"The
Modernization of China's Military: Implications for American Policy"
A
discussion with Dr. David Shambaugh February 12, 2003
The
Nixon Center, Washington, DC
The
Nixon Center recently hosted a luncheon event featuring Dr. David Shambaugh and the views expressed within his new book, Modernizing
China's Military: Progress, Problems and Prospects. Dr. Shambaugh
explained that while the Chinese military is twenty years behind the
state-of-the-art, Chinese missile technology is extremely advanced and the
Chinese military is surprisingly transparent.
Dr. Shambaugh is the Director of The China Policy Program of the Elliott
School of International Affairs at The George Washington University, a
Non-Resident Senior Fellow in the Foreign Policy Studies Program at The
Brookings Institution and is a Fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center
for Scholars. Dr. Shambaugh’s discussion at The Nixon Center focused on
subject matter covered in his most recent book, Admiral Eric McVadon (ret.)
offered his remarks following Dr. Shambaugh's presentation and Dr. David M.
Lampton, Director of China Studies at The Nixon Center, moderated the event.
Dr.
Shambaugh argued that the world is now witnessing a number of changes in the
international systems that are creating a new world order.
A critical aspect of this new world order is the rise of Chinese power
and within this issue exists the importance of the rise of Chinese military
power. Dr. Shambaugh hopes that his
new book will discredit the myth that the Peoples’ Liberation Army (PLA) is
not a transparent organization. He believes that the PLA, which includes all
branches of the Chinese military, is quite transparent, however to extract the
necessary information requires translating Chinese language documents.
The
PLA
Dr.
Shambaugh's book addresses the rapid, complex changes occurring in the PLA, but
does not attempt to ask simple, "bottom line" questions, such as
"Is the Chinese military a threat or not?" Instead, Dr. Shambaugh
offers his analysis of the PLA's progress, problems and prospects, which he said
could assist with constructing such bottom line conclusions.
The
PLA is an institution that has been undergoing thorough, rapid and comprehensive
change. Dr. Shambaugh contends that
the PLA has experienced more change in the past five years than it had in the
previous twenty-five years. Despite
all the progress of recent years, he presented his opinion that the PLA is beset
with a number of problems that are proving to be serious impediments to military
modernization. These problems
include bureaucratic, cultural, technical, and human factors.
Dr. Shambaugh then assessed that, as a generalization, the PLA today
remains twenty years or more behind the international "state of the
art" across the board.
Although
the PLA is making progress, Dr. Shambaugh pointed that the “state of the
art” China is pursuing is not stagnant and continues to improve.
He believes that these technological advances are moving faster than
China’s progress, causing the technical gap to actually widen. However, he
contends that, in certain areas, China’s weapon capabilities will close the
gap. For example, in the next one
to two years China will deploy ground-launched land attack cruise missiles that
will completely change the dynamics across the Taiwan Strait.
Regarding Taiwan, he did not perceive that the PLA needs to or wants to
occupy the island. China's amphibious landing capabilities, essential to any
takeover plan, remain the PLA’s weakest link.
In
addition, Dr. Shambaugh believes that China's recent modernization should not be
confused with professionalization. While the PLA may be making progress with
hardware, it lacks much of the necessary advances in software, such as
personnel, logistics, communications, force structure and doctrine.
The process of acquiring such software is an incremental one that must
progress in tandem with social and economic development.
Learning from the mistakes of the former USSR, China has not placed a
disproportionate amount of its resources into military modernization.
After
presenting all the ways that the Chinese military has modernized, Dr. Shambaugh
asked the question, “What is driving this overhaul?” The first driving force behind the overhaul is that China, as
a modern nation and major power, desires to have a modern military.
The second factor is the Taiwan issue.
The third driver of this modernization is that China is proceeding from
an integrated and well-conceived plan for modernization and professionalization.
The template being used for this progress is almost entirely externally derived. It is the product of a thorough and intensive study of
contemporary international warfare using foreign militaries as models, including
the United States, Russia, Australia, Japan, South Korea and other NATO nations.
Implications
for the United States
The
final point that Dr. Shambaugh discussed dealt with the implications China’s
military modernization will have on both the global landscape and specifically
for the United States. The
modernization of the PLA will have to become a fact of life for China’s
neighbors and the United States. China
is becoming an increasingly capable military force that over time will be able
to project its power around its maritime and land periphery.
As
for specific implications for the United States, Shambaugh contests the idea
that China does not threaten American strategic interests in East Asia or the
United States directly. China’s
military modernization is only one facet of its overall modernization.
The United States is deeply engaged in this overall modernization, but
should remain unengaged in China’s military modernization. For example, he
does not support exchanges in specific areas, such as logistics and doctrines,
because such programs unnecessarily advance Chinese power projection, which is
the line that he does not think the US should cross.
Dr. Shambaugh also stated that he is an advocate of maintaining the
military sanctions that exist on the PLA indefinitely, both in terms of weaponry
and defense technology. He feels
that it does not behoove the United States to improve China’s power projection
capability or to sell its equipment or technology that would accelerate its
modernization, although it does behoove the United States to have a strong, but
carefully limited, exchange program with the Chinese military.
Two
types of these contacts that Dr. Shambaugh supports are high-level contacts and
confidence-building measures, such as ship visits and transparency briefings.
However, the third category of exchange programs, functional exchanges,
is not as simple. For example, some
of these exchanges include Chinese officers attending American military
academies where they get to live with and study with their American
counterparts. Dr. Shambaugh would endorse this contact based on the
argument it reduces the threat of misperception.
As
a conclusion, Dr. Shambaugh stated that although China’s military
modernization is not a danger or threat to the United States or its interests,
the United States must understand it, adapt to it, avoid facilitating it and
build the best possible relationship with China to buffer it.
