China chooses guns, not butter

sandy

Active member
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/editorial/detail.asp?GRP=I&id=78894
 
Last edited:
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)/
 
centurion_ue said:
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/military-relative-size.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.
 
zhjsg said:
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?
 
Marinerhodes said:
14% of 69 - 78 billion is alot of money just to increase the standard of living for Chinese troops.

1. it is 14% out of the official 20 billion (geez..read the news)
2. the so-called 70 billion estimation has absolutely no basis or no details listed for that number,
a better estimation done in Modernizaing China's military book, is about 40 billion u.S, that includes the bugdet for Armed police, space program and equipment purchasing (the book lists very specific details, unlike other estiminatoins..which just provide a number)
3. think about it, soldiers in PLA got paid like 20-30USD a month, officers got like 100-200USD a month, these numbers are far behind the average wage of city jobs in China....it makes sense to rise them, facing inflation and rising cost of living and everything, indeed, in the next couple years, officers' salaries will rise about 100%...still far behind in my opinion..

4. Hey my Iranian friend, CHina will give back Tibet if U.S and Canada give back their lands to first nations. Do not demand other nations to do things that you cannot even do yourself.

5. As Bulldog's article points out, China's perentage is like 2.8 in GDP for military spending, like 1% behind U.S' spending, despite bigger population and much bigger size of army..

6. Iranian friend, any indication that China wants to invade any of the South Asian nations? any sign????? any supporting details for your accusation?
 
Point 6. The constant unlawful violations of Japanese maritime territory and the continuing Ryoko islands dispute would be hard evidence. Soft evidence would be mainland China's continual lying to the world so that professed intentions cannot be trusted.

Marinerhodes, check out the other thread about the increase in military spending to get a better perspective on the issue of pay for PLA troops. ;)
 
ai....
even Republic of China says Ryoko (an island that is much closer to China than to Japan) belongs to Chinese people...not japanese, who militarily took it away..


and that is your evidence that China wants to invade japan?

wow..very strong evidence
 
bulldogg said:
Marinerhodes, check out the other thread about the increase in military spending to get a better perspective on the issue of pay for PLA troops. ;)

I gave it a look see, thanks !!
 
Rabs said:
pardon? China is spending more on defense than Japan.
well. if u dont agree, can u give me the data to show that my data is wrong.
japanese spend around 60billion.
china around 35.1 billion
 
phoenix80 said:
Will your country give Tibet back to its own people and end the occupation of Tibet then?

well. something u must know. it is not communist part that invaded tibet and control it, china have get control of tibet long time ago, the first time is around year 1000. and from year 1600, tibet become a part of chinese again, also later it became more symbolic.
if china must return tibet, then US and canada should return their land to the native people by the same logic
 
the japanese guy always post threads about chaina.
and the purpose of him is that he want to lead the people of others know that china is a threaten to the world peace.

but we should exactly know that japan is a real threten to the world peace.

JApan navy rank world 2. and of course usa rank nuber one.

in the economy japan is the number 2 of the world.of course usa ia number 1.

in population ,japanese population is far more larger than FRANCE,RUSSIA,ENGLISH,GERMANY.

in territeries:japan territeries is larger than germany and england.

IN FACT ,IN MY OWN EYES,JAPAN IS A REAL THREAT TO THE WORLD PEACE.THE PURPOSE WHY HE ALWAYS CLAIMES CHINA IS A THREATEN IS THAT THEY WANT TO BE THE REAL THREATEN TO THE WORLD IN A SECRET WAY .

japan spends a ot of money in army ...also japan can spend money in secret way....why do you always claiming that only china spend money in a dark way why all you own countries are such innocent ????

as to the fact i do not know .i do not know whether it is truly that china spend money in a cecret way .

but the only thing i knoiw is that if china can spend money in a secret way,then other countries can also do it ...

it is strange that while the thief stealing something and he frame a case against others.

of course it is urgly face showed.

do you think it is ok that all of yours are lawfull ??
all the things you have done is right ???
obviously it is self-centered.
but unfortunately you the men have not realized that.
and ,of course this is a pity.
because you are the products of you government.

if you think china spend some money in a seceet way ,then others countries can also do !!!!!
 
And we have a winner!!

Yingying, it seems you are from China. How about giving us some facts if the posters here are so far off.

I am not sure how Japan is a real threat to world peace. Seems a bit of a biased opinion to me.

I am not sure how the population of any countries or the quantity of territory any country holds is relevant to this topic other than disputed territories.

All countries have what I like to call a "hidden budget". Monies spent that is not public knowledge. Look to the increase or decrease in the Chinese military and tell me if they are or are not spending extra money that is not accounted for.

As for framing anyone or showing an ugly face. This is a discussion/debate forum. This is where people come to express ideals and ideas and others to disagree or agree. No one is framing anyone.
 
Back
Top