China 'threat' strengthens US-Japan military ties By Kosuke Takahashi
Jan 13, 2005
TOKYO - This is just the beginning of a war of nerves of military strategy among the world's three most powerful countries, based on real hardball politics, military hardware and spyware. The theater is the East China Sea, surrounding Taiwan and Okinawa. The actors are Japan, its ally the United States, and an increasingly powerful China that already is an economic powerhouse and is expanding and upgrading its military on the sea, on land and in the air.
This perceived Chinese "threat" - vehemently denied by Beijing - is a factor in the gradual transformation of Japan from a pacifist nation, with pacificism enshrined in the US-imposed constitution, to one that assumes a more powerful role on the world stage - and will not countenance a perceived threat from its formidable neighbor to the west. To handle this seeming "threat", Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi is rushing to change Japan's traditional pacifist military posture - urged on by Washington to play a larger role and expand its military operations in the so-called "arc of instability" stretching from Northeast Asia to the Middle East.
Faced with China's strengthening military power, the United States and Japan are reinforcing bilateral security relations by changing Tokyo's pacifistic military posture for their common interest - to prevent an ever-stronger China from emerging as the global and regional superpower, especially militarily, in the coming decades. For the US, China is the only country that has high potential to threaten US global dominance in the 21st century. For Japan, China could jeopardize political and economic stability in Asia, threatening Tokyo's credibility as the leading economic power in the region. To cope with this "China threat", Tokyo is adopting a more muscular military posture, one that causes alarm to its neighbors in Beijing, Seoul, Manila and elsewhere.
A recent White Paper by the Japan Defense Agency also for the first time names North Korea as a potential threat and cites the tensions in the Taiwan Strait that could draw in the United States, and quite possibly Japan.
China, of course, maintains that it is not a menace or a threat to anyone and that its much-touted "peaceful rise" is for the political, economic and security good and unity of Asia. Not everyone thinks so, especially not Japanese hawks and some hard-headed Japanese military planners and politicians who want Japan to assume its rightful role on the world stage.
Last month Japan adopted a new defense-policy guideline that for the first time names China as a possible threat. "China, which has significant influence on the region's security, has been modernizing its nuclear and missile capabilities as well as naval and air forces, and expanding its area of operation at sea," the new outline stipulated. "We have to remain attentive to its future course." (See US FY04 Report to Congress on PRC Military Power - note p 20 "Use of Force", p 46 "Taiwan Strait" - and Japanese Defense Agency website.)
It also said, "And we will also maintain destroyers and other assets to respond adequately to armed special-operations vessels in the peripheral sea and foreign submarines which navigate submerged in the territorial sea of Japan." This was a clear reference to the incident in November in which a Chinese nuclear submarine intruded into Japanese waters.
Aside from China, North Korea was also named as a security concern for the first time. The previous defense outline in 1995 had avoided referring by name to specific countries of concern.
The outline also specifically pointed out two new threats - ballistic missiles, presumably from North Korea or even China, and terrorism. It said Japan needs closer cooperation with the United States and should be ''proactive in bilateral strategic dialogue on security issues" with Washington.
The Koizumi cabinet earlier decided to relax Japan's arms exports ban to enable it to work together with the US to develop a missile defense system. Not all exports will be permitted, however, only high technology for joint Japan-US development of missile defenses. To achieve this objective, Japan plans to purchase from the US four Aegis destroyers for the installation of the Standard Missile 3 (SM3) system as well as a surface-to-air Patriot Advanced Capability 3 (PAC3) system. These two-tiered systems are needed to shoot down any incoming ballistic missiles.
The new outline sets out Japan's defense policies for the next 10 years, effective from this April, and will be reviewed in five years or when a major change in security situations occurs.
In the latest development, early this month the Australian news agency Asia Pulse reported that Japan had been asked by the US government to boost the monitoring of the Chinese navy in the Pacific Ocean. The request was made at an unofficial vice-ministerial-level meeting in late December. The report said, and numerous reports confirm, that the US claimed China's navy was expanding its military presence in the region.
China's buildup of military power vis-a-vis Taiwan It's very difficult for any country or organization to put together a true figure of China's recent strengthening of military power, as the Chinese Communist Party keeps real military operations and the actual buildup of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) strictly confidential - apart from what is released for public consumption to boost national pride and morale and to intimidate Taiwan. Still, the Pentagon's latest annual report on China's military power to the US Congress sheds some light on the subject.
According to this report, the US Department of Defense estimated "total defense-related expenditures for 2003, counting the large but difficult-to-calculate off-the budget financing, could be between $50 billion and $70 billion, making China the third-largest defense spender in the world, after the United States and Russia, and by far the largest defense spender in Asia, followed by Japan".
In recent years, China is believed to have deployed about 500 DF-11 and DF-15 short-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs) in the Nanjing Military Region directly opposite Taiwan. The missiles' range is about 600 kilometers. The report said, "Some can attack US bases on Okinawa. Longer-range conventional medium-range ballistic missiles are expected ultimately to join the inventory."
Besides this, China has purchased Russian-built Su-27 and Su-27 fighter aircraft in bulk, as well as Kilo-class submarines and Sovremenny destroyers, AA-12 air-to-air missiles, SA-10, SA-15 and SA-20 surface-to-air missiles and other weapons.
Some experts, however, are more skeptical. "There [is] lots of political spin in that report and the language matters," said Douglas Ramsey, consultancy managing with Jane's Information Group, affiliated with Jane's Defence Weekly. He is a commentator on security and defense issues, including those in Asia. He pointed out, for example, that the number of deployed DF-11 and DF-15 SRBMs remained unchanged in the past couple of years, but the report seems to emphasize that the number has increased significantly.
From Washington's and Tokyo's perspectives, these military acquisitions by China apparently are targeted at Taiwan and enhance China's ability to attack Taiwan by preventing any military intervention by the US troops in Japan, Guam, Hawaii and elsewhere by sea and air. China’s shopping trip especially targets the operations of US aircraft carriers. Beijing calls Taiwan a renegade province; many in Taiwan, however, consider themselves distinct from China and a separate, sovereign nation or entity. China has not ruled out the use of force to reunify Taiwan and the mainland, especially if Taiwan declares independence.
Meanwhile, China issued late last month the White Paper, which outlined the country's new national defense policy. The document, the fifth on national defense since 1995, described Taiwan relations as "grim" and made clear that any attempt at independence would be dealt with harshly. "Should the Taiwan authorities go so far as to make a reckless attempt that constitutes a major incident of Taiwan independence, the Chinese people and armed forces will resolutely and thoroughly crush it at any cost," China's 85-page White Paper said. "The Taiwan authorities under [President] Chen Shui-bian have recklessly challenged the status quo ... and markedly escalated the Taiwan independence activities designed to split China."
It also accused the US of worsening the situation and supporting separatist elements by selling arms to the island. The United States "continues to increase, quantitatively and qualitatively, its arms sales to Taiwan, sending a wrong signal to the Taiwan authorities", it said. "The US action does not serve a stable situation across the Taiwan Strait." The US says the arms are strictly defensive, mandated by the US Taiwan Relations Act.
The Chinese White Paper described Japan's proposed constitutional changes as a threat, since they would allow the Japanese military to use force in international missions.
The rapid rise of a self-sufficient strategy Japan has been unable to respond adequately to military issues and to retool the nation's military machine for the new security environment for many years. There are many reasons. One is that Tokyo has not been required to take security matters into its own hands, as it has enjoyed security under the US nuclear umbrella. Second, ordinary Japanese have been so allergic to any military issues since the end of the devastating World War II that the government has mainly focused national interest and resources on economic growth. The situation changed, however, in the early 1990s when Japan was severely criticized by Americans about its cash diplomacy - opening its wallet and not sending troops - during the first Gulf War. Coupled with this trauma of Japan-bashing from Washington, North Korea's provocative actions since that time also forced ordinary Japanese to think about security issues for the first time since the end of World War II. Those actions include the firings of Nodong and Daepodong missiles years ago, spy-ship incidents, and the persistent nuclear crisis.
A Japan-US joint security statement is expected to be released as early as next month.
The two countries are facilitating the realignment of US forces in Japan and will likely call for greater cooperation between the Japanese Self-Defense Forces and US troops stationed in Japan to address threats jointly in the Asia-Pacific region. It will surely provide the underpinnings for transferring the US 1st Army Corps in the state of Washington, whose operation areas may extend beyond the Far East, to Camp Zama in Kanagawa prefecture, as well as consolidating the 5th Air Force in Yokota, Tokyo, and the 13th Air Force headquarters in Guam.
Former Chinese president Jiang Zemin once said, "By the middle of the 21st century, when the People's Republic celebrates its centenary [in 2049], the modernization program will have been accomplished by and large, and China will have become a prosperous, strong, democratic and culturally advanced socialist country.
Almost no experts, except for neo-conservatives, believe China will start actual combat against Taiwan, drawing in the United States, in the near term. But concerns over China's emergence as a strong military power are bringing cataclysmic changes as well as crucial movements in Asia's political and economic situation, especially in Japan. Concerns over China's mounting military power could be responsible for a new security architecture involving Japan and its Asian neighbors in the 21st century.
Kosuke Takahashi is a former staff writer at the Asahi Shimbun and currently is a freelance correspondent based in Tokyo. He can be contacted at kosuke_everonward@ybb.ne.jp.
(Copyright 2005 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us for information on sales, syndication and republishing.)
Chinese Navy Buildup Gives Pentagon New Worries By JIM YARDLEY and THOM SHANKER
April 8, 2005
HANJIANG, China - At a time when the American military is consumed with operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, global terrorism and the threat of nuclear proliferation in North Korea and Iran, China is presenting a new and strategically different security concern to America, as well as to Japan and Taiwan, in the western Pacific, Pentagon and military officials say.
China, these officials say, has smartly analyzed the strengths and weaknesses of the American military and has focused its growing defense spending on weapons systems that could exploit the perceived American weaknesses in case the United States ever needs to respond to fighting in Taiwan.
A decade ago, American military planners dismissed the threat of a Chinese attack against Taiwan as a 100-mile infantry swim. The Pentagon now believes that China has purchased or built enough amphibious assault ships, submarines, fighter jets and short-range missiles to pose an immediate threat to Taiwan and to any American force that might come to Taiwan's aid.
In the worst case in a Taiwan crisis, Pentagon officials say that any delay in American aircraft carriers reaching the island would mean that the United States would initially depend on fighter jets and bombers based on Guam and Okinawa, while Chinese forces could use their amphibious ships to go back and forth across the narrow Taiwan Strait.
Some American military analysts believe China could now defeat Taiwan before American forces could arrive at the scene, leaving a political decision about whether to attack, even though Taiwan would already be lost.
Even the most hawkish officials at the Pentagon do not believe China is preparing for an imminent invasion of Taiwan. Nor do analysts believe China is any match for the United States military. But as neighboring North Korea is erratically trying to play the nuclear card, China is quietly challenging America's reach in the western Pacific by concentrating strategically on conventional forces.
"They are building their force to deter and delay our ability to intervene in a Taiwan crisis," said Eric McVadon, a former military attaché at the United States Embassy in Beijing. "What they have done is cleverly develop some capabilities that have the prospect of attacking our niche vulnerabilities."
China's rapid military modernization is the major reason President Bush has warned the European Union not to lift its arms embargo against Beijing. At the same time, some officials in Washington, particularly on Capitol Hill, would like Taiwan to buy more American arms to beef up its own defenses.
Japan, America's closest ally in East Asia and China's rival for regional dominance, is also watching China's buildup and reorganizing its own military. The Japanese prime minister, Junichiro Koizumi, has echoed President Bush by calling on Europe to leave the arms embargo against China in place. A research center affiliated with Japan's Defense Ministry has also criticized China's increased military spending and cautioned that Beijing was rushing to prepare for possible conflict with Taiwan, an assertion China sharply denied.
The growing friction between Japan and China, fueled by rising nationalism in both countries, is just one of the political developments adding to tensions in East Asia. In March, China passed a controversial new "antisecession" law authorizing a military attack if top leaders in Beijing believe Taiwan moves too far toward independence - a move that brought hundreds of thousands of people in Taiwan out to protest China's most recent military white paper also alarmed American policy makers because it mentioned the United States by name for the first time since 1998. It stated that the American presence in the region "complicated security factors." China, meanwhile, accused the United States and Japan of meddling in a domestic Chinese matter when Washington and Tokyo recently issued a joint security statement that listed peace in Taiwan as a "common strategic objective."
"The potential for a miscalculation or an incident here has actually increased, just based on the rhetoric over the past six months to a year," one American intelligence analyst in Washington said.
At a welcoming ceremony on March 28 for the command ship Blue Ridge, of the American Seventh Fleet, here at the home base of China's South Sea Fleet, the American commanding officer, Capt. J. Stephen Maynard, and his Chinese counterpart, Senior Capt. Wen Rulang, sidestepped questions about the antisecession law and military tensions. Asked about China's military buildup and how America should view it, Captain Wen praised the United States Navy as the most modern in the world.
"As for China," Captain Wen said, "our desire is to upgrade China's self-defense capabilities."
In China's view, however, self-defense involves Taiwan, which it regards as a breakaway province and which the United States, by treaty, has suggested it would help defend. In 1996, when China fired warning-shot missiles across the Taiwan Strait before the Taiwanese elections, President Clinton responded by sending a carrier battle group to a position near Taiwan. Then, China could do nothing about it, Now, analysts say, it can.
In fact, American carriers responding to a crisis would now initially have to operate at least 500 miles from Taiwan, which would reduce the number of fighter sorties they could launch. This is because China now has a modern fleet of submarines, including new Russian-made nuclear subs that can fire missiles from a submerged position. America would first need to subdue these submarines.
China launched 13 attack submarines between 2002 and 2004, a period when it also built 23 ships that can ferry tanks, armored vehicles and troops across the 100-mile strait. Tomohide Murai, an expert on the Chinese military at the National Defense Academy in Tokyo, said that China's buildup is intended to focus on an American response, but he is skeptical that China already has the naval and air superiority over Taiwan to dominate the strait.
But Mr. Murai said China's military would continue to expand and modernize for years to come because of the country's booming economy, while Japan is restricted by budget constraints and its World War II era Constitution. Chinese subs and Japanese vessels already have played politically explosive cat-and-mouse games around a string of islands claimed by both countries.
"The speed of our modernization is not so rapid as in China," Mr. Murai said. "Many people in Japan worry that the balance eventually will be less favorable."
China, meanwhile, often expresses concern about rising militarism in Japan and notes that Japan spends more on its military budget - a debatable point since Western experts say China vastly understates its own military spending. China also worries that the United States Navy could be used to try to cut off oil supplies if a conflict ever arises over Taiwan.
Asked about growing concerns in Washington over China's military buildup, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman, Liu Jianchao, said: "American worries are unnecessary. We stick to the path of peaceful development, and we do not pose threats to American influence."
Robert Karniol, an Asia specialist at Jane's Defense Weekly, noted that Japan is also modernizing its military in a significant way, largely as its competes with China for regional dominance in Asia. He said Japan is restructuring the independent branches of its military under a unified command modeled after the American Joint Chiefs of Staff.
And just as Japan is looking at China, he said, so is China looking past Taiwan at Japan. China's naval upgrades will not only strengthen its hand against Taiwan but also expand its influence around Asia.
"If the Taiwan issue was resolved next month, China's military modernization would not end," Mr. Karniol said. "The Chinese understand that if their ambition is to become the dominant power in Asia - well, who can disrupt that? The United States and Japan."
Jim Yardley reported from Zhanjiang for this article, and ThomShankerfrom Washington
Sometimes even the best of us lose sight of the forest for the trees.
In today’s world, few would argue that U.S. Navy SEAL Teams and their counterparts in the other U.S. services are among the best of the world’s elite special operations troops. Our regular soldiers and Marines have certainly proved their mettle. Our various airborne warriors have an equally well-deserved reputation.
And most observers would also agree that U.S. Submariners rank at or near the top of their worldwide class of warriors.
In recent years, “surface pukes,” as submariners like to call sailors and their ships that stay on the surface, have held their own in exercises designed to test their ability to find and destroy submerged submarines. It’s not an equal battle by any measure, but a submariner’s survival odds are less today than they were two decades ago.
In other words, our guys are good – across the board. They have some remarkable history lessons to back up their claims. There is an old adage, however, that history is written by the victor. And history has taught us over and over again that overconfidence can lead to disastrous results.
How invincible is our submarine fleet? How good are our submerged sharks, our fleet of nuclear submarines that stands guard on the front lines, protecting our battle groups, shadowing potential missile launchers, and standing by to wreck havoc in the event of a shooting war?
The U.S. Navy has long relied upon exercises to measure itself against potential threats. These exercises usually pit one U.S. naval group against another, one submarine against another, or one or more submarines against one or more surface ships or even a battle group. Sometimes we join forces with our NATO allies to conduct more realistic exercises, going up against crews with different kinds of training and experience.
Of course, all these exercises are scripted in one way or another. They have to be in order to avoid collisions, to keep things safe and moving in the right direction, and to meet the exercise objectives. Scripting has its disadvantages, of course. For one thing, in a real war, the other side isn’t following a script, at least not one we might know about. Thus, sometimes individual skippers will deviate from the script – sometimes on secret orders, and sometimes, just because .…
Over the years, these off-script events have produced surprising results – or maybe on hindsight, not-so-surprising results. Let’s take a closer look.
Twenty-three years ago during the 1981 NATO exercise Ocean Venture, an unnamed 1960s vintage Canadian diesel submarine “sank” the carrier USS America without once being itself detected, and a second unidentified vintage sub “sank” the carrier USS Forrestal.
What did we learn from this?
Eight years later, during NATO exercise Northern Star, the Dutch diesel submarine Zwaardvis stalked and “sank” the USS America again. Did the America just have problems? Well, in RIMPAC 1996, the Chilean diesel submarine Simpson “sank” the carrier USS Independence, and in 1999 during NATO exercise JTFEX/TMDI99, Dutch diesel submarine Walrus not only “sank” the carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt, but also “took out” the American exercise command ship USS Mount Whitney, plus a cruiser, several destroyers and frigates, and the nuke fast attack USS Boise – all without herself receiving a scratch.
Then, during RIMPAC 2000, the Australian Collins Class diesel sub HMAS Waller “sank” two American nuke fast attacks and got dangerously close to the carrier USS Abraham Lincoln. During Operation Tandem Thrust in 2001, HMAS Waller “sank” two American amphibious assault ships in waters between 200 to 350 feet deep, barely more than the length of the submarine itself, and an unnamed Chilean diesel sub “took out” nuclear fast attack sub USS Montpelier twice during successive exercise runs. A year later in October 2002, HMAS Sheehan successfully hunted down and “killed” the U.S. fast attack USS Olympia during exercises near Hawaii, and just a year ago in September 2003, in an unnamed (read “classified”) exercise, several Collins Class subs “sank” two U.S. fast attack subs and a carrier – all unnamed, of course. And a month later another Collins Class sub surprised and “sank” an American fast attack during another exercise.
Oops!
What’s going on here? How is it possible for “ancient,” diesel powered “surface-bound” submarines to take on and defeat the best-trained, best-equipped sailors driving the most advanced ships and submarines in the world?
Diesel submarines operating on batteries are quiet. They’re small and maneuverable, and they carry the same detection equipment and armament as their nuke big brothers. Their only disadvantage is their limited submerged time. And as the above narrative reveals, even this disadvantage does not seem to matter very much. In 2001, the Waller eventually was herself “sunk,” but the trade was one “insignificant” diesel sub in exchange for two large amphibious assault ships. If you must keep score, this is how to do it.
In earlier articles (“Tomorrow’s Submarine Fleet – The Non-nuclear Option,” DefenseWatch, Feb. 6, 2002 , and “The Wrong Sub for New Warfare Era”, DefenseWatch, Sep. 20, 2004 ), I discussed the concept of the Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) submarine, and its role in modern warfare. Seen in light of the poor performance of our nuclear submarines against modern diesel subs, one can only imagine what would happen if they came up against AIP subs – subs that have eliminated the only “disadvantage” of modern diesels against modern nukes.
When you add to the equation that you can build eight comparably equipped AIP submarines for what it costs to build one otherwise equivalent nuke, one can only ask: What in hell are we doing?
If we don’t solve this conundrum with alacrity, AIP David is going to kick Goliath’s nuke butt right to Neptune ’s doorstep the next time it really matters.
(Thanks to Prof. Roger Thompson of Knightsbridge University for his in-depth research into the performance of the U.S. Nuclear Navy against “inferior” non-nuclear submarines in exercises around the world.)
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
