Aggressive China triggers Asia arms race

[dadeechi]

Aggressive China triggers Asia arms race
The Indian Panorama -
Jun 5, 2016

BEIJING (TIP): Global defence contractors are circling for business in Asia, with countries from Australia to Vietnam upgrading and adding everything from submarines to fighter jets as China expands its military reach.

According to consultancy IHS Jane’s report, the combined defence budgets in the Asia-Pacific region will grow from $435 billion last year to $533 billion in 2020, furthering a shift in global military spending away from Western Europe and North America toward emerging markets, especially in Asia. The figure will put Asia-Pacific on par with North America, which is expected to account for a third of global defence spending by then, from almost half now.

The report attributes the rise to growing tensions in the South China Sea. “A number of the South China Sea’s littoral states appear to be responding to China’s more assertive stance in the region and there is no sign of this trend coming to an end,” Janes’ principal analyst, Craig Caffrey, said in the report. China had the region’s biggest defence budget at $146 billion last year, according to the government. Jane’s said it expects China’s budget to rise by about 5% to $233 billion by 2020.

While military spending in Asia is coming off a low base – especially in Southeast Asia -and remains a small proportion of gross domestic product, nations that for years relied on old and at-times outdated ships and planes are starting to renovate their fleets. “There is a wide-ranging need for modernization across most of the armed forces in the region,” said Dan Enstedt, chief executive officer of Saab Asia Pacific, whose products include submarines, missiles, radars and fighter jets. “There are many examples of old and obsolete equipment fleets that are unable to keep pace with changing national security needs.”

Military outlays in Asia and Oceania -which includes Australia and New Zealand -grew 5.4% in 2015, outpacing a 1% rise in global spending, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Indonesia boosted spending last year by 16%, the Philippines by 25% and Vietnam by 7.6%.

Much of the spending is on air and naval capacity amid China’s assertiveness in the East China Sea, where it claims islets contested by Japan, and the South China Sea, where its land reclamation programme has spooked other claimants. “The growth of China’s national power, including its military modernization, means China’s policies and actions will have a major impact on the stability of the Indo-Pacific,” according to Australia’s Defence White Paper published in February.

A quarter of Australia’s defence investment over the next decade will be devoted to maritime capabilities.

US President Barack Obama’s recent trip to Vietnam may lead to business opportunities, as he lifted a four-decade ban on the sale of lethal weapons. The US embassy has hosted two defence contractor symposiums in Hanoi, attended by companies including Boeing Co. and Lockheed Martin Corp. Doug Greenlaw, a vice president at Lockheed, said in an interview in February that Asia is at the core of the company’s strategy. “The economies in Asia are growing faster than in the rest of the world – that tends to really drive security spending, so we see Asia as a growth market,” Greenlaw said. “We have great partnerships with the countries across Asia.”

Still, much of the spending comes off a low base. The Philippines spent 1.3% of GDP last year, up from 1.1% in 2014, according to Sipri, while Vietnam was largely flat at 2.3% of GDP.

China’s outlays were 1.9% of its economy, well below US expenditure last year of 3.3% of its economy.

Thailand may be one growth center this year. Defence spending will increase 7.3% and account for 7.6% of the overall budget, the Bangkok Post reported last month. On Thailand’s shopping list: 12 MI-17 transport helicopters from Russia, and four South Korean-made T-50 TH training aircraft.

Australia in April awarded an A$50 billion ($36 billion) contract for 12 submarines to France’s DCNS Group, in one of the world’s biggest defence deals. The government is considering tenders for nine warships worth A$35 billion and a A$3 billion deal for 12 offshore patrol vessels.

Indonesia, Japan, China, Vietnam, Singapore, Pakistan and Vietnam are building or buying submarines. Pakistan last year agreed to buy eight diesel electric submarines from China for an undisclosed price.

The greater reach of China’s air force is helping driving sales of planes. China has deployed combat aircraft on Woody Island in the disputed Paracel chain.

India needs dozens of warplanes after it scaled back a big order for Dassault Aviation SA’s Rafale jets to 36. Though no quantity has been announced, Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Saab have made pitches to build combat planes in India. About a third of India’s 650 fighter jets are more than 40 years old.

http://www.theindianpanorama.news/g...sia/aggressive-china-triggers-asia-arms-race/

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

We're so agressive because we haven't had a war in over three decades?

Damn man, I wonder what you guys will say when a war ACTUALLY starts.

 

[Tripoli]

Aggressive China triggers Asia arms race
The Indian Panorama -
Jun 5, 2016

View attachment 308983


BEIJING (TIP): Global defence contractors are circling for business in Asia, with countries from Australia to Vietnam upgrading and adding everything from submarines to fighter jets as China expands its military reach.

According to consultancy IHS Jane’s report, the combined defence budgets in the Asia-Pacific region will grow from $435 billion last year to $533 billion in 2020, furthering a shift in global military spending away from Western Europe and North America toward emerging markets, especially in Asia. The figure will put Asia-Pacific on par with North America, which is expected to account for a third of global defence spending by then, from almost half now.

The report attributes the rise to growing tensions in the South China Sea. “A number of the South China Sea’s littoral states appear to be responding to China’s more assertive stance in the region and there is no sign of this trend coming to an end,” Janes’ principal analyst, Craig Caffrey, said in the report. China had the region’s biggest defence budget at $146 billion last year, according to the government. Jane’s said it expects China’s budget to rise by about 5% to $233 billion by 2020.

While military spending in Asia is coming off a low base – especially in Southeast Asia -and remains a small proportion of gross domestic product, nations that for years relied on old and at-times outdated ships and planes are starting to renovate their fleets. “There is a wide-ranging need for modernization across most of the armed forces in the region,” said Dan Enstedt, chief executive officer of Saab Asia Pacific, whose products include submarines, missiles, radars and fighter jets. “There are many examples of old and obsolete equipment fleets that are unable to keep pace with changing national security needs.”

Military outlays in Asia and Oceania -which includes Australia and New Zealand -grew 5.4% in 2015, outpacing a 1% rise in global spending, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Indonesia boosted spending last year by 16%, the Philippines by 25% and Vietnam by 7.6%.

Much of the spending is on air and naval capacity amid China’s assertiveness in the East China Sea, where it claims islets contested by Japan, and the South China Sea, where its land reclamation programme has spooked other claimants. “The growth of China’s national power, including its military modernization, means China’s policies and actions will have a major impact on the stability of the Indo-Pacific,” according to Australia’s Defence White Paper published in February.

A quarter of Australia’s defence investment over the next decade will be devoted to maritime capabilities.

US President Barack Obama’s recent trip to Vietnam may lead to business opportunities, as he lifted a four-decade ban on the sale of lethal weapons. The US embassy has hosted two defence contractor symposiums in Hanoi, attended by companies including Boeing Co. and Lockheed Martin Corp. Doug Greenlaw, a vice president at Lockheed, said in an interview in February that Asia is at the core of the company’s strategy. “The economies in Asia are growing faster than in the rest of the world – that tends to really drive security spending, so we see Asia as a growth market,” Greenlaw said. “We have great partnerships with the countries across Asia.”

Still, much of the spending comes off a low base. The Philippines spent 1.3% of GDP last year, up from 1.1% in 2014, according to Sipri, while Vietnam was largely flat at 2.3% of GDP.

China’s outlays were 1.9% of its economy, well below US expenditure last year of 3.3% of its economy.

Thailand may be one growth center this year. Defence spending will increase 7.3% and account for 7.6% of the overall budget, the Bangkok Post reported last month. On Thailand’s shopping list: 12 MI-17 transport helicopters from Russia, and four South Korean-made T-50 TH training aircraft.

Australia in April awarded an A$50 billion ($36 billion) contract for 12 submarines to France’s DCNS Group, in one of the world’s biggest defence deals. The government is considering tenders for nine warships worth A$35 billion and a A$3 billion deal for 12 offshore patrol vessels.

Indonesia, Japan, China, Vietnam, Singapore, Pakistan and Vietnam are building or buying submarines. Pakistan last year agreed to buy eight diesel electric submarines from China for an undisclosed price.

The greater reach of China’s air force is helping driving sales of planes. China has deployed combat aircraft on Woody Island in the disputed Paracel chain.

India needs dozens of warplanes after it scaled back a big order for Dassault Aviation SA’s Rafale jets to 36. Though no quantity has been announced, Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Saab have made pitches to build combat planes in India. About a third of India’s 650 fighter jets are more than 40 years old.

http://www.theindianpanorama.news/g...sia/aggressive-china-triggers-asia-arms-race/

What Indians don't realize is that China is surrounded by many powerful
countries ( economically and/or militarily) such as Japan, the Phillipines, South Korea, Vietnam, Australia and so on. So China needs a large air force , navy, and army to protect itself from so many of its neighbors. (some of which host US military bases)

Whereas India only has one hostile neighbor Pakistan. A large scale war with China is unlikely
due to the geographical limitations so we can conclude that India is only threatened realistically by Pakistan.

@Joe Shearer What's your take on this?

 

[Muhammad Omar]

China Naval Air force Also has 345 Aircraft it's missing there

 

[jetray]

Aggressive China triggers Asia arms race
The Indian Panorama -
Jun 5, 2016

View attachment 308983


BEIJING (TIP): Global defence contractors are circling for business in Asia, with countries from Australia to Vietnam upgrading and adding everything from submarines to fighter jets as China expands its military reach.

According to consultancy IHS Jane’s report, the combined defence budgets in the Asia-Pacific region will grow from $435 billion last year to $533 billion in 2020, furthering a shift in global military spending away from Western Europe and North America toward emerging markets, especially in Asia. The figure will put Asia-Pacific on par with North America, which is expected to account for a third of global defence spending by then, from almost half now.

The report attributes the rise to growing tensions in the South China Sea. “A number of the South China Sea’s littoral states appear to be responding to China’s more assertive stance in the region and there is no sign of this trend coming to an end,” Janes’ principal analyst, Craig Caffrey, said in the report. China had the region’s biggest defence budget at $146 billion last year, according to the government. Jane’s said it expects China’s budget to rise by about 5% to $233 billion by 2020.

While military spending in Asia is coming off a low base – especially in Southeast Asia -and remains a small proportion of gross domestic product, nations that for years relied on old and at-times outdated ships and planes are starting to renovate their fleets. “There is a wide-ranging need for modernization across most of the armed forces in the region,” said Dan Enstedt, chief executive officer of Saab Asia Pacific, whose products include submarines, missiles, radars and fighter jets. “There are many examples of old and obsolete equipment fleets that are unable to keep pace with changing national security needs.”

Military outlays in Asia and Oceania -which includes Australia and New Zealand -grew 5.4% in 2015, outpacing a 1% rise in global spending, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Indonesia boosted spending last year by 16%, the Philippines by 25% and Vietnam by 7.6%.

Much of the spending is on air and naval capacity amid China’s assertiveness in the East China Sea, where it claims islets contested by Japan, and the South China Sea, where its land reclamation programme has spooked other claimants. “The growth of China’s national power, including its military modernization, means China’s policies and actions will have a major impact on the stability of the Indo-Pacific,” according to Australia’s Defence White Paper published in February.

A quarter of Australia’s defence investment over the next decade will be devoted to maritime capabilities.

US President Barack Obama’s recent trip to Vietnam may lead to business opportunities, as he lifted a four-decade ban on the sale of lethal weapons. The US embassy has hosted two defence contractor symposiums in Hanoi, attended by companies including Boeing Co. and Lockheed Martin Corp. Doug Greenlaw, a vice president at Lockheed, said in an interview in February that Asia is at the core of the company’s strategy. “The economies in Asia are growing faster than in the rest of the world – that tends to really drive security spending, so we see Asia as a growth market,” Greenlaw said. “We have great partnerships with the countries across Asia.”

Still, much of the spending comes off a low base. The Philippines spent 1.3% of GDP last year, up from 1.1% in 2014, according to Sipri, while Vietnam was largely flat at 2.3% of GDP.

China’s outlays were 1.9% of its economy, well below US expenditure last year of 3.3% of its economy.

Thailand may be one growth center this year. Defence spending will increase 7.3% and account for 7.6% of the overall budget, the Bangkok Post reported last month. On Thailand’s shopping list: 12 MI-17 transport helicopters from Russia, and four South Korean-made T-50 TH training aircraft.

Australia in April awarded an A$50 billion ($36 billion) contract for 12 submarines to France’s DCNS Group, in one of the world’s biggest defence deals. The government is considering tenders for nine warships worth A$35 billion and a A$3 billion deal for 12 offshore patrol vessels.

Indonesia, Japan, China, Vietnam, Singapore, Pakistan and Vietnam are building or buying submarines. Pakistan last year agreed to buy eight diesel electric submarines from China for an undisclosed price.

The greater reach of China’s air force is helping driving sales of planes. China has deployed combat aircraft on Woody Island in the disputed Paracel chain.

India needs dozens of warplanes after it scaled back a big order for Dassault Aviation SA’s Rafale jets to 36. Though no quantity has been announced, Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Saab have made pitches to build combat planes in India. About a third of India’s 650 fighter jets are more than 40 years old.

http://www.theindianpanorama.news/g...sia/aggressive-china-triggers-asia-arms-race/

I dont think china will be fool hardy enough to take on India in indian ocean. It would require a US type force to dominate a far away area. India will face more pressure in the himalayas given CPEC is in full swing.

 

[Kal Muah]

China will do what's in China's interest, India should do what in its interest. This type of articles doesn't suit us.

 

[Joe Shearer]

What Indians don't realize is that China is surrounded by many powerful
countries ( economically and/or militarily) such as Japan, the Phillipines, South Korea, Vietnam, Australia and so on. So China needs a large air force , navy, and army to protect itself from so many of its neighbors. (some of which host US military bases)

Whereas India only has one hostile neighbor Pakistan. A large scale war with China is unlikely
due to the geographical limitations so we can conclude that India is only threatened realistically by Pakistan.

@Joe Shearer What's your take on this?

Not really. China had peaceful relations with the Philippines and was feared by Japan and south Korea and Vietnam, the latter two having faced its aggression. It has now managed to perform a miracle by irritating Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia, to the point where they are now thinking of making serious expansion of their navy and air force.

I'd like to make a detailed reply perhaps this evening, if you don't mind. Am up to my arse in alligators.

 

[Tripoli]

Not really. China had peaceful relations with the Philippines and was feared by Japan and south Korea and Vietnam, the latter two having faced its aggression. It has now managed to perform a miracle by irritating Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia, to the point where they are now thinking of making serious expansion of their navy and air force.

I'd like to make a detailed reply perhaps this evening, if you don't mind. Am up to my arse in alligators.

I sometimes wonder what the Chinese strategic planners have in mind. Are some islands in the SCS really strategic
enough to anger all of the neighboring countries, even if China's historic claim on them is indeed valid?

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

I sometimes wonder what the Chinese strategic planners have in mind. Are some islands in the SCS really strategic
enough to anger all of the neighboring countries, even if China's historic claim on them is indeed valid?

Yes it is a very strategic region.

But even so, we could stand aside and let others take over our territories, as we did during the Century of Humiliation. When you are weak, you have to "吃苦" (eat bitterness), and we have become quite used to it.

However we gain nothing from it, these neighbors of ours will stand there grinning, with their hand out to grab more of our territories... as we burn in flames, just like during WW2.

They can say: "If you give up the rights over your territories, we will be nice to you". All the while, standing with a dagger behind their back, waiting for us to become weak again.

Eventually, you just stop caring about what foreigners think. We can bribe them with every concession and it won't make a difference in the end.

They can think we are aggressive if they want, but they have no idea what it would look like if we were truly aggressive.

 

[Genesis]

I sometimes wonder what the Chinese strategic planners have in mind. Are some islands in the SCS really strategic
enough to anger all of the neighboring countries, even if China's historic claim on them is indeed valid?

This thread is why. China this year is spending around 40 Billion dollars on new equipment alone that's about 80% total of the Indian budget, and more than all of ASEAN's combined budget, by quite a distance.

Yet there is an article on arms race, I didn't hear arms race between China and the US in the 60s, yet here we are.

For prestige, more so than islands. For China this is key, no one can be a major advanced economy without prestige. Japan, Germany, France, Britain and the US got theirs during WW2 and prior, we needs ours today.

Does it matter what China is doing today? I mean if the Jewish people can get over Germany, you have doubts on China's relationship in Asia?

Not really. China had peaceful relations with the Philippines and was feared by Japan and south Korea and Vietnam, the latter two having faced its aggression. It has now managed to perform a miracle by irritating Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia, to the point where they are now thinking of making serious expansion of their navy and air force.

I'd like to make a detailed reply perhaps this evening, if you don't mind. Am up to my arse in alligators.

That really doesn't matter, I can say why we are not in that bad of a relationship, but I can just mention, who on your list can withstand a Chinese offensive, or to put it another way, which president wants to be on the receiving end of us.

If history has shown anything, it's that people are selfish. Even if they can come to a common goal, which they can't, because deep down they know China is an "enemy" today, but could very well be an ally tomorrow, while their neighbors will forever be their competitor, not to mention also have competing claims.

Even by passing that, everyone would want someone else to be the one that takes the beating, I mean I'm not even reading as many articles on how these countries will beat China, it's all the US.

These country will get over it, because we are not peer competitors. Boxers other than Manny can get over losing to Floyd because they were never on the same level, Manny can't because they will always remain in the same conversation.

 

[Joe Shearer]

We're so agressive because we haven't had a war in over three decades?

Damn man, I wonder what you guys will say when a war ACTUALLY starts.

MUMMY?

Yes it is a very strategic region.

But even so, we could stand aside and let others take over our territories, as we did during the Century of Humiliation. When you are weak, you have to "吃苦" (eat bitterness), and we have become quite used to it.

However we gain nothing from it, these neighbors of ours will stand there grinning, with their hand out to grab more of our territories... as we burn in flames, just like during WW2.

They can say: "If you give up the rights over your territories, we will be nice to you". All the while, standing with a dagger behind their back, waiting for us to become weak again.

Eventually, you just stop caring about what foreigners think. We can bribe them with every concession and it won't make a difference in the end.

They can think we are aggressive if they want, but they have no idea what it would look like if we were truly aggressive.

That certainly is a point of view. You had your century of humiliation, time your neighbours had theirs. Perfect symmetry.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

That certainly is a point of view. You had your century of humiliation, time your neighbours had theirs. Perfect symmetry.

Luckily for them, they will never understand what China went through during our Century of Humiliation. We lost 20-30 million people during WW2 alone, in the most horrific and cruel manner (e.g. Unit 731 and human experimentation).

If you want to talk about "symmetry", that can only be achieved through nuclear warfare, to hit those kinds of numbers and that kind of suffering. But luckily they will never have to see that, they are living in times of peace and will continue to live in those times, unlike the people in the Middle East.

Unless of course someone is stupid enough to attack us. But I doubt that will happen, if they wanted to commit suicide there are much faster and easier ways to do that.

 

[Joe Shearer]

This thread is why. China this year is spending around 40 Billion dollars on new equipment alone that's about 80% total of the Indian budget, and more than all of ASEAN's combined budget, by quite a distance.

Yet there is an article on arms race, I didn't hear arms race between China and the US in the 60s, yet here we are.

For prestige, more so than islands. For China this is key, no one can be a major advanced economy without prestige. Japan, Germany, France, Britain and the US got theirs during WW2 and prior, we needs ours today.

Does it matter what China is doing today? I mean if the Jewish people can get over Germany, you have doubts on China's relationship in Asia?

That really doesn't matter, I can say why we are not in that bad of a relationship, but I can just mention, who on your list can withstand a Chinese offensive, or to put it another way, which president wants to be on the receiving end of us.

If history has shown anything, it's that people are selfish. Even if they can come to a common goal, which they can't, because deep down they know China is an "enemy" today, but could very well be an ally tomorrow, while their neighbors will forever be their competitor, not to mention also have competing claims.

Even by passing that, everyone would want someone else to be the one that takes the beating, I mean I'm not even reading as many articles on how these countries will beat China, it's all the US.

These country will get over it, because we are not peer competitors. Boxers other than Manny can get over losing to Floyd because they were never on the same level, Manny can't because they will always remain in the same conversation.

I don't know how you would define a bad relationship, if what is going on now is 'not that bad' a relationship.

Nobody on our list can withstand a Chinese offensive. I didn't know that was a criterion. No president on that list wants to be attacked, but I don't know that they can tell their people that China came and walked over them and it was a good thing nobody said or did anything.

Quite possibly, as you say, China may be an ally tomorrow. That doesn't take away the humiliation of being kicked around today.

Finally what rankles is not defeat, but the sort of arrogance that allows that comparison between Manny and Patterson. You must have topped in charm school.

 

[Kal Muah]

Going by the Chinese jingoism in this thread,it seems WINTER IS COMING, very quickly

 

[Joe Shearer]

Luckily for them, they will never understand what China went through during our Century of Humiliation. We lost 20-30 million people during WW2 alone, in the most horrific and cruel manner (e.g. Unit 731 and human experimentation).

If you want to talk about "symmetry", that can only be achieved through nuclear warfare, to hit those kinds of numbers and that kind of suffering. But luckily they will never have to see that, they are living in times of peace and will continue to live in those times, unlike the people in the Middle East.

Unless of course someone is stupid enough to attack us. But I doubt that will happen.

It still doesn't explain why, having suffered at the hands of the Japanese, you now want to grind the faces of the Filipinos, the Koreans and the Vietnamese into the mud. I am aware of the horrible atrocities perpetrated on you; did someone tell you how the same perpetrators used our bound and blindfolded soldiers for target practice? So what is the logic of assaulting everybody in sight because one of them assaulted you?

Nobody will attack China, but many will defend themselves against China. Even if it ends in defeat.