAAF and tactical assets operated by the PLA's ground forces. Historically, Beijing relied upon its large inventory of interceptors along with PLA anti-aircraft artillery units to defend the country. However, the acquisition of modern SAMs may be precipitating a change to the historical strategy in which SAMs had not been the primary choice of engagement. Modern SAMs are primary weapons against cruise missiles, SRBMs and tactical aircraft at close range. PLAAF aircraft would be primary weapons for engaging tactical aircraft at a greater distance. Until additional SAM units become operational, China will only be able to defend effectively against isolated intrusions and small-scale attacks.
Much of China's more recent air defense modernization efforts extend from Beijing's observation of Western military campaigns beginning with the Gulf War in early 1991 and Operation ALLIED FORCE in mid-1999. During the Gulf War, the employment of precision- guided munitions, stealth aircraft, and airborne C4I apparently awakened Beijing to the limitations of its air defense capabilities. The design of the HQ-9 SAM reportedly was influenced by these observations, and plans were made to upgrade China's C4I system. Late model Russian SAMs such as the SA-10 and the SA-15 were purchased to provide a stop-gap measure against a perceived cruise missile threat, and external assistance was sought to develop a robust air defense system.
Anti-Radiation Missile Development. Reports of a Chinese
anti-radiation SAM, the FT-2000, first surfaced in sales brochures at
the September 1998 Farnborough Air Show. The FT-2000 is a mobile
system based on the HQ-9/SA-10 with a maximum advertised range in
excess of 100 km. It has been described as an AWACS killer.
There
also are indications that China is promoting the development of
another anti-radiation SAM, the FT-2000A, which is an update of the
antiquated CSA-1; it is a fixed-based SAM system with a range of under
100 km. The intended targets for anti-radiation SAM systems would be
AWACS aircraft or any airborne asset emitting radio signals. There is
no information indicating that any country, including China, has
expressed an interest in acquiring either system or that either system
has progressed beyond the conceptual phase.
PLA combined-arms training in 2001 reportedly emphasized amphibious warfare with limited multiservice participation. Several major exercises were conducted, some of which focused on aspects of amphibious warfare. The PLAN, Air Force, and Second Artillery all conducted service-specific training.
Ground Forces Training and Exercises. PLA ground forces training and exercises since the mid-1990s have focused on various themes, although without a predictable pattern or sequence from year to year. Training activity in 2001 reportedly emphasized maritime and amphibious training, and integration of conventional ground units with Marines, Airborne, and SOF. It built on previous years and included more combat units, which incrementally improved the PLA's abilities to deploy and sustain the force, and to conduct amphibious operations in a multi-service environment.
PLA Navy Training and Exercises. PLAN training and exercise activity in 2001 was limited, with the Navy reportedly participating in only a handful of exercises. Moreover, the normal end-of-year multifleet exercise apparently was cancelled.
PLA Air Training and Exercises. The PLAAF and PLANAF fighter pilot tactical training continues, albeit slowly. During 2001, some of the PLAAF's more advanced aircraft reportedly conducted advanced tactical training involving fighters of dissimilar types. Advanced tactics training is part of the PLA's push to modernize combat tactics against regional air forces. The tactics being practiced are a significant departure from traditional PLA training. PLAAF/PLANAF exercise activity during 2001 reportedly concentrated on mobility, air defense, and support to amphibious assault forces. Air defense exercises, apparently smaller in number than last year, were said to be highly scripted and the scenarios lacked realism, limiting the benefit PLA pilots could have gained from the exercises.
China is in the midst of a ballistic missile modernization program that is improving its force, both qualitatively and quantitatively, in all classes of missiles. This modernization program will improve both China's nuclear deterrence by increasing the number of warheads that can target the United States as well as improving its operational capabilities for contingencies in East Asia.
China is replacing CSS-4 Mod 1 ICBMs with longer range CSS-4 Mod 2s. The replacement of all the approximately 20 CSS-4 Mod 1s will be completed by mid-decade. In addition, China is developing three solid propellant ICBMs. Development of the DF-31 is progressing and deployment should begin before mid-decade. China also is developing two follow-on extended range versions of the DF-31: a solid-propellant, mobile ICBM and a solid- propellant submarine launched ballistic missile (SLBM). Deployment of these two DF-31 follow-ons should begin by mid-to-late-decade. China also will retain the dozen CSS-3 ICBMs through the end of the decade.
The Second Artillery is continuing the replacement of the liquid propellant CSS-2 IRBM with the solid-propellant, mobile CSS-5 MRBM.
China is expected to deploy a medium-range SLBM aboard the XIA SSBN before the end of the year. The DF-31 follow-on SLBM will be deployed on a new, more capable submarine by the end of the decade.
China currently has around 20 ICBMs capable of targeting the United States. This number will increase to around 30 by 2005 and may reach 60 by 2010.
China's ballistic missile modernization began before it assessed that the United States would deploy a missile defense, but China likely will take measures to improve its ability to defeat the defense system in order to preserve its strategic deterrent. The measures likely will include improved penetration packages for its ICBMs, an increase in the number of deployed ICBMs, and perhaps development of a multiple warhead system for an ICBM, most likely for the CSS-4.
[twice the size]
China is developing a longer range version of the DF-31 that can reach
much of the U.S.
China is enhancing its battlespace awareness for a Taiwan Strait conflict. The acquisition of modern intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) systems remains a critical aspect of Beijing's military modernization. China is developing its ISR capabilities based upon indigenous developments, supplemented by foreign technology acquisition, and procurement of complete foreign systems. Its procurement of new space systems, airborne early warning aircraft, long range unmanned aerial vehicles, and over-the-horizon radar will enhance its ability to detect, monitor, and target naval activity in the Western Pacific Ocean.
Exploitation of space and acquisition of related technologies remain high priorities in Beijing. China is placing major emphasis on improving space-based reconnaissance and surveillance, including electro-optical, synthetic aperture radar, and other satellite reconnaissance systems. These systems, when fully deployed, are expected to provide regional and potentially a hemispheric, continuous surveillance capability. China has begun to embrace new satellite architecture emphasizing common satellite buses. This approach to satellite construction is based on the use of a standard, versatile satellite bus module, with minor modifications to accommodate various payloads. In addition to indigenous development, China will probably continue to use commercial satellite imagery and may seek to join an international consortium-owned constellation. China is cooperating with a number of countries, including Russia, Ukraine, Brazil, Great Britain, France, Germany, and Italy, in order to advance its objectives in space.
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. China's armed forces have operated the Chang Hong (CH-1) long-range, air-launched autonomous reconnaissance drone since the 1980s. China developed the CH-1 by reverse-engineering U.S. Firebee reconnaissance drones recovered during the Vietnam War. An upgraded version of the system was displayed at the 2000 Zhuhai air show and is being offered for export. A PRC aviation periodical reported the CH-1 can carry either a daylight still, TV or infrared camera. It is likely not equipped with a data-link, which would allow remote control operation, nor is it capable of providing real-time payload feedback to the remote operator. China's armed forces also operate other UAVs, primarily for battlefield reconnaissance or electronic warfare.
Manned Aircraft. In addition to the Y-8 AEW and efforts to procure and produce an AWACS capability, China has several other aircraft that can perform ISR missions such as the Tu-154 multi-role special mission aircraft equipped for ELINT collection missions and possibly electronic warfare. The PLAAF reportedly also has several aircraft -- both fighters and bombers -- capable of performing an imagery reconnaissance function.
Over-the-Horizon Radar (OTHR). China may have as many as three OTH sky-wave radar systems that China aspires to use to target aircraft carriers. These systems could be used in an early warning capacity. China also may have deployed at least one surface-wave OTHR.
China may have developed passive acoustic sensors for use in coastal waters. China also may have at least one underwater acoustic range. This range could be used to track torpedoes during training exercises. Because of China's interest in ASW, development and deployment of additional underwater sensors is probable in the next 5-10 years and will expand through 2020. Some of these future systems may be installed as far offshore as the edge of the continental shelf. Passive sensors would provide only a few miles of coverage against quiet submarines, but could detect merchant shipping and noisy combatants at greater distances.
Currently, the PLA conducts joint battle and weapon management functions manually at the theater level. The theater-level commander determines which weapons will accomplish the task and communicates these decisions to subordinate weapon controllers. The weapon controllers provide feedback, enabling the theater-level commanders to determine the next course of action. China is developing a battle management system that will be used by the entire PLA for strategic, campaign, and tactical planning and operations.
China's on-going development of a common, joint C4ISR system recognizes the importance of accurate sensors. China also aims to improve the characteristics of its sensors in terms of all-weather capability, miniaturization, artificial intelligence, survivability, and integration with other sensors.
Over the next 10 years, China is projected to have several functioning AWACS-type platforms. The technical ability could exist for these aircraft to display a coordinated air picture, with the capability to command and control airborne assets. With the enhancement of an air refueling capability, this air capability could extend into the South China Sea and beyond. In the interim, China reportedly has leased several A-50 aircraft from Russia, with first delivery expected this year. China may be negotiating with the Belarusian firm Agat to produce C4I software and equipment capable of performing joint battle management. Analysis of brochures for Agat's PANORAMA C2 system suggests it is capable of performing joint battle management. Although a purchase has yet to be confirmed, acquisition of the PANORAMA C2 system would be one way China could make progress in developing a joint C4ISR architecture.
China has an extensive network of hardened, underground shelters and command and control facilities for both its military and civilian leadership. Fear of a possible war with the former Soviet Union in the 1960s and 1970s prompted Beijing to expend considerable resources constructing national-level command posts, civil defense facilities and associated communications. These facilities are intended to ensure survival of China's leadership and provide a refuge from which it can maintain control over the country's military forces.
China's national command and control (C2) facilities are supported by both civilian and military communications networks. The military communications network is separate from the civilian telecommunications network. It supports all levels of the military and civilian leadership. The military communications network provides the backbone support to China's national military command and data network. PLA national level C3 is carried over multiple transmission systems to include coaxial and fiber optic cable, satellite communications, microwave radio relay, and long-range high frequency (HF) radio. China's communications networks, both civil and military, would be capable of supporting a wide range of military operations.
China views information operations/information warfare (IO/IW) as a strategic weapon for use outside of traditional operational boundaries. China is particularly sensitive to the potential asymmetric applications IO/IW can have in any future conflict with a technologically superior adversary.
Both the Academy of Military Science and the National Defense University have published several books devoted, in part or completely, to this subject. These writings indicate a growing sophistication in the PLA's understanding of all aspects of IO. In addition to developing wartime applications for its robust information control and perception management capability, China is pursuing IO/IW development as part of its overall military modernization. Combining information warfare -- such as computer hacking -- with irregular special and guerilla operations, would allow China to mount destructive attacks within the enemy's own operations systems, while avoiding a major head-on confrontation.
The PLA has increased the amount and complexity of IO/IW components in several recent exercises. Efforts have focused on increasing the PLA's proficiency in defensive measures, most notably against the threat of computer viruses. This concern apparently is driving anti- viral and network security research and development within the PLA and military-supported academia. The research is facilitated by the dual-use nature of Information Technology (IT) and the growth in China's technology base. Increases in network defense likely will enhance China's understanding of virus propagation and behavior, creating a solid knowledge base not only for computer network defense (CND), but potentially also for computer network attack (CNA) through malicious software development.
In an effort to improve its skill base in the IT field, the PLA has been recruiting specialists via its reserve officer selection program. The program involves sponsoring students, particularly those in high technology fields, through college or offering to repay loans after graduation in return for a military service commitment. This program is intended to help provide China with a more technically skilled officer corps that would improve, among other things, the PLA's ability to design, comprehend, and execute a full-spectrum IO/IW campaign.
China has the capability to penetrate poorly protected U.S. computer systems and potentially could use CNA to attack specific U.S. civilian and military infrastructures. This anti-access strategy is centered on targeting operational centers of gravity, including C41 centers, airbases, and aircraft carrier battle groups located around the periphery of China.
In the near term, nationalistic hacking is likely to occur during
periods of tension or crises. Chinese hacking activities likely would
involve extensive web page defacements with themes
sympathetic to China. Although the extent of Chinese government
involvement would be difficult to ascertain, official statements
concerning the leveraging of China's growing presence on the Internet,
and the application of the principles of Peoples War
in net
warfare,
suggest the government will have a stronger role in future
nationalistic hacking.
China's electronic warfare (EW) efforts are focused on technology and design development, accomplished mainly through cooperation with Western companies, through reverse engineering efforts, and through the procurement of foreign systems. The inventory of Chinese EW equipment includes a combination of 1950s-1980s technologies, with only a few select military units receiving the most modern components. China's newer designs, offered for sale at air and trade shows, show significant improvements over older systems.
China is procuring state-of-the-art technology to improve its intercept, direction finding, and jamming capabilities. In addition to providing extended imagery reconnaissance and surveillance and electronic intelligence (ELINT) collection, Beijing's unmanned aerial vehicle programs probably will yield platforms for improved radio and radar jammers. Additionally, existing earth stations can be modified to interfere with satellite communications. The PLA also is developing an electronic countermeasures (ECM) doctrine and has performed structured training in an ECM environment.
Publicly, China opposes the militarization of space, and seeks to prevent or slow the development of anti-satellite (ASAT) systems and space-based missile defenses. Privately, however, China's leaders probably view ASATs -- and offensive counterspace systems, in general -- as well as space-based missile defenses as inevitabilities. In addition to passive counterspace measures -- such as denial and deception -- China is said to be acquiring a variety of foreign technologies, which could be used to develop an active ASAT capability.
China probably has a thorough knowledge of U.S. and foreign space
operations, based, in part, on access to open-source information on
U.S. space systems and space operations. Beijing already may have
acquired technical assistance that could be applied to the development
of laser radars used to track and image satellites and may be seeking
an advanced radar system with the capability to track satellites in
low earth orbit. It also may be developing jammers that could be used
against Global Positioning System (GPS) receivers. In addition, China
already may possess the capability to damage, under specific
conditions, optical sensors on satellites that are very vulnerable to
damage by lasers. Beijing also may have acquired high- energy laser
equipment and technical assistance, which probably could be used in
the development of ground-based ASAT weapons. Given China's current
level of interest in laser technology, Beijing probably could develop
a weapon that could destroy satellites in the future. Although
specific Chinese programs for laser ASAT have not been identified,
press articles indicate an interest in developing this capability and
Beijing may be working on appropriate technologies. For example, a
Hong Kong newspaper article in January 2001
reported that China had developed and tested an ASAT system described
as a parasitic microsatellite.
This claim is being
evaluated. Nonetheless, a number of countries, including China, are
developing and proliferating microsatellite (10- to 100-kg mass) and
nanosatellite (1- to 10-kg mass) technologies.
Since 1998, China and the United States have signed three intergovernmental agreements on launching services. Several U.S. satellite-manufacturing companies have signed contacts on commercial satellite launching services, involving a total of some 30 satellites.
Beijing is developing a new modular family/class of heavy-lift space launch vehicles (SLVs), which reportedly will use ecologically clean propellants. China's objective is a capability to launch 25 tons to low earth orbit and 14 tons to geosynchronous orbit by 2007. Beijing also has begun to develop a new small, solid-propellant SLV.
China continues to make progress with its manned space program. The first unmanned test launch occurred in November 1999. A second unmanned test flight occurred in January 2001. There is some concern that at least the recovery portion of the second mission experienced some difficulty, since Beijing has not released any photography of the recovery capsule (it did release pictures of the capsule used in the November 1999 mission shortly after recovery). While one of the strongest immediate motivations for this program appears to be political prestige, China's manned space efforts almost certainly will contribute to improved military space systems in the 2010-2020 time frame.
China may launch its first manned space mission by 2003 or 2004. It also has long-term plans to launch its own space station, and possibly a reusable space plane as well.
New ConceptWeapon Systems
China is pursuing research and development programs to introduce
so-called new concept
weapon systems into the PLA inventory. Key
weapon systems in this category include laser and radio frequency
weapons.
China is pursuing a robust research and development program for laser
weapons. The Chinese have openly stated that their scientists have
laid a firm technical foundation
in laser technology and are capable
of developing laser weapons. China reportedly is focusing its laser
weapon development on anti-personnel, counter-precision guided
munitions air defense, and ASAT roles.
China's research into laser weapon technologies already has resulted in the development and fielding of several systems. In 1995, China North Industries Corporation (NORINCO), a military trading company, introduced the ZM-87 laser weapon at defense exhibitions in Manila and Abu Dhabi. Since that time, Chinese writings indicate a continuing effort to develop additional laser systems. A second system was unveiled at the 50th Anniversary Military parade in 1999, when the Chinese displayed a probable laser-based ATGM countermeasure on its Type 90-II tanks. Additional Chinese ground combat systems include laser pointers, laser range finders, and laser target designators. These devices are routinely marketed at defense exhibitions. In the future, China can be expected to continue to develop and field military weapon and non-weapon laser systems. Using a combination of indigenous capabilities and foreign assistance, China could emerge as a leading producer and exporter of military lasers by 2020.
China reportedly has placed a priority on the development of radiofrequency (RF) weapons. PRC officials have indicated publicly that the PLA will need RF weapons that would defeat enemy electronics in the 21st century. Although the PLA most likely does not have an RF weapon at this time, it is believed to have a program to develop the high-power RF technologies that could form the basis for some types of RF weapons. In addition to indigenous research, China is working closely with foreign scientists and is seeking foreign technology associated with high-power RF generation. Chinese scientists have published on efforts to develop explosively driven RF weapons technology that potentially could be used in missile warheads or aircraft bombs, and are studying the effects of RF pulses on electronics and the propagation of RF energy through the atmosphere.
Within the next decade, China may be able to develop and field air defense RF weapons intended to defeat missiles or aircraft by targeting the electronics in guidance, altimeter, fire- control, communications, navigation or other critical subsystems. While the PRC has discussed the use of high-power RF technology for air defense, there is little evidence that a program to produce an RF weapon for this mission has been initiated. Nevertheless, China may consider working with Russia to support research and development on a high-powered microwave system (HPM), referred to as Ranets-E, which would target the electronics onboard precision-guided weapons. If the Russians succeed in developing the system -- and China purchases it -- the PLA could have a number of these systems available before 2020.
China is known to be conducting research on explosively driven RF weapons; however, there are questions regarding the technological feasibility and military utility of RF warheads. Even if China could produce significant amounts of RF energy by means of an explosive driver, it is still not clear whether it is possible to build an RF warhead that will negate electronics at a significantly greater range than a conventional warhead of the same size would cause blast/fragmentation damage. China is unlikely to possess effective RF warheads until after the year 2010 even if such weapons do prove to be feasible.
Finally, China may consider RF weapons with an ASAT capability. An ASAT mission is undoubtedly one of the most stressing RF weapon applications. For a ground-based system beaming RF energy into space, HPM sources operating at very high power levels as well as large transmitting antennas having high gain would be required. For an RF weapon delivered via a direct-ascent missile or deployed as an orbital system, there are severe constraints on system size and mass and the question of competitiveness with other ASAT systems that also must approach the target. Even if the Chinese commit resources to a major ASAT RF development program, they likely will be unable to deploy such a weapon for at least fifteen years.
China reportedly embarked on an extensive national effort to understand and develop low observable (LO) technology in the 1980s. Indigenous efforts likely have grown in maturity and understanding so as to allow analysis of foreign capabilities and attempt to duplicate past research. Chinese scientists are said to have an excellent theoretical understanding of LO technology, but apparently lack practical experience that comes with decades of applied research. China appears to have begun multiple programs to apply basic signature reduction technologies to its fighter aircraft programs and reportedly is developing new fighter aircraft that will incorporate LO technology.
The PRC's efforts to develop, acquire and gain access to advanced technologies that would enhance military capabilities are multi-faceted and include the use of traditional military actors, commercial entities and individuals involved in basic scientific research. The production of advanced weapon systems requires not only the transfer or development of the technology, but also the transfer or development of associated knowledge, including training, education, technical skills and manufacturing know-how.
In 1979, China began modernizing its weapons facilities through a policy emphasizing production of both military and civilian goods throughout its defense industrial base. This policy shift reflects China's aspiration to attain long-term self-sufficiency through the acquisition of key foreign dual-use technologies and knowledge. Once such technology is obtained, defense-affiliated institutes and factories may apply them to the design and production of commercial and/or military end-items. Moreover, design and production of commercial goods by the defense industrial base can generate revenue and foreign exchange to finance the acquisition of advanced technology. Since 1979, thousands of PRC business entities have been established in the United States. The bulk of the business conducted by these entities is probably legitimate, but an undetermined number may target dual-use commodities and controlled technologies restricted from sale to the PRC.
Recently, two authoritative PRC journals recommended an increase in
the use of overseas ethnic-Chinese scientists to transfer foreign
technology. The journals endorsed building databases of such overseas
scientists, tasking them with research of interest to Beijing, and
maintaining secrecy through the use of intermediaries and third
countries. Recruitment through intermediaries was recommended to avoid
complications due to policies and sensitivities of the targeted
nation. One journal suggested private sector intermediary
organizations and international talent exchange associations be used
for recruiting. The
journals also suggested setting up an Overseas Chinese Experts Data
Center
operated by the Ministry of Science, fed by multiple sources,
and organized by region, country, and profession. This data would be
collected through privately owned service organizations supported by
the State, over Internet websites hosted in China and the target
country, by the private sector's foreign offices, and by science
attaches in PRC embassies and consulates abroad.
Using academic exchange as a medium to train scientists and to develop ties between scientists, China appears to be building an informal S&T network around the world that could not only contribute to basic research but also to the development of commercial and military technologies. The close relationships between the personnel and organizations involved often makes it difficult to separate the research, funding and cooperation triangle among Chinese universities, government institutes and businesses.
In 1991, the China Defense Science and Technology Information Center
(CDSTIC) -- then the information arm for the Commission on Science,
Technology and Industry for National Defense -- published a science and
technology (S&T) collection manual titled Sources and Techniques of
Obtaining National Defense Science and Technology Intelligence.
The
manual suggested that 80% of China's defense S&T needs are met through
open and gray source (purchase/subscription) materials. This manual
provided detailed information on foreign open sources on defense
technology and noted that there are roughly 4,000 individual
intelligence organizations operating in China (as of 1991). Many of
these organizations are associated with state-owned enterprises,
research institutes and academies affiliated with China's defense
industrial base.
The collection of technical information probably continues to be orchestrated by CDSTIC -- now under the PLA General Equipment Department (GED). The GED reportedly oversees a complex web of factories, institutes, and academies that are subordinate to China's nuclear, aeronautics, electronics, ordnance, shipbuilding, and astronautics industries. Each of these institutions has an import/export corporation to facilitate the import of technology and knowledge.
National Defense Science, Technology and Industry. China's defense industrial base -- also known as National Defense Science, Technology and Industry (NDST&I) -- is a well- organized and redundant structure, consisting of the factories, institutes, and academies subordinate to the organizations that represent the nuclear, aeronautics, electronics, ordnance, shipbuilding, and astronautics industries.
Prior to the reforms of 1998, five corporations and one ministry represented China's defense industrial base:
-- Ministry of Electronics Industry -- China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC) -- Aviation Industries of China (AVIC) -- China North Industries Corporation (CNIC) -- China State Shipbuilding Corporation (CSSC) -- China Aerospace Corporation (CASC)
In 1998, each of the five corporations split into two competing corporations in the shipbuilding, aviation, nuclear, ordnance and missile/aerospace arenas. The Ministry of Electronics Industry merged with the Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications to become the Ministry of Information Technology and Telecom Industry. The current organization of China's defense industrial base is:
-- Ministry of Information Technology and Telecom Industry (MTTI) -- China State Shipbuilding Corporation (CSSC) -- China State Shipbuilding Industry Corporation (CSIC) -- China Aviation Industry Corporation I (AVIC I) -- China Aviation Industry Corporation II (AVIC II) -- China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC) -- China National Engineering Construction Corporation (CNEC) -- China North Industries Group Corporation (CNIGC) -- China South Industries Group Corporation (CSIGC) -- China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation (CASIC) -- China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation (CASC)
Each of these corporations and MTTI have subordinate import/export corporations. These sub-corporations facilitate the import of technology and the export of commercial and military goods for profit. All of these import/export corporations have at least one branch office operating in the United States.
The import/export corporations are: -- China Nuclear Energy Industry Corporation -- China Aero-Technology Import/Export Corporation -- China North Industries Corporation -- China National Electronics Import/Export Corporation -- China Shipbuilding Trading Corporation -- China Great Wall Industries Corporation -- China Precision Machinery Import/Export Corporation
Chinese Academy of Sciences. The Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), directly subordinate to the State Council, is China's highest academic institution for comprehensive research in the natural and applied sciences. Research is conducted in the basic sciences, such as mathematics, physics, chemistry, astronomy, and geology, as well as in newer scientific fields, such as systems engineering, remote sensing, computers, automation, robotics, semiconductors and lasers. CAS has branches with subordinate institutes in Shanghai, Nanjing, Hefei, Guangzhou, Wuhan, Changchun, Shenyang, Chengdu, Kunming, Xian, Lanzhou, and Xinjian -- cities also strongly associated with China's defense industrial base. As a consequence, these organizations often work closely with the military in applied research, with products funded or developed for use by the military.
In March 2002, Chinese finance minister Xiang Huaicheng announced that China is increasing military spending in 2002 by 17.6 percent, or $3 billion, bringing the publicly reported total to $20 billion. The publicly disclosed figures do not include major spending for weapons research and for the purchase of foreign weapons like two Russian-built destroyers China bought last year. Actual military spending, including the large but difficult-to-assess off- budget financing portion, could total $65 billion, making China the second largest defense spender in the world after the United States and the largest defense spender in Asia.
Additional double-digit defense budget growth is likely, at least through the 10th Five-Year Plan (2001-05). These increases will be used to offset losses from divested PLA commercial enterprises, underwrite escalating personnel costs, and fund PLA modernization. Beijing's 2000 White Paper on National Defense and its predecessor editions detail the official PLA budget, but only by poorly defined resource categories and not by service or mission. The release of the white papers may be an attempt by China to appear to be increasing its military transparency to the West while in reality keeping much secret.
Although Xiang cited modernization as one reason for the budget increase, most defense modernization spending occurs outside the PLA budget. Imported weapon systems are financed by separate hard-currency allocations from the State Council and are not charged against the PLA budget. The PLA pays for domestically produced Chinese equipment, which makes up about half of the modernization effort, but it pays only the incremental cost of manufacturing one system and none of the substantial R&D or startup costs. Such costs appear in the budget of the state-owned industry that produces the equipment, including substantial hard-currency costs for foreign technology and assistance.
The PLA receives funding from numerous, extra-budgetary sources. These sources include special allocations for procurement, at least partially derived from arms sales profits; sales of military unit services (e.g., construction) and products (e.g., farm produce) and other traditional PLA self-sufficiency activities; earnings from PLA enterprises remaining after divestment, which still produce civilian services and products; and, defense-related allocations in other ministries (e.g., state science and technology budgets and agencies at the provincial and local levels). In addition, China's proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD)- associated technology and conventional munitions may help subsidize certain force modernization programs. Tracking these sources complicates the process of identifying and assessing defense budgetary trends.
Projecting Chinese defense spending over a long period of time is problematic, especially given that even total defense spending is not adequately defined or reported. However, anticipated economic growth would define somewhat the boundaries of future defense expenditures. Using this method, annual defense spending could increase in real terms over threefold to fourfold between now and 2020.
China's force modernization program is heavily reliant upon assistance from Russia and other states of the former Soviet Union (FSU). China hopes to fill short-term gaps in capabilities by significantly expanding its procurement of Russian weapon systems and technical assisstance over the next several years. Beijing's purchase of Russian weapon systems includes advanced fighters, such as the Su-30MKK, modern air defense systems such as the SA-10/20 and SA-15 SAMs, KILO-class submarines, and SOVREMENNYY-class destroyers. Sales of these systems are, or likely will be, accompanied by the transfer of precision guided air-to-surface munitions, active, BVR air-to-air missiles, and sophisticated anti-ship cruise missiles. Russia's assistance to China's space program is extensive. Russian arms sales and technical assistance to China accelerate Beijing's force modernization, and likely will have a significant impact on its ability to use military force.
Chinese President Jiang Zemin and Russian President
Vladimir Putin reviewing Chinese Navy honor guard
[twice the size]
China maintains defense and security cooperation relationships with some, but not all, of the states from the FSU. Beijing's primary objectives in establishing and fostering ties with FSU nations are to develop political and economic influence and gain access to the advanced military technologies and weapon systems necessary to pursue military modernization. With the exceptions of Russia and Ukraine, most countries of the FSU do not have the capability to manufacture and sell complete, fully integrated weapon systems. Consequently, FSU governments tend to sell the parts or components of a larger system that were originally manufactured in their part of the FSU and stand now as no-cost inventory. Moreover, because these nations often do not have a valid requirement for these systems or sub-systems, they are viewed as potential sources of export revenue.
Russia. China and Russia maintain a robust defense and security relationship, including bilateral policy consultations and professional military exchanges. The sale of arms and military technology to China is a major component of Russia's foreign and security policy. Military-technical cooperation with Beijing acts as a source of revenue to fill state coffers, support defense industries and enrich influential Russian individuals and groups. It also provides Moscow with a vehicle to bolster relations with an emerging power and provides a primary source of funding for continued Russian military research and development (R&D) efforts.
Beijing reportedly purchased approximately $1.0 billion worth of Russian weaponry a year on average during the 1990s, accounting for about one-quarter of total Russian arms sales. Since 1999, however, China's purchases from Russia have averaged approximately twice that amount annually. These sales have increased in the late-1990s. Russian leaders are not expected to reduce significantly their sales effort in China even under pressure. Similarly, improved U.S.-Russian relations after the September 11 terrorist attacks are unlikely to cause Moscow to scale down arms transfers to Beijing.
Arms and technology sales also fortify Russia's relationship with China. Access to Russian weaponry gives Beijing a strong stake in cooperation with Moscow. Russian leaders probably view China's commitment to good relations as particularly important given the length of their common border, demographic trends in Russia's eastern regions, Beijing's growing power, and mutual concern over certain U.S. policies. Nevertheless, based on persistent concerns over the direction of China's foreign and security policies, Russia's leadership has placed some limits on the types and sophistication of weapons transferred to China.
Ukraine. Kiev is a moderate supplier in the world arms market and has active military cooperation agreements with dozens of nations, including China; however, Kiev's arms sales to China comprise only a very small percentage of its total world sales. Since Ukraine has no political sanctions against China, there are no diplomatic barriers to prevent growth in either military cooperation agreements with China or arms sales. Ukraine likely would resist international pressure to limit cooperation with China, or it would declare its cooperation but move some of its sales into the gray market to obscure direct governmental links.
Belarus. The Belarusian arms trade is closely tied to that of Russia. Belarus uses arms sales to generate hard currency and to keep its struggling arms industry afloat. China represents a lucrative target for arms sales, and since there are no internationally recognized sanctions against China, Minsk does not perceive a need to limit its sales or military cooperation with Beijing. While Belarus is a signatory to major international agreements regarding the proliferation of WMD, it does not believe it should be subject to any constraints on the transfer of conventional technologies and systems.
Uzbekistan. Uzbekistan recently joined the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), in which China is a leading member. Despite some concerns over Beijing's intentions in Central Asia, its bilateral military cooperation with Beijing has increased in recent years, primarily through professional military exchanges and military assistance. Available evidence indicates that arms-related sales and technology transfers from Uzbekistan to China are limited.
Kazakhstan. Kazakhstan apparently pursues defense and security contacts with Beijing primarily as a mechanism to promote economic cooperation and address shared regional security issues such as Islamic extremism, border delimitation, and demilitarization. Available information does not support a significant Kazakh-Chinese military arms relationship. Any growth in bilateral military cooperation, including arms sales or professional military exchanges, likely would reflect a balance of Kazakhstan's interests to support economic and security cooperation with the Russian-led Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) while pursuing closer economic ties and continuing dialogue through the SCO framework with China.
Kyrgyzstan. Although Kyrgyz military contacts with China have increased in recent years, there is no information suggestive of significant Kyrgyz arms transfers to China. Kyrgyzstan has agreed to headquarter the SCO Counter-Terrorism Center in Bishkek, indicating that closer defense and security relations with Beijing likely will include cooperative measures to combat Islamic extremism.
Tajikistan. Like Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan is a member of the CIS Collective Security Pact and the SCO. While Tajikistan faces practical political restraints on military cooperation with China, it reportedly has begun a program of military-to-military exchanges with Beijing. However, there is no evidence of arms or technology transfers from Tajikistan to China.
Others. The remaining FSU states -- Armenia, Azerbaijan, Estonia, Georgia, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, and Turkmenistan -- are not believed to have a significant defense, security, or military-technical component to their bilateral relations with China.
All fifteen FSU states have current or pending laws, decrees, or regulations controlling the transfer of dual-use or conventional weapon technologies and commodities. However, these measures act more to control than prohibit the transfer of military hardware, expertise or technology to the PRC.
In general, export control laws within the FSU serve an important purpose by providing a domestic legal framework that may one day enable FSU nations to satisfy fully international commitments. While the FSU has made some progress in developing export controls, many FSU nations still lack the capability to control effectively the transfer of commodities and technologies relevant to military hardware including WMD.
Both Russia and Ukraine have extensive export control
regulations. Russia has made multiple additions to its export laws in
recent years. After almost three years of U.S. technical assistance,
on July 18, 1999, former Russian President Boris Yeltsin signed
legislation controlling the transfer of goods, technologies, and raw
materials related to weapons of mass destruction, their delivery
systems, and other types of weapons and military hardware.
Conventional weapon exports are regulated by the Law on
Military-Technical Cooperation of the Russian Federation with Foreign
States,
enacted on July 9, 1998.
Russian law has extensive provisions for export licensing of
nuclear-related and dual-use technologies. In 1998, Russian
legislators also added a catch-all clause
to the existing body of
export control legislation to prevent exporters from transferring
weapons-related technologies to sensitive end-users. This clause
empowers authorities to hold an export that is under suspicion while
they investigate the conditions for its ultimate end-use, even if the
export has no other legal restriction. In addition, Russian exporters
are required to obtain preliminary license approval from a group of
government experts authorized to take into account the end-user and
the technology to be exported. Russian licenses issued for weapons-
related goods and technologies also are issued for one-time use only,
requiring parties to reapply each time the transfer of sensitive
technologies would occur.
In addition, Russian export control authorities maintain provisions to issue administrative sanctions on exporters who violate control regulations. Under this type of administrative penalty, export authorities could suspend export operations, annual export licenses, or impose fines if they find violations of Russian law. Russia's Criminal Code articles 78.1 and 189 provide criminal penalties for those violating WMD export control regulations, including up to five years of imprisonment with seizure of property, or a fine of up to five monthly wages for illegal exports of raw materials, equipment, technologies, scientific and technical information, and services that can be used in developing armaments and military hardware.
Ukraine does not have active comprehensive export control
legislation. Such legislation is, however, awaiting parliamentary
approval. In the meantime, Kiev's export control regime consists of a
variety of presidential decrees and cabinet resolutions. In February
1998, Ukraine issued Presidential Decree No. 117/98
determining
specific procedures for state control over the international transfer
of arms, military materiel, raw materials, hardware, and technologies
that can be used for weapons development.
Ukraine's licensing process is primarily limited to nuclear, chemical, missile, and conventional arms. It also covers 36 kinds of industrial activity mainly related to nuclear, chemical, missile, and conventional arms trade. The process requires a license and must be submitted complete with an international import certificate, an end-user certificate, a copy of the contract, and specifications of the trade.
The Ukrainian penal code also has specific penalties for WMD-related export control violations. Section 228.6 of the Penal Code states that the violation of established procedures for export of missile, nuclear, and chemical armament goods and technologies--including special military equipment, services related to creation of arms, and any related spare parts and ammunition--is punishable by up to eight years' imprisonment and confiscation of property.
Kazakhstan is an example of an FSU nation with moderate export control
regulations. In June 1997, Kazakhstan enacted Presidential Decree
#1037,
which covers import and export licensing for its export
control system. An anomaly in the Kazakh system is that many specifics
are not written into law, but rather are regulated through a Cabinet
of Ministers of Energy, Industry, Trade, Defense, Finance, Atomic
Energy, and Science.
Kazakhstan has an extensive criminal code for dealing with violations of export control law, with penalties, including confiscation of goods, fines, and possible criminal liability, for the illegal export of WMD-related arms and technologies.
Azerbaijan is representative of FSU nations with limited export
control laws. In June 1997, Azerbaijan issued Rules Regulating
Foreign Trade in the Azerbaijan Republic,
requiring explicit
permission from the Cabinet of Ministers to export specified military
related goods and technology, including spare parts, nuclear materials
technology and equipment, special non-nuclear materials, narcotics,
psychotropic substances, chemical poisons, scientific- technical
information and certain kinds of technology, materials, and equipment
that could be used in the creation of military technology or arms.
Azerbaijan does not have a well-defined licensing system, and there are no particular limitations regarding company-specific export of WMD-related or sensitive goods. Moreover, Azerbaijan does not appear to have a criminal code addressing export control violations.
There are no unclassified figures that accurately depict the extent of arms sales and technology transfers from FSU states to China since 1990. Depending upon the source, figures for signed arms agreements range from $10 billion to $20 billion, with actual deliveries to date ranging from $7 billion to $10 billion. Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus appear to be China's chief sources of weapons and materiel, reportedly providing in excess of 90 percent of all PRC arms imports since 1990. Among FSU nations, Russia clearly is China's largest arms supplier, accounting for over 90 percent of all FSU arms sold to China over the last decade.
Russia. The Sino-Russian military trade relationship has been extensive with China purchasing advanced Russian weapon systems for its military forces, weapon components for its indigenous production programs, and military technology for its weapon development programs. Beijing's purchase of advanced Russian weapon systems available for export has included Su-27 and Su-30 fighter aircraft, A-50 AWACS-type aircraft, SA-10 and SA-15 SAMs, KILO Class submarines, SOVREMENNYY class destroyers, and associated weapon systems. China also relies on key Russian components for several of its weapon production programs and, in some cases, has purchased the production rights to Russian weapon systems. For example, China assembles Su-27 fighters from Russian kits and eventually is expected to fabricate major components for the aircraft. In addition to weapon components, Russian military technology and technical assistance has played an important role in many of China's key weapons development programs.
Ukraine. While Ukraine ranks as the second largest FSU arms supplier to China, signed arms contracts with Beijing total approximately $250 million, accounting for less than 2 percent of China's arms purchases during this period. Ukraine's arms sales to China reportedly have consisted primarily of weapon system components and equipment to support China's aircraft and missile programs. For example, Ukraine is said to have sold aircraft engines for use on China's K-8 jet trainer.
Belarus. Belarus is not a major PRC arms supplier. Since the break up of the Soviet Union, Minsk reportedly has signed contracts with Beijing valued at just over $200 million. Most of Minsk's arms contracts with Beijing reportedly have focused on providing equipment, technical assistance and technology that have supported China's development of various missile systems.
Uzbekistan. Uzbekistan is a minor Chinese arms supplier. Since 1990, Tashkent has signed arms agreements with Beijing valued at approximately $100 million, accounting for less than one percent of China's arms agreements, reportedly involving primarily the sale of the IL- 76/CANDID transport aircraft.
From 1999-2001, Beijing conducted major weapons negotiations with Moscow, suggesting that China will continue to rely on Russia as its primary source of modern military weapons systems. China also will continue to look to Russia and the other FSU states as potential suppliers for modern electronics, communications, and other technologies for incorporation into existing or new weapon systems under development in China.
China pursues a two-track weapon acquisition strategy to satisfy both long- and short-term military requirements. Russia figures prominently in both tracks. In the first track, China's preference is to develop and produce a weapon system domestically to satisfy long-term military requirements. To accompl
![[twice the size]](/images/2002/fig-000.jpg){kind=link}
![[twice the size]](/images/2002/fig-001.jpg){kind=link}
![[twice the size]](/images/2002/fig-002.jpg){kind=link}
![[twice the size]](/images/2002/fig-003.jpg){kind=link}
![[twice the size]](/images/2002/fig-004.jpg){kind=link}
![[twice the size]](/images/2002/fig-005.jpg){kind=link}
![[twice the size]](/images/2002/fig-006.jpg){kind=link}