Anthony H. Cordesman
China, however, is scarcely Russia, and Xi is scarcely Putin. China’s steady rise to the status of a military and economic superpower has so far shown that China is cautious; willing to move slowly and carefully; and has emphasized politics, economics, and indirect military pressure over conflict. Assessments like the annual U.S. official China Military Power Report also make it clear that Chinese strategy integrates civil and military operations and that China’s civil advances in trade, technology, and manufacturing capability cannot be separated from its rising military budgets and force levels.
It is something of a strategic cliché to note Sun Tzu’s famous statements, such as, “To fight and conquer in all our battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy’s resistance without fighting,” and “The greatest victory is that which requires no battle.” Yet, no one who attends Chinese military conferences or talks to Chinese planners can ignore the extent to which Chinese military and civil leaders still emphasize the use of economic and political power, military demonstrations and exercises, and the indirect use of force.
There is a very real cultural difference between China and the West in addressing the need for integrated civil and military strategies, and China seems much more committed to integrating civil and military activity at every level.
No comments:
Post a Comment