China Navy has got 19 new ships year-to-date 2016!

[ChineseTiger1986]

The last part of your statement is the key to tackling the US ambitions. The last thing the US wants is a powerful Pakistan, it has come to some kind of understanding with Iran because Iran does not possess nukes. Propping up Pakistan as much as possible and as fast as possible, the way they are propping up india, is the solution to this threat directed towards China. Sooner or later Pakistan will do the job for China if she is propped up adequately, so my suggestion is to avoid a conflict at the SCS at this stage if possible but if the US continues its bellicose, a conflict close to the Chinese shores won't be that risky. If China offers Pakistan couple of nuclear subs the US will stop thinking of threatening China and think of solving the dispute amicably.

True, now the US has already pre-elected Hillary Clinton. When she comes to power, she will keep sneezing Russia to death. Russia alone cannot handle such pressure.

Now China has to play the main pillar of the alliance.

In order to match NATO, China has to pop out the weapons as fast as possible, because it is already the new Cold War. Also to make the further economic integration with Pakistan-Iran-Russia. Finally, it is the time to arm China's allies to the teeth.

 

[Shotgunner51]

China's 2015 GDP is about 11 trillion USD, and its current defense budget intensity (defense budget vs. GDP) is 1.9%.

If we increase our budget intensity to the level of Vietnam (2.3% of GDP), PLA can get 11,000 * 0.4%= 44 billion USD additional budget.

052D destroyer costs about 600 million USD per unit. So 44 billion USD = 052D destroyer x 73!! Even if a nuclear submarine is 3x the cost of 052D destroyer, the additional budget still means nuclear submarines x 24!!

China's 2015 defence spend was around $145 billion so that's ~1.3% of GDP, is very modest I think. China is indeed a pacifist nation.

I agree with you bro, considering China's modest defence budget is stretched across a wide spectrum (as compared to non-nuclear states) to cover like space warfare, ASAT, thermonuclear deterrance, supercomputing and cyber warfare, the progress of PLAN building is doing well.

Luckily China's defence budget does not carry heavy war liabilities like medicare and compensation for war veterans, such costs could be astronomical even if indirect losses of national productivity (workforce, GDP) are excluded from defence budgets.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...2a5dce-97ed-11e2-814b-063623d80a60_story.html​

China's defence progress is so far satisfactory like you mentioned the PLAN, after all it's a typical peace-time economy with wealth & assets rapidly being expanded at home and overseas (China mainland alone is already second largest creditor nation after Japan, already world's largest trade nation, largest trade surplus). China's does have adequate even excessive industrial capacity (in some areas even more than rest-of-the-world combined, e.g. 1.2 billion tonnes of steel per annum) as well as strategic reserves, can raise defence budget to above 2% GDP or even to war-time economy, however I don't see it necessary anytime soon.

​

 

[Economic superpower]

$215b per SIPRI. I just wondered how much you defence budget will be, let say in 5-10 years?

5 years: $500 billion (4% of GDP)
10 years: $1 trillion (4% of GDP)

 

[T-Rex]

True, now the US has already pre-elected Hillary Clinton. When she comes to power, she will keep sneezing Russia to death. Russia alone cannot handle such pressure.

Now China has to play the main pillar of the alliance.

In order to match NATO, China has to pop out the weapons as fast as possible, because it is already the new Cold War. Also to make the further economic integration with Pakistan-Iran-Russia. Finally, it is the time to arm China's allies to the teeth.

Does Hillary have any special 'affection' for Putin? What makes you think that she's going to put pressure on Russia? As for Pak-Iran-Russia alliance, india is the loose end, China should convince Russia to stop speaking for india. For the sake of Russia's own long term security it's high time the Russians understood where Modi's allegiance is.

 

[Viet]

Wow, It is already more than Vietnam's GDP. So it is not wise to get into an arm race with China. Better be friends than foes.

that is true. I always promote a cooperation with China. most of Vietnamese are for the same cause. it is unwise for you to seek confrontation, because it will lead you to nowhere. we have seen China having much higher proportion of GDP of the world, with armies much more powerful than the PLA today: the Han, the Song, the Yuan, the Ming, Qing, with China economy having 1/3 to 1/2 of the world GDP. our strategy is a combination of diplomacy, alliance, deterrence, and last but not least maintaining military edge over China.

but it is not about VN, we may go back to topic.

 

[Shotgunner51]

This is true but I think building subs take more time. It seems like the Chinese leaders are placing their bets on ACs. ACs make big fat target for anti-ship missiles, so they need plenty of protection. Since China has no plan to project her power across the oceans I really cannot comprehend why China is so adamant about acquiring these floating behemoths.

Bro the big picture is that after WWII it's always American responsibility to patrol the seas, keep the sea lanes safe and ensure low trade costs for all economies. However since on one hand US debts are mounting (the once largest and sole creditor nation after WWII now goes to the opposite end, becomes largest debtor nation on this planet, NIIP already at -$7.5256 trillion sinking at a speed $1 trillion per year), on the other hand China is now probably the biggest beneficiary of free trade, so while American taxpayers should continue to fund this post-WWII international obligation, it's time for China to help pickup some bills.

SSBN's are for deterrance of war, safeguarding humanity from doomsday fanactics. Being top trade partner for two third of all economies, annual trade $4 trillion, trade surplus $600 billion, China's investments and interests are vested across the world. AC's are for protecting sea lanes, protecting China's overseas investments-assets, eliminating overseas anti-China terror cells. Both SSBN and AC are necessary, and well within China's very modest defence budget.

 

[T-Rex]

Bro the big picture is that after WWII it's always American responsibility to patrol the seas, keep the sea lanes safe and ensure low trade costs for all economies. However since on one hand US debts are mounting (the once largest and sole creditor nation after WWII now goes to the opposite end, becomes largest debtor nation on this planet, NIIP already at -$7.5 trillion sinking at a speed $1 trillion per year), on the other hand China is now probably the biggest beneficiary of free trade, so while American taxpayers should continue to fund this international obligation, it's time for China to help pickup some bills.

SSBN's are for deterrance of war, safeguarding humanity from doomsday fanactics. While AC's are for protecting sea lanes, protecting China's overseas investments-assets, eliminating overseas anti-China terror cells. Both are necessary.

Yes it's true that securing the sea lane boosts trade but securing the sea lanes from whom that is the question. Definitely you don't need ACs or destroyers for tackling pirates. You see, with responsibility comes power and control and that has always been the US objective. If China can do it, it will be good for us but definitely the US won't like it and the US satellites won't hesitate to express their displeasure on behalf of their master because in the end it's all about control and dominance and trade is the excuse.

 

[Brainsucker]

China's 2015 defence spend was around $145 billion so that's ~1.3% of GDP, is very modest I think. China is indeed a pacifist nation.

I agree with you bro, considering China's modest defence budget is stretched across a wide spectrum (as compared to non-nuclear states) to cover like space warfare, ASAT, thermonuclear deterrance, supercomputing and cyber warfare, the progress of PLAN building is doing well.

Luckily China's defence budget does not carry heavy war liabilities like medicare and compensation for war veterans, such costs could be astronomical even if indirect losses of national productivity (workforce, GDP) are excluded from defence budgets.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...2a5dce-97ed-11e2-814b-063623d80a60_story.html​

China's defence progress is so far satisfactory like you mentioned the PLAN, after all it's a typical peace-time economy with wealth & assets rapidly being expanded at home and overseas (China mainland alone is already second largest creditor nation after Japan, already world's largest trade nation, largest trade surplus). China's does have adequate even excessive industrial capacity (in some areas even more than rest-of-the-world combined, e.g. 1.2 billion tonnes of steel per annum) as well as strategic reserves, can raise defence budget to above 2% GDP or even to war-time economy, however I don't see it necessary anytime soon.

​

I don't think that it is fair to compare the Chinese defense budget and the US by using the USD and the American standard price tag as the basis. Because they are different. A middle income Chinese who live in Shanghai can enjoy the same luxury level as the American middle income who live in New York. But they spend fewer just because the RMB value is lower than the USD. But it doesn't mean that the Chinese is poorer than the American.

The example is this
At a glance, we see that the price of J-10A is way lower than F-16. In a sense, J-10A is inferior to F-16, but actually it is not that case. I don't say that J-10A can beat F-16 or vice versa. But more of J-10A is cheaper just because they paid the material, workers, etc with RMB. If it is the American who build the J-10A, the price tag will be way higher than the Chinese J-10A; maybe approaching the F-16 price tag; simply because they have to pay the production cost with the USD.

So even if the Chinese Def budget is only $145 billion, while the US is more than $500 billion, I don't think that China's def budget is lower than the US. That's why they can pay all those ships production without any problem and doesn't need to raise the def budget significantly to pay them all.

What do you think about that? As somebody who work in economic sector, I think you know it better than me, so please tell me if I'm wrong or not.

 

[T-Rex]

That's great

Time to add more production lines for more ships, submarines and fighter jets.

Go into full scale military buildup mode.

I've a better idea. In indian occupied Kashmir violent protests have been going on for months. I think finally these people want to come out of the indian union. Of course, it is in the best interest of the west to support indian persecution of the Kashmiris for strategic reason. This is the moment, if China gives the green light to Pakistan with adequate supply of high tech weapons I think Pakistan can break the status quo as far as occupied Kashmir is concerned, the status quo actually helps the west. If Pakistan succeeds it will stop the US at SCS right on its track because it will have to intervene in india to save the pinoys. Other than this a naval confrontation at SCS seems inevitable.

 

[Shotgunner51]

Yes it's true that securing the sea lane boosts trade but securing the sea lanes from whom that is the question. Definitely you don't need ACs or destroyers for tackling pirates. You see, with responsibility comes power and control and that has always been the US objective. If China can do it, it will be good for us but definitely the US won't like it and the US satellites won't hesitate to express their displeasure on behalf of their master because in the end it's all about control and dominance and trade is the excuse.

After WWII, US had the largest industrial base, an intact home economy, and was the biggest creditor to the whole world. It's naturally their obligation to help others, say the Marshall Plan (for 17 war-torn European countries), policing the sea lanes, keep a lid on Nazism and Imperial Militarism from revival.

Nowadays US still maintain the biggest tax regime in the world, with largest consumption, largest imports, but debts are piling. Instead, China has the largest industrial base, largest gross savings (because of low consumption), largest trade, largest exports, largest trade surplus. The top creditor nations are: Japan, China mainland, Germany, China Taiwan, China Hong Kong SAR, Switzerland, Singapore, Norway and GCC states. As a responsible global citizen with huge vested interests overseas, China should help a debt-stricken US by picking up a fair share of the international security bills.

You are very right bro, threats on sea lanes and Chinese global assets are not just from pirates, but can also come from unstable sovereign governments, radical ideologists, war profiteering politicians. China should be ready to meet these challenges on international security.

I don't think that it is fair to compare the Chinese defense budget and the US by using the USD and the American standard price tag as the basis. Because they are different. A middle income Chinese who live in Shanghai can enjoy the same luxury level as the American middle income who live in New York. But they spend fewer just because the RMB value is lower than the USD. But it doesn't mean that the Chinese is poorer than the American.

The example is this
At a glance, we see that the price of J-10A is way lower than F-16. In a sense, J-10A is inferior to F-16, but actually it is not that case. I don't say that J-10A can beat F-16 or vice versa. But more of J-10A is cheaper just because they paid the material, workers, etc with RMB. If it is the American who build the J-10A, the price tag will be way higher than the Chinese J-10A; maybe approaching the F-16 price tag; simply because they have to pay the production cost with the USD.

So even if the Chinese Def budget is only $145 billion, while the US is more than $500 billion, I don't think that China's def budget is lower than the US. That's why they can pay all those ships production without any problem and doesn't need to raise the def budget significantly to pay them all.

What do you think about that? As somebody who work in economic sector, I think you know it better than me, so please tell me if I'm wrong or not.

You are correct bro, the RMB-denominated defence budget does have good purchasing power in domestic procurement.

 

[Beast]

Yes it's true that securing the sea lane boosts trade but securing the sea lanes from whom that is the question. Definitely you don't need ACs or destroyers for tackling pirates. You see, with responsibility comes power and control and that has always been the US objective. If China can do it, it will be good for us but definitely the US won't like it and the US satellites won't hesitate to express their displeasure on behalf of their master because in the end it's all about control and dominance and trade is the excuse.

Some small countries on instruction on US will pick on China or try obstruct China sea lane. The US create ISIS create havoc on middleast. With introduction of nuclear weapon. Superpower no more have direct confrontation like in WWII but instead start proxy war and funded each other allies to weaken one another superpower. Like vietnam war or Afghanistan war. CV is not to use against pirates but to intimidate small power trying to play trick on superpower. Crush them until they submitted to exert your power. Of cos cruise missile and long flight of aircraft reduced much needed carrier influence but carrier ensure Superpower are able to fight proxy war anywhere on earth as long as they are sea lane and big ocean.

 

[Jlaw]

True, now the US has already pre-elected Hillary Clinton. When she comes to power, she will keep sneezing Russia to death. Russia alone cannot handle such pressure.

Now China has to play the main pillar of the alliance.

In order to match NATO, China has to pop out the weapons as fast as possible, because it is already the new Cold War. Also to make the further economic integration with Pakistan-Iran-Russia. Finally, it is the time to arm China's allies to the teeth.

yes, hilary in charge means a US China conflict in SCS though indirect means. hilary is warmlnger so it's best to prepare faster than ever before

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Does Hillary have any special 'affection' for Putin? What makes you think that she's going to put pressure on Russia? As for Pak-Iran-Russia alliance, india is the loose end, China should convince Russia to stop speaking for india. For the sake of Russia's own long term security it's high time the Russians understood where Modi's allegiance is.

India is starting to the dump the Russian weapons in favor of the American weapons.

 

[CAPRICORN-88]

India is starting to the dump the Russian weapons in favor of the American weapons.

IMO Not really.

India cannot really afford US weapons (India is already complaining that the maintenance cost for the C-17 which she acquired from USA is much too high) nor has USA any real intention to transfer any real hi-tech technology to her.

At the end of the day, it is good old Russia which India can depend on. (The nuclear submarines which she leased from Russia)

But India's ruling party short-sightness and flirtation with Obama's USA has put Putin's Russia on the defense. India will have to prove her loyalty to Russia all over again.

So you see, India is starting to pay for her double dealing (Beside China, Russia also opposed India entry into the NSG).

India just cannot have the cake and eat it.

 

[english_man]

Regarding the posts in this thread. Someone mentioned building missile craft. Well i think the Chinese are happy enough with the newish type 022 class, and i can't see China building anymore such craft for quite a while...........as China is now only interested in construction of major surface warships. btw:- how many 022's does China really have? Some sources say 83 others 60. Its a bit confusing. Anyway, the 056 light Frigate, seems like the smallest surface combatant that China will be building for the forseeable future.

Submarines...........true China has only a handful of nuclear hunter subs, but does possess a largish fleet of modern, quiet diesel subs. Whereas, the US does possess a fair number of nuclear hunter subs, but doesn't have any non-nuclear subs whatsoever.
I think, the nuclear submarine issue will be the last piece of the puzzle to be solved, in China's naval ambitions, and it will be hard for us to see what is going on, as nobody outside of China seems to know much about Chinese submarine matters.
Firstly, they need to get the 095 as i believe it will be called, to be a very good sub indeed, then build it in reasonable numbers, but until that happens, China's overall goal, whatever that happens to be, will not be realised.

Regarding 'Carriers', i've heard that the new carrier coded 002 will be built at JN shipyard, and will be a complete new Chinese design, unfortunately, the Chinese leadership don't want us to see it until its built, as i've read that a giant wall has been constructed around the dock area at JN where the carrier will be built............is this true?

Regarding the next US President.........i don't think that China would be happy with Clinton, as i could see her being very troublesome in US-China ties, as she appears to be a very hawkish type of politician.
I think China would prefer Trump, as even though he appears to be a bit crazy, his experience of the past in being a businessman, will give hope to Chinese leaders that they could work with him. Well that's what i think, anyway.

The issue of India, in my opinion is not an issue, as their military is in such a mess, they are of no threat to anyone. They are not loyal to anyone when it comes to buying arms, and at the moment they don't seem to have the money to buy the items they really want.