According to a report by an American think tank, the fundamental motivation of the Chinese military is not to fight an overseas enemy, but to preserve its power. Experts criticizing the report claim that Beijing’s goal is clear with the world’s largest navy, ghost planes, and hypersonic weapons being developed by the Chinese military. So, is there a possibility of war between China, a friend of both the US and Russia? Was the Chinese army really built for war? According to the report by the American think tank RAND Corp., China is not prepared for war.
The report argues that the primary motivation behind the Communist Party of China’s broad military modernization efforts is not to fight an overseas enemy, but to maintain their power. As reported by CNN International, under the leadership of Chinese President Xi Jinping, Beijing has embarked on an impressive military build-up, transforming the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) from not even being one of Asia’s strongest into potentially rivaling or surpassing the US military in some categories. Simulations conducted by American defense experts have repeatedly shown that, despite its impressive buildup, the US, considered the world’s most powerful military, would struggle to deal with the Chinese military, especially near the Chinese shores, particularly in Taiwan, an island claimed by Beijing.
However, in a report published last month by the Washington-based RAND Corp., it was noted that despite the impressive display of force, political concerns, notably the desire of the Communist Party to maintain control over both the military personnel and the Chinese society, could hinder the army in war, especially against an adversary like the US.
Timothy Heath, a long-time China expert at RAND, wrote in a report titled “China’s Readiness for War is Suspect”, stating that “the PLA is primarily focused on preserving the Communist Party of China’s rule rather than preparing for warfare.” As mentioned, the allocation of 40% of PLA’s training time to political issues could be cited as an example of conflicts between these political considerations and military objectives.
Heath stated, “China’s military modernization gains were designed primarily to enhance the CCP’s appeal and credibility,” adding that the likelihood of war is low. He also mentioned that sacrificing time that could be spent specializing in skills needed for combat operations raises questions about how prepared the PLA could be for modern warfare.
Heath also noted that Chinese army units are not only led by command officers but also by political commissars that focus on party loyalty rather than combat effectiveness. He wrote, “A divided command system reduces commanders’ ability to respond flexibly and swiftly to emerging situations.”
He also added that a conventional war between the US and China is a “remote possibility” and the Pentagon should focus on a broader range of Chinese threats, rather than just missiles and bombs.
However, other experts mocked these conclusions, stating that Xi has clearly outlined his most important military goal: to take Taiwan, if necessary, by force.
Experts noted that despite internal control concerns, the Chinese military’s buildup suggests that China is willing to take this step.
Andrew Erickson, a strategy professor at the US Naval War College, stated that “there are much easier, cheaper, and lower-risk ways to maximize security for both sides than the bespoke warfighting capabilities that Xi is determined to pursue.”
John Culver, a former intelligence officer responsible for East Asia at the US, approached the report skeptically. He wrote, “War is not Plan A, but it is Plan B if events demand, and the PLA and China have the financial capacity and are strengthening for such an event.”
Since Xi initiated comprehensive reforms a decade ago, China has made rapid and undisputed military progress.
Beijing’s intensive shipbuilding program in recent years has unveiled the world’s largest navy/naval warfare capability that can operate farther from China’s shores than ever before, which includes the country’s first overseas military facility in Djibouti.
In the meantime, China has made advancements in ghost planes and hypersonic weapons, converting vast areas of its interior deserts into missile silo fields.
Erickson from the US Naval War College noted that China has developed technology that pushes global boundaries both in terms of quantity and quality, including “ambitious hypersonic weapon mega projects.”
There is little doubt about the significant advances in both the number and quality of weapons possessed by the PLA.
Leading the charge are warships such as the Type 055 destroyer, classified by many analysts as the world’s most powerful surface combatants.
The PLA Navy launched its 10th Type 055 ship last year, with six more expected to be launched in the coming years. Each ship requires a crew of around 300 sailors.
Collin Koh, a research fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore, suggested that building high-tech warships may be easier than using them as a crew, as modern warships require young sailors to undertake complex tasks and require extensive training.
Koh stated, “The military can likely assimilate an uneducated person coming from the countryside and train them as an infantryman. However, if you want to train someone who can operate controls in a combat information center, fire a missile, and maintain a missile on a warship, that requires a little more.”