IT is clear from military statistics that the US has an overwhelming superiority over China in most if not all spheres of any likely war. Be it in nuclear weaponry, warships, submarines, military aircraft or military satellites, the US alone – without allies in the West, and in Asia – has the resources to outshoot China.
At the same time, the military capacity of the US is increasing every year. Latest reports show that the US spends more on national defence than China, Russia, India, Saudi Arabia, the UK, Germany, France, South Korea, Japan and Ukraine combined.
US defence expendi-ture of US$870 billion (RM4.07 trillion) in 2022 dwarfed that of China’s estimated US$230 billion (RM1.07 trillion).
The US is also the world’s leading armament producer. The US accounted for 40% of the total volume of international arms transfers between 2018–2022.
Japan and Australia, members of the QUAD (also comprising the US and India) that set up to counter China in the Indo-Pacific region, are the US biggest weapons customers while Taiwan, under President Tsai Ing-Wen, has purchased several billions of dollars worth of weaponry during President Joe Biden’s administration.
Meanwhile, current wars in Gaza and Ukraine are keeping US armament factories busy and ensuring big cheques for the political and military lobbies supporting them. They are also keeping investors in the US “defence” companies happy.
Any war, even a heightened threat in the Asian and Pacific region, will undoubtedly produce enormous returns to the US and Western military-industrial complex even if the world’s share markets drop.
China, despite its enormous industrial and manufacturing capability, ranks fourth in the world in armament exports after the US, Russia and France, with an estimated 5.2%, or one-eighth of the US volume. China’s armament exports fell by 23% from 2013-17 to 2018-2022 while that of the US increased by 14%.
These figures speak for themselves as to which country is a more militarised one, and which country can be considered to be benefitting from wars with its consequential negative impact in the world.
US encirclement of China
Not satisfied with military superiority, US politicians and military leaders are engaging in attempts to inflate China’s military capabilities and expen-ditures to justify further increases in US spending.
Together with these efforts aimed at scare-mongering through hyping the China challenge to US military supremacy, the US has long had its military bootprint and agenda all around the world, especially in the Asian region.
Within the Indo-Pacific region, the US has for more than 70 years implemented a “first island chain” security network aimed at projecting US military power. Initially directed against the Soviet Union after the end of the Second World War and following the outbreak of war in Korea in 1951, it is now aimed primarily against China whose coastline the US considers as potential enemy territory.
The midpoint and key part of this first island chain is to be found in Taiwan, popularly referred to by American policymakers as their “unsinkable aircraft carrier”.
In addition, a second American security island chain has been developed with Japan, the Philippines, Australia and the islands of Micronesia as components. As with the first chain, the target is China.
Within these two island chains are stationed hundreds of thousands of US military personnel. A recent US congressional report revealed that 375,000 US military personnel are presently based in 66 distinct “defence”, that is, military installations in the Indo-Pacific region.
In contrast, China has one foreign military base – not in Asia but in Djibouti, Africa.
All evidence shows conclusively that China’s military capacity and capabilities are far inferior to the US for now and in the foreseeable future.
At the same time, Chinese leaders have repeatedly declared that China has no intention to challenge or unseat the American position in the region. This does not mean that China will be a sitting duck or an easy target should the US decide to take on China and what Chinese leaders regard as the country’s national interest and legitimate position in the Asian region.
Hence, China today is in the midst of two major campaigns to turn its People’s Liberation Army into a “world-class military” by 2027 and to achieve “national rejuvenation” by 2049.
Will China’s growing technological prowess and nuclear arsenal be sufficient to deter the US from the war, which some members of the American leadership are stoking, and in which they appear in a hurry to initiate for fear that US military superiority will be lost soon?
Latest “war” front
Meanwhile, the US has opened up new fronts to take down China.
At the end of her visit to Beijing in late August, in which it was announced that the US and China were to hold regular conversations about commercial issues and restrictions on access to advanced technology to reduce tensions between the world’s two largest economies, US Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo stated: “I think it is a very good sign that we agreed to concrete dialogue, and I would say, more than just kind of nebulous commitments to continue to talk, this is an official channel.”
Three months later, speaking at an annual national defence forum in California, she engaged in ratcheting anti-China sentiment and walked back on her earlier declaration of stabilising relations between the two countries.
Speaking to lawmakers, Silicon Valley and US allies for more funding to stop China from getting semiconductors and cutting-edge technologies, according to her, China is “the biggest threat we have ever had” and she stressed that “China is not our friend”.
“Everyday China wakes up trying to figure out how to do an end run around our export controls, which means every minute of every day, we have to wake up tightening those controls and being more serious about enforcement with our allies.”
Raimondo should realise that war between the US and China on any front – whether military, commercial, trade or economy – will not see only China as the loser. The US, even if it wins, will pay a heavy price, too. As with the rest of the world.
Lim Teck Ghee’s Another Take is aimed at demystifying social orthodoxy. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com
