Ms. Condoleezza Rice is concerned about mainland China's ever-increasing military spending. While visiting Australia this week, the U.S. secretary of state said Beijing's 14 per cent increase in its defense budget was "a lot" of money.
This concern is shared by many in the world, given the fact that mainland China faces no military threat from other countries. The money could and should be better spent on more pressing matters at home, such as tackling the country's rural woes which are getting worse every day.
America concern about Beijing's military buildup is not new. Last summer, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld severely criticized the mainland for spending too much on defense, which he said might tip the balance of regional stability. Shortly afterwards, the Pentagon issued a report on China's military, in which the United States viewed the mainland as a threat.
Beijing, of course, has been refuting America's criticism, saying its defense budget for 2006, which totals US$35 billion, is moderate and reasonable. Mainland Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing said last week that China's military spending per capita is only one-77th that of the United States.
That may be true, to be sure. But the mainland's 14 percent increase in defense spending can hardly be justified. The US$35 billion accounts for 7.5 per cent of the regime's total government expenditure, which should give priority to social and economic issues instead of military buildup.
The reasons are obvious. The mainland's rural woes, known as 'san nong wen ti', or three agricultural problems concerning peasants, villages, and agriculture, are malignant tumors that threaten the Communist Party's hold on power. Rural unrest has been growing as farmers are getting restless when their farmland is grabbed by greedy developers in collaboration with corrupt officials.
In a country of 1.3 billion souls, 800 million live in the countryside which has not been benefiting from the industrial boom of the urban and coastal areas. Many of the people still live below the poverty line. The glaring income inequality between the two social divides has become the source of widespread discontent and turmoil.
Prime Minister Wen Jiabao is not unaware of the problem. At a press conference following the conclusion of the National People Congress -- the mainland's top legislature -- he apologized for having not done enough to improve the lot of the farmers, and vowed to do more.
That's why Beijing has increased spending on rural development by 14.7 per cent to US$42 billion in 2006, about 8.9 per cent of the overall budget. But that's just a drop in the ocean. It amounts to a meager US$7 per head.
In Mao's days, farmers did not live well, but at least they did not have to worry about public health and education. Now, however, health care and education are no longer free. The government's scrapping of the agricultural tax and an experiment in health care insurance in rural areas are not enough to cure the rural woes. Against this background, the increase in the defense budget is a misplaced priority. Building more missiles and aircraft carriers serves no sensible purpose because they are useless in a world where disputes cannot be resolved by military means. The mainland's national security depends more on social stability at home than on military expansion. Bread and butter matter more than guns for mainland China, whose peaceful rise as a world power needs balanced and wholesome development in all sectors, not the least of which is the agricultural sector.

http://www.chinapost.com.tw/editoria...GRP=I&id=78894

hey,if the chinese intend to spend more money in their military,it's their own business,not ours.

And if China decided to invade it's neighboring countries, massacre it's people, and spread and support third world communist dictators. Than I guess it's not our problem.

Touche. Centurion that argument was the same one the European powers spouted in the 1930's whilest Hitler armed Germany. You ignore your neighbour at your own peril. If Cameroon suddenly devoted 30% of its budget to military spending you cannot tell me that Nigeria would not be slightly uneasy and then couple that with a ruling junta which is ideaologically opposed to Nigeria and I know any prudent Nigerian would be most concerned about just what the hell their intentions were. And would you take their answer at face value? This final question is in fact the crux of the whole crisis with China and the free world.

ai....what is China's military spending in percentage of GDP?
what is China's overall military spending in comparison to that of U.S

by these politicians' logics, U.S is a bigger threat of world satistically


You have to see that China devots much much much more (just annoucned after the parliment session) to education, medicare and other things to truly improve people's life

the increase of military budget is also mostly for increasing salaries (which are really low in comparison to civilian jobs), to pay for the rising cost of fuels (same problem faced by U.S military) and to improve the diet and living standard of troops (aren't that great??).


and Luis...is that any single indication that China will invade one of her neighbour right now (without being provoked)/

Originally Posted by centurion_ue

hey,if the chinese intend to spend more money in their military,it's their own business,not ours.

you cant say that about China. A country which has dangerous intentions to dominate the South eastern part of Asia militarily and economically

The percentage of the US GDP spent on the military over the past 60 years...
http://www.truthandpolitics.org/mili....php#gdp-graph

Year Military spending as percent of GDP
1940 1.7
1941 5.6
1942 17.8
1943 37.0
1944 37.8
1945 37.5
1946 19.2
1947 5.5
1948 3.5
1949 4.8
1950 5.0
1951 7.4
1952 13.2
1953 14.2
1954 13.1
1955 10.8
1956 10.0
1957 10.1
1958 10.2
1959 10.0
1960 9.3
1961 9.4
1962 9.2
1963 8.9
1964 8.5
1965 7.4
1966 7.7
1967 8.8
1968 9.4
1969 8.7
1970 8.1
1971 7.3
1972 6.7
1973 5.8
1974 5.5
1975 5.5
1976 5.2
1977 4.9
1978 4.7
1979 4.6
1980 4.9
1981 5.1
1982 5.7
1983 6.1
1984 5.9
1985 6.1
1986 6.2
1987 6.1
1988 5.8
1989 5.6
1990 5.2
1991 4.6
1992 4.8
1993 4.4
1994 4.0
1995 3.7
1996 3.5
1997 3.3
1998 3.1
1999 3.0
2000 3.0
2001 3.0
2002 3.4
2003 3.7

Now for China...
http://rand.org/news/press.05/05.19.html

The problem with the Chinese numbers is that these are the "official" budget figures and do NOT take into account the vast amounts of money raised by the PLA through their business ventures. Those funds are completely at the PLA's discretion with no oversight or accounting to any governmental body so no one, not even the Chinese government, knows how much money they are raising or where it is going.

well. some thing must say, who have said japanese navy can defeat chinese navy in half an hour?
what is purpose for american aircrafte carrier in aisa? peace keeping???
what what is the logic behind that china have no big threat? how big the big is??
and chinese military spending is half of the japanese army while china has 10 times more population.

It is kind of scary if you view their responses to Iran. How many countries does China support militarily? i.e. How many countries does China have a military presence in?

Using the logic that China is using this money "for the good of it's troops" I would like to see how their armaments are funded. China has a very large military from what I assume. But raising the budget by 14%? Geez that IS an awful lot just to care for the troops.

The study estimates that the purchasing power of current Chinese military spending runs between $69 billion and $78 billion in 2001 dollars, and could reach $185 billion in 2001 dollars in 2025. This amounts to more than 40 percent of current U.S. defense spending.

14% of 69 - 78 billion is alot of money just to increase the standard of living for Chinese troops.

chinese-canadian:

When in history (past and recent) has one "communist like" country ever had to have provocation to invade another country? I am very ignorant when it comes to China so if I my opinions seem overly biased then it is likely due to ignorance.

Originally Posted by zhjsg

well. some thing must say, who have said japanese navy can defeat chinese navy in half an hour?
what is purpose for american aircrafte carrier in aisa? peace keeping???
what what is the logic behind that china have no big threat? how big the big is??
and chinese military spending is half of the japanese army while china has 10 times more population.

Will your country give Tibet back to its own people and end the occupation of Tibet then?