China & Russia close the tech gap vs USA in weapons race

China’s Military ‘More Than Just Catching Up’
New Chinese military hardware remarkably more advanced
BY TYREL SCHLOTE • FEBRUARY 20


hina’s military is not on par with the United States military, but it is “catching up,” according to a report released this week by the International Institute of Strategic Studies (iiss).

In its annual report titled “The Military Balance,” the iiss details how China has made “remarkable” progress in its military advancement, particularly in avionics, missile technology and naval capability. According to Bastian Giegerich, director of defense and military analysis at iiss, “in some selected areas, our assessment is indeed that China is doing more than just catching up.”

China has invested billions of dollars in its military to bring it into the 21st century. No longer content to be a regional power, China has made huge strides in the past year to take its military to the global stage. In 2017, China opened its first overseas base in the African nation of Djibouti. This allows Chinese naval vessels to operate farther from home for longer periods of time.

At the same time, the Chinese Navy continues to expand. In 2017, it launched its first Type 055 guided missile destroyer, the largest post-World War ii warship to be produced in Asia. It has seven more of these vessels under construction. China is also constructing a second aircraft carrier. Regarding China’s expanding navy, Giegerich told Die Welt, “In the last four years, China has built vessels with a total tonnage that is greater than the total tonnage of the French Navy and is roughly equivalent to the total tonnage of the British Royal Navy.”

The Chinese Air Force is also quickly catching up with American air superiority. It recently entered its own fifth-generation aircraft, the J-20, into service. Fifth-generation fighters incorporate stealth technology and have supersonic cruising speeds. This makes the J-20 a rival to America’s F-35 fighter. The model challenges America’s “monopoly on operational stealthy combat aircraft,” according to Dr. John Chipman, director general and chief executive at iiss.

Still, this new fighter is a serious problem for the West. Since the end of the Cold War, air superiority has given Western nations an advantage over their enemies. Planes could operate with relative freedom in combat zones. But, according to Giegerich, “those days now are over.”

The third area of advancement the report drew attention to was China’s missile capability. Its PL-15 extended-range air-to-air missile could enter service this year. “This weapon appears to be equipped with an active electronically scanned array radar, indicating that China has joined the few nations able to integrate this capability on an air-to-air missile,” reported Chipman.

The bbc reported that a “very long-range air-to-air missile [is] intended specifically to strike at tanker and command and control aircraft that now orbit out of harm’s way; essential but vulnerable elements in any air operation.” Improving air-to-air missile technology pushes American support aircraft even further from Chinese forces.

The J-20 fits right in with that strategy. As Business Insider reported, this new jet isn’t meant to go head to head with American jets. Instead of direct confrontation, these fighters deter confrontation almost completely:

Malcolm Davis, a senior analyst at the Australia Strategic Policy Institute, told Business Insider that the J-20 is a “fundamentally different sort of aircraft than the F-35.”

Davis characterized the J-20 as “high-speed, long-range, not quite as stealthy (as U.S. fifth-gen aircraft), but [the Chinese] clearly don’t see that as important.” According to Davis, the J-20 is “not a fighter, but an interceptor and a strike aircraft” that doesn’t seek to contend with U.S. jets in air-to-air battles.

Instead, “the Chinese are recognizing they can attack critical airborne support systems like awacs (airborne early warning and control systems) and refueling planes so they can’t do their job,” Davis said. “If you can force the tankers back, then the F-35s and other platforms aren’t sufficient because they can’t reach their target.”

Analysts call this China’s “anti-access area denial” strategy. This strategy is a combination of missiles, sensors and weaponry that tries to keep an enemy further away from its shores. By developing weaponry that attacks support aircraft, China can limit the range of the enemy’s attack aircraft.

The same strategy can be seen in the artificial islands China is creating in the South China Sea. Despite its repeated denials, China is militarizing those islands. It has placed anti-ship cruise missiles on them. Like the air-to-air missiles, these cruise missiles force American naval vessels to operate farther away from China in the event of a conflict.

All these advances in avionics, missile technology and naval capability create an overlapping defense grid that keeps potential enemies further away from China. The iiss report points out that China still lags behind in its ground combat capabilities. But China is working to prevent any enemies with superior forces from even being able to initiate a land war.

The iiss report confirms the Trumpet’s warning on China’s strategy in the Pacific. Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry warned that China is “steering the world toward war.” In our July 2016 issue, he pointed out that the Chinese regime is now challenging “seven decades of American naval dominance in the Pacific Rim.” This aggressive behavior “should alarm the world!” he wrote.

“Since Japan’s defeat in World War ii, America has protected this vital trade route and brought peace to this part of the world,” Mr. Flurry wrote. But because of new military technology, China is pushing America out of the region. American forces can no longer safely operate there. “China is intimidating the nations of Southeast Asia into submission to its will,” he wrote. “It is forcing these countries to do what it wants. Everything is headed in the direction of war.”

These new technologies make it much harder for America to confront China. America now risks significant losses if it ever needs to step in to defend its allies in Asia.

The reality is that China’s grand strategy in Asia preys on America’s broken will.

This is exactly what the iiss report outlines. While Western powers still have some advantages over Chinese forces, they need to exert a strong will to stay ahead of their rival. Along with continuing to develop better weapons, Western nations need to be “resistant to attempts to erode their cohesion and will in peacetime as well as war.”

The problem is that America’s will is already broken, as Bible prophecy said it would be (Leviticus 26:19). So is its cohesion with its allies. It has been weak in its responses to Chinese aggression in the South China Sea and elsewhere. It is pulling back as the foremost leader in the world, isolating itself from its traditional allies, and, despite its enormous spending on its advanced military, already losing battles of strategy against China.

China’s military expansion is a harrowing sign of what is about to befall America. To understand more about what the Bible says about China’s military advancement, be sure to read “China Is Steering the World Toward War.”

https://www.thetrumpet.com/16931-chinas-military-more-than-just-catching-up

As for the actual military sphere, at present there is not a single significant technology where the United States would not be ahead of the PRC. In addition, most of the American technologies have been tested on the battlefield to one degree or another. And, on the contrary, almost all modern PLA weapons, including those based on modern technologies, have not yet been tested even in peacetime. Only Chinese export unmanned aerial vehicles have experience in combat use. Considering that the PRC continues to critically depend on American patents in many areas of electronic products, as well as in the production of microprocessors, one can be sure that the US military-technological leadership will remain in the short and medium term.

But huge spending on R&D, already comparable to the US, will provide China with technology parity in the long term, although so far the presence of strong scientific schools and a smooth combination of public and private investment in R&D gives the United States a significant advantage. Where these factors are of decisive importance - in microprocessors, aerospace, medicine, biotechnology - the US advantage is great and will remain for a long time. Where these factors, for some reason, are not so significant - primarily in a number of new areas (network technologies, including the same 5G) - or where the advantages of the huge capacity of the Chinese market affect, China has every chance to break into the leaders.

To achieve military-technological parity, China must equalize its military spending with America's and maintain it for a long time. In addition, in the PRC, the transfer of civilian technologies to the military sphere is still ineffective. And if the Americans themselves kindly somehow do not help their competitor to gain a geopolitical victory, as Gorbachev's Soviet Union did, the Sino-American military technological parity will not be achieved until 2040–2045.

A direct consequence of the competition between the United States and China in technology will be the disintegration of the global space of technological standards and solutions, dominated by the United States, into two areas - American (Western) and Chinese. This will significantly worsen the leadership position of the United States, depriving America of its role as a global technological unifier and weakening the global position of its high-tech industries. On the contrary, China's position will be strengthened by the emergence of its own technology sphere of standards.

It is technological rivalry that will determine all other aspects of the confrontation between the United States and China, and the development of computing power and networking solutions will be a breakthrough success. This will change the face of the entire civilization and, in particular, the face of war. In military-technological terms, one can expect completely remote warfare with the massive use of drones and smart ammunition, as well as total anti-missile defense capable of hitting many of the most difficult targets, which will devalue traditional nuclear forces and deprive Russia of the last attribute of a great power left to it from the USSR.

And Russia, after another one and a half to two decades of efforts to preserve its military-technological autonomy, will be forced to choose one or another pole of competition. And it is not at all predetermined that this side will be China. If American policy is sufficiently patient, flexible and open, then it will have a considerable chance of getting Russia on its side, especially since the Russian elite dreams of exactly this. Only now, there is less and less reason to expect flexibility and wisdom from Washington.

George1 wrote:Technologies become the main line of confrontation between the United States and China

As for the actual military sphere, at present there is not a single significant technology where the United States would not be ahead of the PRC. In addition, most of the American technologies have been tested on the battlefield to one degree or another. And, on the contrary, almost all modern PLA weapons, including those based on modern technologies, have not yet been tested even in peacetime. Only Chinese export unmanned aerial vehicles have experience in combat use. Considering that the PRC continues to critically depend on American patents in many areas of electronic products, as well as in the production of microprocessors, one can be sure that the US military-technological leadership will remain in the short and medium term.

But huge spending on R&D, already comparable to the US, will provide China with technology parity in the long term, although so far the presence of strong scientific schools and a smooth combination of public and private investment in R&D gives the United States a significant advantage. Where these factors are of decisive importance - in microprocessors, aerospace, medicine, biotechnology - the US advantage is great and will remain for a long time. Where these factors, for some reason, are not so significant - primarily in a number of new areas (network technologies, including the same 5G) - or where the advantages of the huge capacity of the Chinese market affect, China has every chance to break into the leaders.

To achieve military-technological parity, China must equalize its military spending with America's and maintain it for a long time. In addition, in the PRC, the transfer of civilian technologies to the military sphere is still ineffective. And if the Americans themselves kindly somehow do not help their competitor to gain a geopolitical victory, as Gorbachev's Soviet Union did, the Sino-American military technological parity will not be achieved until 2040–2045.

A direct consequence of the competition between the United States and China in technology will be the disintegration of the global space of technological standards and solutions, dominated by the United States, into two areas - American (Western) and Chinese. This will significantly worsen the leadership position of the United States, depriving America of its role as a global technological unifier and weakening the global position of its high-tech industries. On the contrary, China's position will be strengthened by the emergence of its own technology sphere of standards.

It is technological rivalry that will determine all other aspects of the confrontation between the United States and China, and the development of computing power and networking solutions will be a breakthrough success. This will change the face of the entire civilization and, in particular, the face of war. In military-technological terms, one can expect completely remote warfare with the massive use of drones and smart ammunition, as well as total anti-missile defense capable of hitting many of the most difficult targets, which will devalue traditional nuclear forces and deprive Russia of the last attribute of a great power left to it from the USSR.

And Russia, after another one and a half to two decades of efforts to preserve its military-technological autonomy, will be forced to choose one or another pole of competition. And it is not at all predetermined that this side will be China. If American policy is sufficiently patient, flexible and open, then it will have a considerable chance of getting Russia on its side, especially since the Russian elite dreams of exactly this. Only now, there is less and less reason to expect flexibility and wisdom from Washington.

https://bmpd.livejournal.com/4202729.html