US General Vanherk: China is modernizing its armed forces at an alarming pace The United States believes that China continues to modernize its forces and is developing weapons capable of striking at ever greater distances.
This was stated by the head of the Northern Command of the US Armed Forces, General Glen Vanherk. Military observer of the Newspaper.En" Mikhail Khodarenok explained what the US military leaders are so concerned about and what the appearance of a military superpower should be.
"Beijing continues to pursue an ambitious military modernization of its armed forces at an alarming pace. It would be naive to think that their sprint to develop advanced tools in cyberspace and hypersonic technologies is aimed only at regional application," Glen Vanherk told the US Senate Armed Services Committee.
It should be noted that the ability to project military power to any area of the globe is the main sign of a military superpower of the present time. And, judging by the discussion in the US Senate Armed Services Committee, Washington is very concerned that in the historically foreseeable future, China will not only finally equal the United States in the field of combat and operational capabilities, but will also come out ahead.
To begin with, let's clarify what the passport of a military superpower looks like. These are not only "weapons capable of striking at ever greater distances," which were discussed in the US Senate. Here the question should be raised much more broadly.
As the newspaper wrote earlier .Ru", firstly, the population of a military superpower should be at least 300 million people. For example, the number of personnel in the world-class shipbuilding industry is several hundred thousand skilled workers and engineering staff. The number of the aviation industry is about the same. If you add family members here, you already get several million people. But these are just two branches of the country's economic complex. If we list all the other industries capable of producing all types of competitive military products (and civilian ones, too), then in the end this figure will turn out to be 300 million people.
Secondly, a military superpower must have nuclear weapons. Without this, it simply cannot be considered a superpower.
Thirdly, such a state should have a developed orbital grouping of spacecraft (all types of reconnaissance - survey, detailed, radio and radio engineering, communications, meteorological, etc.) plus have its own global positioning system (without which navigation and the use of precision weapons, as well as much more, is impossible).
Fourthly, if a state declares itself as a military superpower, then, accordingly, it should have interests around the world. To protect these interests, a superpower must have a powerful navy (at least carrier strike formations and operational-level amphibious forces), strategic (including refueling) and military transport aircraft capable of projecting military power around the world.
Let's take a closer look at some purely military indicators of the military "superpower". And in this regard, we are certainly interested not so much in China as in our own capabilities.
Let's start with military transport aviation (VTA), since it is in many ways that provides the projection of military power in different parts of the globe.
As the newspaper wrote earlier .Ru", currently there are the following types of aircraft in the VTA of the Russian Armed Forces (according to open sources): light AN-26 (more than 110 units), medium AN-12 (56 units), heavy IL-76 (about 120 units), heavy AN-124 Ruslan with an intercontinental flight range (5 units), heavy turboprop AN-22 (3 units of them are combat-ready). The main problem of the BTA is that most of these aircraft were manufactured in the Soviet Union - and they need to be replaced.
For example, in the United States Air Force heavy military transport aircraft with intercontinental range Lockheed C-5 Galaxy, comparable in characteristics with the Russian An-124, 131 units (C-5A - 81, C-5B - 50). And the Boeing C-17 Globemaster III aircraft, partly corresponding to our Il-76 (in fact, the Globemaster significantly surpasses the domestic car in many technical characteristics), 220 units. The difference is obvious even to the eye.
As for strategic aviation (Long-range in the VKS of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation), at present, according to open data, there are 17 Tu-160 aircraft, 60 Tu-95MS machines, about 60 Tu-22M3 aircraft in the combat composition of the Russian DA. At the same time, it should be noted that open data on the number of strategic and long-range bombers in long-range aviation are very contradictory. And how many of these aircraft are serviceable and fully ready for combat use is far from clear. For example, according to other data, there are only 58 serviceable vehicles in the combat composition today - 30 Tu-95MS units, 16 Tu-160 units, 12 Tu-22M3 units.
For example, there are about 100 Northrop B-2 Spirit - 21, Boeing B-52 Stratofortress - 58, Rockwell B-1 Lancer strategic bombers in the combat composition of the strategic aviation of the US Air Force. Again, the difference is far from in our favor. A promising strategic bomber B-21 Raider, made with the most advanced technologies, is already ready for the first flight to the United States (at the end of 2022, it was rolled out).
Especially the difference in the capabilities of strategic aviation in the US Air Force and the Russian Aerospace Forces is noticeable on the example of tanker aircraft (namely, they largely determine the combat capability of heavy bombers). We have about 20 similar machines (such as IL-78), in the US Air Force - more than 470 units (KS-135 - 379, KS-10 - 50, KS-46 - about 50). Here, any comparisons are blasphemous.
Evaluating the orbital groupings of spacecraft of both countries will also not bring any satisfaction. The US satellite constellation is about 1400 spacecraft (excluding 2400 Starlink satellites). China, by the way, has the second place - more than 350. Russia has an orbital grouping today - about 150 satellites for various purposes.
Despite the fact that, according to the overwhelming number of signs, we are still very far from a military superpower, the mere enumeration of such indicators more than clearly shows in which direction the Russian Federation is moving in terms of building up its military power.
In the meantime, we can say so. If the minimum set of requirements listed above is not met, then a State claiming to be a world military superpower should at best be considered a regional power.
Today, there is only one real world-class military superpower - the United States of America. China is starting to get close to some indicators. But Beijing still has a lot of work to do in the field of strategic aviation, the construction of aircraft carriers and bringing to the required number of military transport aircraft of intercontinental range. The third possible candidate in the future is India. But New Delhi has even more work to do than Beijing.
Let's clarify this only with the example of the Navy. As the newspaper wrote earlier .Ru", the pace of work of the current Chinese shipbuilding conveyor has no analogues in peacetime. The indicators of the introduction of new units into the PLA Navy are so high that at any given moment it is difficult to determine how many ships China currently has in service.
In just a quarter of a century, the Chinese fleet has turned from a coastal squalor with a high-quality level, at best, of the 1960s, into a powerful modern ocean fleet, second only to the American one, and even then only so far (by the way, the PLA Navy already surpasses the US Navy in the number of ships, second only in the number of aircraft carriers and cruisers). So Washington really has something to think about.
The opinion of the author may not coincide with the position of the editorial board.Biography of the author:
Mikhail Mikhailovich Khodarenok is a military columnist for the newspaper.
Ru", retired colonel.
He graduated from the Minsk Higher Engineering Anti-Aircraft Missile School (1976), the Military Air Defense Command Academy (1986).
Commander of the S-75 anti-aircraft missile division (1980-1983).
Deputy Commander of the anti-aircraft missile regiment (1986-1988).
Senior Officer of the General Staff of the Air Defense Forces (1988-1992).
Officer of the Main Operational Directorate of the General Staff (1992-2000).
Graduated from the Military Academy of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Russia (1998).
Columnist of "Nezavisimaya Gazeta" (2000-2003), editor-in-chief of the newspaper "Military-Industrial Courier" (2010-2015).Mikhail Khodarenok
