How Washington and Beijing develop armed forces and assess security threats
Due to the uncertainty of the development of the military-political situation in the world, many powers rely primarily on the Armed Forces to ensure their interests and security. The development of forces and means of armed struggle leads to the spread of hostilities to new areas, the complication of forms and methods of using the Armed Forces. Two superpowers – the United States and China - have achieved the greatest development in the line of military planning. They formed original schools of planning and organization of military construction, carried out reforms of the Armed Forces. The study of foreign experience in military planning makes it possible to reasonably adjust the directions of ensuring Russia's national security.
The US military doctrine is disclosed in documents issued by the President, the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (KNSH). And also in the statements and practical actions of the American leadership reflecting its military-political course and military strategy. Washington's military-political course is being developed and implemented on the basis of the premise that the United States is and should remain the only military and economic superpower, a global leader. Only America has the right to single-handedly shape such conditions of the international situation that maximally promote its interests in various regions of the world.
The United States is stepping up efforts aimed at strengthening its position in the post-Soviet space by reorienting the republics of the former USSR to Washington as the main and most profitable partner. The US authorities believe that, given the preservation of traditionally close trade and economic ties between the CIS countries and Russia, the development of a dialogue with them in the fight against terrorism, defense and security will allow the US to ensure its involvement in regional processes and have a direct impact on their development.
In Europe, the main efforts of the United States are focused on maintaining a leading role in the formation of a collective security system in the region, the central component of which should remain the NATO bloc. Washington is trying to block any opportunities for European countries to gain independence in solving military-political issues and creating military structures autonomous from NATO. The United States is persistently pursuing a policy aimed at further expanding the alliance, linking European countries to the bloc's infrastructure, and increasing their dependence on NATO and the United States in the field of military-technical cooperation.
In the Asia-Pacific region (APR), Japan and the Republic of Korea remain the main allies of the United States. The main directions of US policy in the Asia-Pacific region are strengthening the leading positions in this region, maintaining the American military presence, expanding access of the US Armed Forces to the infrastructure elements of the states of the region, preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
In the Middle East, the main tasks of the United States are to protect its military-strategic and economic interests, to ensure the security of sea and air communications. Washington, using political and economic levers of pressure on Israel and Arab countries, intends to seek a solution to the Palestinian-Israeli and other regional crises according to a favorable scenario for itself.
In Africa and Latin America, the United States continues to maintain control over the policies of the countries of these regions through the use of economic levers, diplomatic pressure and direct force pressure.
In the foreseeable future, the use of the US Armed Forces will be carried out with the involvement of allied troops (forces). At the same time, the United States will independently determine the goals of the war and, based on them, form coalitions.
The content of the US military strategy is revealed in a whole set of documents. The main ones are the US National Security Strategy (geopolitical and geo-economic aspects), the US National Defense Strategy (military-political aspects) and the US National Military Strategy (military-strategic aspects).
The change in the nature of the future military confrontation, according to Washington, is determined by the expansion of the spectrum of threats to US national security in the world. In the "national strategies", existing and expected threats are divided into four categories.
1. Traditional military threats caused by the presence of regular armed forces in other States, equipped and prepared for full-scale military operations on the ground, in the air and at sea.
2. Irregular threats from irregular armed formations of countries and non-state actors using terrorism and guerrilla actions to neutralize the advantages of the US Armed Forces or carrying out criminal activities (piracy, drug trafficking) to destabilize regional security.
3. Catastrophic threats, including the acquisition and use of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) by States or non-State actors. According to American estimates, the number of hostile regimes and terrorist groups seeking to possess and use WMD is growing.
4. Subversive threats associated with the use by other countries of new technologies (nano-, cyber- and space, directed energy weapons, etc.) to level the US military superiority. Among the countries that can challenge American superiority, China is considered first of all. Russia and India are also among the powers potentially capable of effectively countering the United States.
The use of the US Armed Forces in the XXI century will have the following main features:
– close cooperation at all levels;
– focus on achieving results;
– formation of a single information space;
– high firepower and accuracy of hitting targets;
– mobility of expeditionary formations of the Armed Forces;
– using superiority in space;
– the possibility of using nuclear weapons.
In the coming decades, the main efforts in US military construction will be focused on improving the equipment of the Armed Forces and their preparation for combat use without full-scale mobilization reinforcement.
The American leadership, recognizing that the US Armed Forces remain the strongest in the world, does not exclude the emergence of opponents who will be able to neutralize this superiority, which will undermine the leading position of the United States in the world. In this regard, the US military power is being increased as part of the "transformation of the Armed Forces". The main focus is on strengthening the capabilities to protect the country from asymmetric threats using preventive actions, as well as the development and introduction of new promising technologies.
To implement the concept of "Comprehensive deterrence", the United States plans to use the triad: 1) an offensive component (nuclear and non–nuclear means of air and space attack); 2) a defensive component (a unified global missile defense/air defense system, a promising anti-space defense system - PKO); 3) a flexible infrastructure for the production, storage and testing of nuclear weapons. To combine the components of the triad, it is planned to build a unified management, intelligence and planning system using advanced information technologies.
China'S "GRAND STRATEGY"
China's military theorists use the term "military doctrine" differently than is customary in the Russian Federation. This term is often identified with the concepts of "national security strategy", "defense strategy". Sometimes it extends to a separate area of military affairs ("nuclear doctrine", "offensive doctrine"). In other cases, this term acts as a veiled expression of the state's military goals and ways to achieve them.
The Chinese term "da zhanliue" (literally "grand strategy") best corresponds to the concept of "national security strategy". In a broad sense, it is understood as "the strategy of using the resources of the state to achieve the main national goals." China has its own system of views on the nature of military threats and ways to parry them, as well as on the role of the Armed Forces in ensuring national interests.
The PRC leadership considers the concept of "living space and strategic borders" as a basis for achieving its military and political goals. This concept directly justifies Beijing's claims to create its own spheres of influence in the Asia-Pacific region and the formation of a favorable "living space" for the Chinese within the "strategic borders" that do not coincide with the state borders of the PRC. Beijing believes that strategic borders should expand as the "complex power of the state" grows. Beijing intends to achieve these tasks by peaceful means, implementing the concept of soft power.
When assessing external military threats, Beijing takes into account that the roles of countries and the balance of forces in world politics do not remain constant, therefore, one should be prepared for any changes in the international situation, including in an unfavorable direction for China.
Threats to national security, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the People's Republic of China are divided into "traditional" and "non-traditional".
The main "traditional" threats include:
– unresolved Taiwan problem;
– the potential for direct external aggression due to territorial disputes between the PRC and neighboring states, as well as the involvement of the US and Japanese Armed Forces in an armed conflict in the Taiwan Strait zone;
– high probability of solving problems on the Korean peninsula by force;
– the desire of the United States to contain China at the expense of anti-Chinese bloc structures;
– proliferation of nuclear weapons, militarization of outer space;
– the intensification of international terrorism, religious extremism and national separatism.
Threats in the information, economic, environmental and humanitarian fields, threats related to the struggle for sources of raw materials and sales markets, for control over the resources of the World Ocean and strategic transport communications are considered as "unconventional".
If earlier in Beijing the threats of international terrorism, extremism and separatism were classified as "non-traditional", today they have been transferred to the category of "traditional".
Beijing classifies its opponents as "most likely" and "potential". The former include the United States and Japan, while it is believed that a direct armed clash with them in the near future is possible only if the Taiwan problem is solved by force. Potential opponents include India and a number of Asia-Pacific countries (Vietnam, Malaysia, the Philippines), with which there are territorial differences.
Analysis of global trends since the mid-1980s allows Chinese strategists to conclude that there is a low probability of a large-scale war involving China. But in the near and medium term, Beijing is considering the possibility of a high-intensity armed conflict against an enemy with technological superiority.
Beijing builds its armed forces based on a number of concepts – "active defense", "limited nuclear counterattack" and "local wars".
The concept of "active defense" implies the economy and the Armed Forces for a long-term active strategic defense on pre-prepared lines in order to change the balance of forces in favor of the Armed Forces of the People's Republic of China and ensure the transition to a counteroffensive. According to Chinese military terminology, this concept is based on the principle of "defense, self-defense and retaliation against the enemy."
The concept of a "limited nuclear counterattack" does not refute Beijing's commitment not to use nuclear weapons first, but provides for a retaliatory nuclear strike against an enemy whose intentions include a nuclear attack on China.
The development of the Armed Forces of the People's Republic of China within the framework of this concept is carried out in accordance with the policy of nuclear deterrence.
The concept of "local wars" allows the construction of modern armed forces capable of solving tasks in armed conflicts of any intensity and against any enemy.
In implementing measures to ensure the country's defense, Beijing proceeds from a number of principles generally accepted in world practice. The most important of them is the system of "small military representation and large mobilization capabilities", when the limited production of peacetime military products serves as the basis for its intensive build-up in wartime. Peacetime production provides for the current needs of the Armed Forces in weapons, the creation of new models of equipment and the trade in weapons on the foreign market. Mobilization capabilities include the full use of the capacities of the defense and civilian sectors of the country's economy.
The main emphasis of the PRC is on the development of its own scientific and technical base for the creation of military and dual-use technologies. The progressive development of China's economy ensures a systematic increase in defense spending.
CONCLUSIONS AND GENERALIZATIONS
The US leadership is striving to achieve overwhelming military-technical superiority not only over potential adversaries, but also over its strategic allies and partners.
Increasing the importance of military force in achieving the goals of US foreign policy may become the main military threat to the Russian Federation. The development of forms and methods of using the US Armed Forces indicates their preparation for war with opponents comparable in military power, which Russia and China are considered to be.
The foreign policy course declared by the People's Republic of China is peaceful in nature, excludes entry into military blocs and allows ensuring military security and defending the territorial integrity of the country. Further military buildup will allow the PRC not only to protect national interests, but also to attempt to resolve controversial issues by force.
The United States and China continue to develop their military doctrines, which are becoming increasingly complex. Today, Washington and Beijing are already at war: economically and technologically. In the near future, the nature and content of the armed struggle will be largely determined by the US-Chinese confrontation.
Vasily Ivanov
Vasily Ivanovich Ivanov is a journalist.
