China-US military balance not so lop-sided
If it came to a war over the South China Sea, who would win?
Ten years ago, the answer would have been a resounding nod to the United States. While the odds are still well in the super power's favour today, military experts say the costs would be high and China could inflict some serious damage.
Of course, this is an extreme scenario. Most analysts agree that the chance of a conventional war between China and the US over the South China Sea is low, precisely because the consequences are so serious.
It would pit a rising military power against the most established fighting force in the world, which would ostensibly be acting in support of its regional allies and to maintain its influence in the region.
Such a conflict would divide the world and bring the global economy to its knees.
So this is not a likely scenario, but it can't be ruled out, particularly when the head of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) Navy said this week China was ready to counter aggression in the South China Sea.
So, in the event of a war, how do China and the US match up?
In terms of sheer firepower, experience and weaponry, the US is a decade ahead of China.
However, China is narrowing the gap and its real military spending is expected to be higher than its official budget.
The Rand Corporation, which provides research to the US armed forces, says that over the next five to 15 years if both forces spend on defence as they do now, "Asia will witness a progressively receding frontier of US dominance."
China has been stocking up on anti-ship missiles as part of its strategy to force the US further out to sea.
When it unveiled its latest weaponry in a lavish parade last September to mark the 70th anniversary of World War II, one of the missiles on display was the Dongfeng-21D, which can target moving ships and travels at 10 times the speed of sound.
It has been dubbed the "carrier killer". Another missile in the parade was the YJ-12, which skims the water's surface.
"The US has way more stuff and it's better stuff, but that's not the right question to be asking," says Hugh White, professor of strategic studies at the Australian National University.
"The question is what can you do to stop the other guy? China's capability development has been very heavily directed towards finding and sinking US ships."
"Ten years ago you would have said the US had an assured capacity to prevail," he says. "It now faces the probability of taking big losses ... it could even lose an [aircraft] carrier."
White says that since 1996, China has focused its resources on submarines, anti-ship missiles and nimble patrol craft in a campaign to stop the US projection of naval power into the region.
Peter Jennings, executive director of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, agrees China has developed a strategy to push the American forces as far away from the Chinese mainland as it can. He singles out the Dongfeng-21D or
"carrier killer" as "definitely a danger to any opposing force".
"carrier killer" as "definitely a danger to any opposing force".
"China has focused on raising the cost for the US."
However, Jennings says China is currently no match for the US, which would have the additional backing of Japanese forces.
"The PLA has come a long way in the last 10 years, to be a credible regional force but they have nowhere near the capability of the US."
This capability was on full display when the US sent two of its aircraft carrier strike groups to the Philippine Sea in June, a show of strength before the international court ruling.
Jennings points out both the USS John C. Stennis and the USS Ronald Reagan have the equivalent airpower of the entire Australian Defence Force. The surrounding ships in each carrier group are more powerful than Australia's entire navy.
"If we're talking about a serious full-on conventional fighting scenario, China would not be able to prevent the US for very long in the South China Sea," he says. "The first things to go would be the islands they have constructed."
"The American assessment is that there is an over-confidence in the Chinese military right now. They haven't been in a fight since the mid-1970s."
Jian Zhang, a senior lecturer at the University of NSW in Canberra who specialises in China security issues, says the country's priority would be to be able to "do enough damage to the US that it would make the US unwilling to intervene".
"The key to China's deterrence capability is submarines and ballistic missiles," he says.
"It's difficult to assess China's military capability because none of it has really been tested."
Read more: http://www.afr.com/news/world/chinaus-military-balance-not-so-lopsided-20160720-gq9xot#ixzz4F3jYrN00
Follow us: @FinancialReview on Twitter | financialreview on Facebook
No comments:
Post a Comment