Is China Really That
Dangerous?
May 25, 2016
Doug Bandow
Nationalinterest.org
The United States dominates the globe
militarily. Washington possesses the most powerful armed forces, accounts for
roughly 40 percent of the globe’s military outlays, and is allied with every
major industrialized state save China and Russia.
Yet the
bipartisan hawks who dominate U.S. foreign policy see threats at every turn.
For some, the People’s Republic of China is replacing the Soviet Union as
America’s chief adversary. They view another military buildup as the only
answer.
The PRC’s rise is reshaping the globe.
Today, the PRC ranks second only to the United States economically. Increased
financial resources have enabled Beijing to take on a much greater
international role.
Of greatest
concern in Washington is China’s military buildup. Indeed, a novel reportedly
making the rounds at the Pentagon is Ghost Fleet, which posits a Chinese attack on
Hawaii.
The Department
of Defense publishes an annual review of China’s military. Thelatest
report warns that the
PRC “continued to improve key capabilities,” including ballistic and cruise
missiles, aircraft and air defense, information capabilities, submarines, and
amphibious and airborne assault units. The Chinese military “is also focusing
on counterspace, offensive cyber operations, and electronic warfare.” Further,
Beijing “continued to modernize and to restructure its ground forces to create
a fully modern army.”
This program
may sound menacing, but Beijing’s ambitions are bounded. DOD observes that
China’s leaders “portray a strong military as critical to advancing Chinese
interests, preventing other countries from taking steps that would damage those
interests, and ensuring that China can defend itself and its sovereignty
claims.” Which is precisely what U.S. policymakers do.
In the short
term, Beijing’s principal objective is to advance its territorial claims in the
Asia-Pacific without provoking conflict. In the longer term the objective, says
DOD, is “to deter or defeat adversary power projection and counter
third-party—including U.S.—intervention during a crisis or conflict.” That is,
deterrence.
Most important
is planning for contingencies in the Taiwan Strait, East and South China Sea,
and Korean peninsula. They all concern Beijing far more than America, and
involve other, potentially well-armed states, including Japan, South Korea and
the Southeast Asian nations, which are able to advance their own interests.
China also is
developing a capability for such missions as “sea lane security, counterpiracy,
peacekeeping, and humanitarian assistance/disaster relief.” These tasks
actually mirror U.S. interests. Washington officials might feel uncomfortable
sharing leadership with the PRC, but that cannot justify a military response.
Most
important, even the Pentagon does not believe Beijing is planning an aggressive
war. America enjoys a vast military lead, possessing a significantly larger
nuclear force, ten carrier groups compared to China’s single carrier and much more. With
Washington spending roughly $600 billion annually on the military, compared to
an estimated $180 billion by Beijing, China is not overtaking America.
Moreover, the PRC’s economic
predominance is not guaranteed. China’s challenges are huge: white elephant
investments, a shrinking labor force, inefficient state enterprises, ubiquitous
bank bad debts, pervasive corruption and regional disparities. Because of Beijing’s
one-child policy, the country may grow old before it grows rich. China’s
military modernization program also faces serious challenges, including a
slowing economy and pervasive corruption that afflicts the People’s Liberation
Army.
Even a more
powerful PRC would not easily threaten the United States. Projecting force
across oceans and continents is extraordinarily expensive. Deterring use of
such force is relatively cheap. America is uniquely secure, enjoying relative
geographic isolation—in contrast to China, which is surrounded by nations with
which it has been at war over the last century: Russia, Japan, Korea, India and
Vietnam.
In fact, only
Washington’s attempt to dominate China along
the latter’s border(imagine the Chinese navy patrolling America’s
East Coast) might trigger war.
The United
States understandably favors its friends in their disputes with the PRC.
However, they should be responsible for defending their own interests. None of
the ongoing territorial controversies is worth conflict with nuclear-armed
China.
Unfortunately,
deterrence often fails. If Beijing ignores U.S. threats, Washington could find
itself in a real war with a real power. Are Americans prepared to sacrifice Los
Angeles or San Francisco for Tokyo or Taipei? Doing so would be madness.
Despite the
tendency to treat the PRC as the next superpower, Chinese officials are aware
of their limitations, tempering any danger to America. Concludes DOD: “China
continues to regard stable relations with the United States and China’s
neighbors as key to its development.”
The United
States should be watchful and wary of China’s rise. But the best way for the
United States to prepare for the future is to husband its economic strength and
respond militarily only if a serious threat develops. Otherwise, Washington
should seek to accommodate, rather than combat such an important rising power.
Doug Bandow is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute and a former
Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan. He is a Foreign Policy Fellow and
Scholar with Defense Priorities.
