Home World Policy Institute World Policy Journal Research Projects Media Guide
Calendar of Events Contact Links Discussion

WPJ - Home

 

Fall '05

Summer '05

Spring '05

Winter '04/'05

Fall '04

Summer '04

Spring '04

Winter '03/04

Fall '03

Summer '03

Past Issues

About the Journal

Reader Services

Writer's Guidelines

Advertising &
Distribution

 
Journal Subscription

 

Volume XXII,  No 3, Fall 2005
 

WORLD POLICY JOURNAL

The Pentagon Plays Its China Card
James H. Nolt*

The "war on terrorism" has raised America's concerns about defense, but not necessarily in ways that are most useful for Pentagon planners. Many of the high-tech weapons and forces designed to fight modern militaries are of limited utility against suicide terrorists and roadside bombs. So when the Bush administration and Pentagon planners wish to make a case for funding the most advanced (and expensive) weapons systems, especially for the navy and the air force, they focus on China as a potential adversary.
The Pentagon, after much delay for rewriting, finally released its annual report to Congress on China's military power in mid-July. However, in failing to compare systematically China's capabilities with those of the United States and Taiwan, the document makes an exaggerated case for a Chinese military threat. It is true that China has been modernizing its military, and China's rapid economic growth has fed a concomitant increase in its defense spending. Yet the constituent parts of the Pentagon document dissolve on closer analysis.
China's military, especially its navy and air force, remain so feeble compared to those of the United States and its allies that the Pentagon's case can only be made by eschewing any comparisons with U.S. forces. Such was not the case with the Pentagon's reports on Soviet military power, issued annually for some years during the latter part of the Cold War, which were full of useful graphs and tables comparing U.S. and Soviet forces. Even though those assessments typically exaggerated Soviet capabilities, defense analysts at least recognized the need for comparison. The Pentagon's China report, in contrast, offers little more than simple numerical comparisons of Chinese and Taiwanese forces and is largely devoid of analysis.
Lacking comparative perspective, the report nonetheless tries to imagine ways in which Chinese military power might be used against Taiwan or the United States, but with little regard for possible counteraction. Like the sound of one hand clapping, the scenarios presented in the report seem to presume that China could attack with impunity against passive targets. Deterrence is neglected.

*James H. Nolt is a senior fellow at the World Policy Institute. He is the author of a number of articles on the Chinese military and the China-Taiwan military balance.

[Go to interactive discussion forum]

You will need the Adobe Acrobat Reader installed on your computer to access WPJ's full text PDF articles.

back

 
Journal Subscription
The New SchoolThe New School Divisions
Milano The New School for Management and Urban Policy The New School for General Studies The New School for Social Research Milano The New School for Management and Urban Policy Parsons The New School for Design Eugene Lang College The New School for Liberal Arts Mannes College The New School for Music The New School for Drama The New School for Jazz and Contemporary Music Mannes College The New School for Music