World spending on defense for the first time in 15 years fell by $1.75 trillion in 2012, which marked a 0.5-percent reduction in comparison with 2011, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). The share of the U.S. has fallen below the level of 40 percent for the first time since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Russia and China entered the top three of the countries that increased their military spending.
The research of the institute is based on public expenditure on the maintenance of armed forces, namely, military exercises, salary or remuneration for troops, as well as other employee benefits, operating costs, procurement of weapons and equipment, military construction, research and development works, administrative costs, etc. The total military spending of the world in 2012 in comparable prices made up 1.753 trillion dollars, which was 2.5 per cent of global GDP.
The Institute has also published the list of 15 countries with largest military budgets. The first place still belongs to the United States with its 682 billion dollars, accounting for 4.4 percent of GDP. The second place is taken by China with $166 billion (2 percent of GDP), and the third place - by the Russian Federation with $90.7 billion (4.4 per cent). The statistics on the U.S. is official. Then comes the United Kingdom - $60.8 (2.5) and Japan - $59.3 (1.0). The top five accounts for 60 percent of world military spending - 1.06 trillion dollars.
(...)
China's defense industry by 2025 will become the largest in the world, according to the forecast from the National Intelligence Council of the United States from 2008. This is a long-term perspective - a part of the "Chinese Dream", to protect sovereign interests and put an end to strategic interests of the Western dominance in Asia and the Asia-Pacific region. In addition, Beijing has ongoing territorial disputes with Japan, Vietnam and the Philippines in the South China Sea.
China has ambitious plans to improve strategic forces, including the nuclear submarine fleet; the country also plans to create a strategic bomber. In the next ten years, China should develop fifth-generation fighter jets and aircraft carriers, including through cooperation with Russia. China's military budget, according to IHS Global Insight, will double from 2011 to 2015, exceeding the combined defense spending of all other countries in the Asia-Pacific region.
China has a long way to go to catch up with the USA, of course. However, the correlation between them has decreased from 7 to 1 in 2003, and then from 4 to 1 in 2012, SIPRI's Sam Perlo-Freeman, one of the authors of the report, told the Associated Press. But he stressed out that the quality gap was still incredibly high. For example, the U.S. has 11 aircraft carriers, while China - only one. "It takes time to make quantitative indicators develop into qualitative changes," said Perlo-Freeman.
http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas/17-04-2013/124314-rearms_race-0/
Chinese Defense White Paper Challenges American Leadership, Military Readiness
ResponderEliminarOn the eve of Secretary of State John Kerry’s testimony to Congress on securing American interests abroad, the release of the Chinese defense white paper is a reminder of the significant challenges confronting the U.S. in the Asia–Pacific region.
Sequestration may have Washington in knots, but there is no comparable situation in Beijing. The eighth Chinese defense white paper highlights that China’s military is not only substantial and modernizing, but that it will be a growing factor worldwide. This matters immensely to the U.S. because our interests and those of the Chinese—from Syria and Iran to the Korean Peninsula, East China Sea, and South China Sea—so often are at odds.
Retitled “The Diversified Employment of China’s Armed Forces,” this year’s white paper discusses the roles and organization of the Chinese armed forces, including not only the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), but also the People’s Armed Police Force (PAPF) and the militia.
For the first time, the Chinese are providing some insights into the PLA’s “order of battle,” i.e., how their forces are organized and deployed. The PLA Army, for example, is described as fielding some 18 combined-arms corps, as well as some independent divisions, with a strength of 850,000 men. These 18 corps are deployed to seven “military area commands,” what were formerly termed “military regions.”...
http://blog.heritage.org/2013/04/17/chinese-defense-white-paper-challenges-american-leadership-military-readiness/
Q: My name is Muzi (sp?) Yomiuri Shimbun, staff writer in Tokyo. I'd like to ask you about China; because you did not refer to China at all on your speech. "Yes, has the military build-up of China become a threat to the security of Asian region and to the world?" is my question. And what is your perception about the situation?
ResponderEliminarAnd secondly, what can NATO do to stabilize the situation in Asia? And according to your perception, has your perception changed after you visited Asia? Thank you.
ANDERS FOGH RASMUSSEN: Thank you very much for your questions. First on China, we do not consider China a direct threat to NATO Allies.
Of course, we have taken note of the fact that the Chinese defence budget has increased substantially during recent years while defence budgets in NATO Allied nations have declined. These declining defence budgets in NATO nations are, of course, a matter of concern, seen from my chair as NATO Secretary General. And from an overall strategic perspective, of course, it may have a long-term impact on the global power balance that we are cutting defence budgets while China and other emerging powers are increasing their defence budgets.
But again, we do not consider China a direct threat to NATO Allies. We hope that China will use its increasing influence on the international scene in a peaceful way and in a constructive way to maintain international peace, security and stability.
I hope and I believe that the Chinese leadership realizes that it is in China's interest to maintain such international peace, security and stability; because the Chinese economic success depends very much on a stable world order.
Let me just add to that, that I would very much like to see a strengthened dialogue between NATO and China. NATO operates on the basis of United Nations mandates. And we have special relationships with four out of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. Because three of them are Allies: the US, UK and France. And with the fourth, Russia, we have a special partnership rooted in the NATO-Russia Council. So we have a structured dialogue with four out of five permanent members of the UN Security Council. But with the fifth, China, I would like to see a more structured dialogue. We have some dialogue. But it could be enhanced. And that could, I think, also contribute to preventing any misunderstandings.
(...)
On China, which kind of dialogue? Well, what I mentioned was my desire to see a more structured China-NATO dialogue. But obviously it would also be to the benefit of the security in Asia if a multilateral dialogue could take place among major players in this region. And that leads me to... to your third question.
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/opinions_99634.htm