The Chinese Defense Industry.The Chinese defense industry remains state owned，is grossly inefficient，and has had an abysmal track record of developing and producingtechnologically sophisticated weaponry.Thus，when press articles，hawkish analysts，or even the DoD notes Chinas pursuit of asymmetric technologies （ways that theweak can attack the vulnerabilities of the strong ）such as anti-satellite systems，法语毕业论文，infor-mation warfare ，and radio frequency weapons（nonnuclear devices that generateelectromagnetic pulses，much like those of a nuclear blast ，that neutralize enemyelectron-ics ）it does not mean that the Chinese efforts will be successful.Infact，most of the significant technological progress in the Chinese military hasresulted from weapons purchases from Russia.In other words ，the $1billion or$2billion a year China spends on Russian weapon systemswhich so alarms anti-Chinahawks in the United Statesis actually a sign of weakness in the Chinese defenseindustrial base.For example，Chinas purchase of Russian Kilo diesel sub-marinesprobably indicates that significant problems exist with Chinas homegrown Song-classsubmarine program. Even when the Chinese buy advanced weapon systems abroad，they have difficultyintegrating them into their forces.For exam-ple ，the Chinese have had problemsintegrat-ing the Russian-designed Su-27fighter into their air force.17As in manyother militaries of the Third World ，deficiencies in Chinese training ，doctrine，and maintenance for sophisticated arms do not allow the full exploitation of suchsystems. Military Equipment.Although the best crude measure of a nations military poweris probably its defense spending（because it includes money spent for the all-importantintangibles ，such as pay，training ，ammuni-tion ，maintenance of equipment），a nations military capital stockthe dollar value of its military hardwareisa measure of its forces modernity.The U.S.militarys capital stock is almost $1trillion.In contrast ，despite the purchase of some sophisticated Russian weapons，the capital stock of the largely obsolete Chinese military is only one-tenth ofthat totalwell under $100billion.In fact，China has fewer top-of-the-line weaponsthan middle powers，such as Japan and the United Kingdom ，and smaller powers ，such as Italy ，the Netherlands，and South Korea.18A further measure of a militarystrue capa-bility is based on how much is spent per sol-dier （for training，weapons，and the like）。 Even when calculated from the inflated DoD estimate of Chinese defense spending$65billion per yearChinas spending is less than $33，000per troop ，whereas the UnitedStates spends $213，208and Japan spends $192，649.19That disparity in value mirrorsa wide gap in capabilities.In contrast to the thoroughly modern U.S.military，Chinas armed forces have been able to modernize only slowly and in pockets.Accordingto DoD，the Chinese have a large air force3，400combat aircraft but only about100are modern fourth-gener-ation aircraft20（for example ，the Russian-designedSu-27and Su-30）。Most Chinese aircraft incorporate technology from the 1950sor 1960s.In contrast ，all of the more than 3，000aircraft in the U.S.air servicesare fourth-generation aircraft（F-14s ，F-15s，F-16s ，and F-18C/Ds ），andfifth-generation air-craft （F-22s and F-18E/Fs）are already begin-ning production.Even Chinese pilots who fly the limited number of fourth-generation fighters getonly 180flying hours of training per year（the pilots of older aircraft get muchless）；U.S.fighter pilots average 205flying hours per year.21 1 |
