China's DWP 2008

I was reading a Foreign Policy analysis of the Chinese Defence White Paper and was rather skeptic. Therefore i decided to scrutinise it myself.
http://shadow.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/01/22/you_were_at_the_inauguration_china_was_planning_to_fight_america

In essence, "China's national defense policy for the new stage in the new century basically includes: upholding national security and unity, and ensuring the interests of national development; achieving the all-round, coordinated and sustainable development of China's national defense and armed forces; enhancing the performance of the armed forces with informationization as the major measuring criterion (took a tip or two from georgia); implementing the military strategy of active defense; pursuing a self-defensive nuclear strategy; and FOSTERING a security environment conducive to China's peaceful development."

Nevertheless, I have to say that I concur with the writer Dan Twining that the White Paper's primary audience is the USA. They aren't very subtle of course. Look at this:

"World peace and development are faced with multiple difficulties and challenges. Struggles for strategic resources, strategic locations and strategic dominance have intensified. Meanwhile, hegemonism and power politics still exist, regional turmoil keeps spilling over, hot-spot issues are increasing, and local conflicts and wars keep emerging. The impact of the financial crisis triggered by the U.S. subprime mortgage crisis is snowballing. In the aspect of world economic development, issues such as energy and food are becoming more serious, highlighting deep-seated contradictions. Economic risks are manifesting a more interconnected, systematic and global nature. Issues such as terrorism, environmental disasters, climate change, serious epidemics, transnational crime and pirates are becoming increasingly prominent."

It's a summary which I daresay some GP kids can't even do themselves, though it seems more of a checklist of developments in the later part of the 20th century. But look at the underlying resentment with the specific reference to 'THE U.S. subprime mortgage crisis'. It's not the 'global economic crisis', but a pinpointing of what the Chinese feel IS THE ROOT CAUSE. Not too different from Russia in this aspect.

And then there's this. It's thick.

"Driven by competition in overall national strength and the development of science and technology, international military competition is becoming increasingly intense, and the worldwide revolution in military affairs (RMA) is reaching a new stage of development. Some major powers are realigning their security and military strategies, increasing their defense investment, speeding up the transformation of armed forces, and developing advanced military technology, weapons and equipment. Strategic nuclear forces, military astronautics, missile defense systems, and global and battlefield reconnaissance and surveillance have become top priorities in their efforts to strengthen armed forces. Some developing countries are also actively seeking to acquire advanced weapons and equipment to increase their military power. All countries are attaching more importance to supporting diplomatic struggles with military means. As a result, arms races in some regions are heating up, posing grave challenges to the international arms control and nonproliferation regime."

The notables here is really the not-too-subtle reference once again to the US, which is the indisputed leader of the RMA (albeit with its own difficulties but nevertheless STILL the indisputed leader...). The usage of these terms should send 'pings!' into you. I'm not sure about the 'arms races' bit, though i think the reference to 'international arms control' and the 'nonproliferation regime' are just diplomatic-talk meant to appease the UN.

Again,

"At the same time, the U.S. has increased its strategic attention to and input in the Asia-Pacific region, further consolidating its military alliances, adjusting its military deployment and enhancing its military capabilities. In addition, terrorist, separatist and extremist forces are running rampant, and non-traditional security issues such as serious natural disasters crop up frequently. The mechanisms for security cooperation between countries and regions are yet to be enhanced, and the capability for coping with regional security threats in a coordinated way has to be improved...In particular, the United States continues to sell arms to Taiwan in violation of the principles established in the three Sino-U.S. joint communiques, causing serious harm to Sino-U.S. relations as well as peace and stability across the Taiwan Straits."

It's interesting to see how this blatant reference to the US presupposes the US itself to be part of the problem. The Chinese stand is therefore officially this: we ain't pursuing any extension of a sphere of influence, so you shouldn't as well. I'm wondering if China will go Putin in the future, if America keeps walling up China and pushing it back.

It's also not to subtle on things like - "China is playing an active and constructive role in multilateral affairs, thus notably elevating its international position and influence."

and even ASEAN is mentioned - "The conclusion of the ASEAN Charter has enabled a new step to be taken toward ASEAN integration. Remarkable achievements have been made in cooperation between China and ASEAN, as well as between ASEAN and China, Japan and the Republic of Korea."

While this is interesting - "The Six-Party Talks on the Korean nuclear issue have scored successive achievements, and the tension in Northeast Asia is much released."

This portion illicits careful reading though: "Issues of existence security and development security, traditional security threats and non-traditional security threats, and domestic security and international security are interwoven and interactive. China is faced with the superiority of the developed countries in economy, science and technology, as well as military affairs. It also faces strategic maneuvers and containment from the outside while having to face disruption and sabotage by separatist and hostile forces from the inside. "

There is lingering suspicion of American espionage attempts attempting to aid rebellion and resistance within China. This brings to mind the Tibet fiasco last year, not to mention annoying human rights groups based in America as well, though the bottom line is that internal threats to the regime are still their primary concern. The status quo can be jeopardised however, by international developments (i.e. global credit crunch and impact on the CCP).

It is nevertheless, good to know that "China will never seek hegemony or engage in military expansion now or in the future, no matter how developed it becomes", though the question begs as to how it plans to FOSTER 'a security environment conducive to China's peaceful development'
...

Technology is the essence of RMA and this is how the Chinese plan to do it:
" Persisting in taking mechanization as the foundation and informationization as focus, China is stepping up the composite development of mechanization and informationization. Persisting in strengthening the military by means of science and technology, China is working to develop new and high-tech weaponry and equipment, carry out the strategic project of training talented people, conduct military training in conditions of informationization, and build a modern logistics system in an all-round way, so as to change the mode of formation of war-fighting capabilities. "

However I think on the whole, 'the strategic project of training talent people' is highly flawed. My impression of the chinese system is still rather 'factory-like' in its produce, and im not sure about their capability to produce leadership which looks beyond mere knowledge of technical facts. They may prove me wrong, but I don't think that their 'talent management scheme' is currently producing much results, esp with cronyism in the upper echelons.

Meanwhile with their economy in deep shit too, I highly doubt their ability to "call for the building of a lean and effective deterrent force and the flexible use of different means of deterrence." I'm quite concerned about this - It takes military operations other than war (MOOTW) as an important form of applying national military forces, and scientifically makes and executes plans for the development of MOOTW capabilities. - which could point to greater Chinese exposure through the UN platform (or not). Not sure where they got their idea from...

OOOO and this part i like: The PLA insists on putting ideological and political work first, and pushing forward the innovative development of ideological and political work, to ensure the Party's absolute leadership over the armed forces, the scientific development of the military, the all-round development of the officers and men, the increase of combat capabilities and the effective fulfillment of historical missions...The PLA persists in arming its officers and men with the theory of socialism with Chinese characteristics, educates them in its historical missions, ideals, beliefs, fighting spirit and the socialist concept of honor and disgrace, and carries forward the fine traditions of obeying the Party's orders, serving the people, and fighting bravely and skillfully. The PLA's ideological and political education adheres to six principles: to be guided by scientific theories, to put the people first, to focus on the central task and serve the overall interests, to aim at concrete results, to educate through practical activities, and to encourage innovation and development.

I really don't see how any of this is 'socialist'. It's Maoist alright, but merely cliche. The 'historical' part makes me laugh out loud cuz its vaguely marxist, but really just an abuse of commie jingo. It all goes downhill from there...