Skip to content

Dai Xu on China’s Military Strategy

Dai Xu is a Colonel in the Chinese Air Force. He has served as the Secretary, News Officer, and Navigation Station Director for an aviator institute of the Air Force’s surface to air missile unit. He graduated from the Air Force Communication College and Air Force Political College. He has over 100 publications including military academic articles, political commentaries, and military commentaries. He is the leading “Hawk” in the Chinese military. The Hong Kong magazine Cheng Ming said that Dai Xu has taken the most prominent “Hawk” position from Zhu Chenghu, who once said that China could afford to sacrifice its coastal regions to have an atomic war with the U.S. Dai Xu is very vocal and has a large reader base in China. His articles have sharp viewpoints and tones and are very provocative. He expressed in his blog that “It is a pity that we have not had any wars in the last twenty years. Peace is a fortune for a country, but a misfortune for soldiers… I dare not to claim that I am a scholar, but I can claim that I am a true warrior.” [1] His understanding of the U.S. is also of note. He alleges, “Actually, the U.S. is the general sponsor for all the forces that are hostile to China.” The following summarizes Dai Xu’s comments on the Sino-US relationship, and China’s military strategies.

The U.S. Suppresses China [2]

The U.S. has surrounded our country on two sides, which are two segments of one line. One segment is the circle over the sea. The sea circle starts at Japan.”

Continuing from the Japanese islands, the next important point in the circle is Taiwan… We cannot take the problem of Taiwan Island lightly. As long as it does not come back (to China), it will remain a problem for us.”

After Taiwan, the ending point of the sea circle is the South China Sea. I would say that (about the territory dispute of the South China Sea), either (other countries) take all and we completely lose, or we take everything and they have nothing. There is no win-win situation. The situation in that place is different from other situations. The issue of territory cannot be negotiated…”

“To the west of the South China Sea is India… (India has blocked China) from the Indian Ocean to the South China Sea. Thus, from the Pacific Ocean to the Indian Ocean, the two gates are basically closed. The U.S. is the gate closer.”

“During the Cold War era, there was only one sea circle. It was called a “Crescent Surrounding” at that time. It was like the crescent moon, a very small circle. However, it is different now. That is to say, the circle in the ocean stops at India. The circle on the land starts with India. Therefore, the circle on the land extends from the circle in the sea. From India, it goes to the west, then to the north, and then to the east.”

“After India, it is Pakistan (on the land circle). Recently, the situation in Pakistan has been very severe. Not only is the Pakistan military battling with the Taliban; the U.S.’ military action in Pakistan has basically surpassed those in Afghanistan. They are battling in the Southwest of Pakistan, where it is close to the Indian Ocean… There is a sea port on the Indian Ocean called Gwadar Port, which was built by our Chinese.”

That is why on May 9, 2009, an American wrote an article saying, “Why do we have to battle in this place? It is to try our best to force China, who built the Gwadar Port and needs the natural gas from Iran, to withdraw from that place…” Therefore, I think that the U.S. is actually fighting against China behind the scenes, while fighting with the Taliban on the surface. Thus, in that place, many of our enterprises have been driven out. We have withdrawn all the construction projects there. We can do nothing at present. Therefore, the U.S. military action in that area (having achieved its goal) has basically stopped. That is actually a U.S. action against the mainland.”

From the mainland to the ocean, the U.S. has also laid down an Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) network… The network was laid by the U.S. around China from the Korean Peninsula all the way to India. The U.S.’ ABM system circle in the ocean is connected by the Aegis Shield Warship with ABM capabilities. From the ocean to the mainland, it forms a C-shaped circle… This ABM system is to stop missiles from China, and not allow missiles to be launched from China’s territory.”

Another point is the U.S. strategy towards China, which is comprehensive. The U.S. occupation of China includes economic deprivation, surrounding China, militarily suppression, political pressure, attacking China from both inside and outside, continuous interference, and a trade blockade. The overall goal of the U.S. for China is as follows. The U.S. has created Japan after the model of a eunuch. Now it wants to shape China after Japan, which is rich but not strong. If China insists on independence and protecting its national pride, the U.S. will employ all kinds of means to suppress China, including instigating wars between China and its neighboring countries, direct military interference, and even eventually dividing China.

After the war between China and the U.S. in 1951, the CIA of the U.S. issued an injunction. At first, it was not called an injunction. It was about how to use state-level action to divide and destroy China from all sorts of aspects, levels, and angles. They wrote 10 approaches… 1. Try the best to seduce and degenerate the younger generation using material enticement. Encourage them to oppose their education. Create interests and opportunities for them to be lustful (This is very clear to our friends in Shenzhen). Make them not to feel ashamed of their vanity. 2. Try the best to make them long for the lifestyle of the Americans. 3. Make them focus on sports, pornography, indulgent games, crime movies, religion and superstition. In addition, create something boring and silly every now and then for their people to discuss openly, and then plant the seeds of separation in the backs of their minds. 4. Find opportunities, particularly in the ethnic minority groups, to separate the country, separate the ethnic groups, separate their feelings, and instigate old and new resentment and hatred among themselves. That is a strategy that cannot be ignored. 5. Create derogatory images of their leaders. 6. Promote democracy, that is, make them trust the U.S. 7. Try the best to encourage their government to spend money, and encourage them to borrow money from the U.S. Thus, we would have the full confidence to destroy their credit… 8. Ruin their industries using our economic and technical advantages. As long as their industries can be paralyzed without even realizing it, we can encourage turmoil in society. Therefore, on the surface, we should help them very compassionately. Thus, their government will appear soft and a soft government may have greater turmoil. 9. The next step is to destroy its value system. 10. Last, secretly ship different kinds of weapons to arm some of (China’s) enemies and people who might become their enemies. That is the big circle surrounding us that I mentioned above. The U.S. not only provides weapons to all the countries in the circle, but it also forms alliances with them, may it be a factual, open or invisible alliance.”

“Therefore the Rand Corporation offered a suggestion to the U.S. government in 1999 that the U.S. strategy toward China should be carried out in three steps. First, westernize and divide China by making China have western ideology. That is to make China rich but not strong and not confrontational toward others. Second, if the first step does not have an obvious effect, then comprehensively suppress China and form a strategic joint surrounding of China… If neither of the first two steps works, then have a war with China. Of course, the best format for the war is that the U.S. does not directly participate in the war. The U.S. can support the regions in China that seek independence or the neighboring countries that have major conflicts with China or instigate riots inside China.. That explains why there was the March 14 incident last year (2008 in Tibet) and why there was the July 5 incident this year (2009 in Xinjiang). There will be other incidents down the road.”

“In addition to surrounding China geologically, the U.S. has other conspiracies including economic manipulation and U.S. Dollar traps, etc. …”

At the same time, the U.S. has been working inside China to organize and support all anti-China forces. As a matter of fact, we all know those anti-China forces. Actually, the U.S. is the general sponsor for all the forces that are hostile to China. However, the problem is that those forces are now cooperating with each other. They used to work separately. The situation is different now. Therefore, Dalai contacted Rebiya Kadeer when he created the March 14 incident, and Rebiya contacted Dalai after she caused the Xinjiang incident. They stood together again… Dalai is connected to Democracy activist Wei Jingsheng and the Democratic Progressive Party. At the same time (the U.S.) has set up a great number of spies inside China (in many major economic offices and academic organizations). Many of our academic organizations have researchers working for them or serving as visiting professors and conducting academic exchanges. Those professors take advantage of their own reputations to spread notions that serve the U.S.

The last one is that the U.S. has led the world to create mob-like trade attacks on China. After Obama declared a sanction against China in September, 55 countries sued us within just a few days and started anti-dumping actions. This was said by an American. He said, “Right now, the countries in the world are forming alliances to initiate mob-like counter attacks against China, using the regulations of the WTO.”

China Faces Wars

My point is that (in the next 10 years China) has the possibility of facing wars, and not just a single war…

Eventually, China may face a war. Why? There are several reasons. First, the U.S. is a country with a comprehensive military industry. A third of the U.S. enterprises engage in producing military products…Who would want military products if there were no wars? Therefore, the U.S. has wars everywhere and creates wars everywhere. The U.S. propels its industrial development and technology advancement through having wars.

The second reason that we cannot avoid war is that war always follows fortune. That is the law of the world economy. Thus, we have seen three major shifts of fortune in the 20th century. The first one is before the 1950s. Europe became the center of fortune for the world. Therefore, two world wars broke out in that place. The second shift happened during 1970-80. The oil in the Mideast became the West’s lifeline. Hence, from then on, the Mideast had 5 major wars in 20 years. By now, fortune has had its third shift, to the Asia-Pacific region, and to China, the center of the fortune of the world. How can China escape the disaster of war?

The third reason that we cannot escape from war is that economic crises generally lead to war. WWI was caused by the economic crisis in England. WWII was associated with the economic crisis in the U.S. in 1929… A crisis happened again in 2009 and the Rand Corporation has claimed that instead of spending $700 billion to rescue the economy, it would have been better to spend that money on a war. Therefore, for the U.S., the issue is not whether to have a war, but where to have the war and who to fight. In my opinion, currently, China is facing the danger of being divided (after a war)…

The Military Strategy for China

“Why can’t the GDP be a measure for being a superpower? Why historically was China defeated, even though at that time it had such a high GDP?  That is because the composition of our GDP is problematic… Now, China has the second largest GDP in the world, but what components are in the second largest GDP? The GDP in Japan and the U.S. consist of traditional and modern industries including manufacturing, electronics, ship building, aviation and aeronautics, automotive, and so on. However, ours are real estate, toys, liquor, and cigarettes. Eight hundred million pairs of pants to exchange for an airplane. It was proven over 100 years ago that GDP is not a good measure. Using this thing, we can only deceive ourselves and our people but not others. Being fat does not mean being strong; weight does not equal strength.” [3]

“I suggest that our military forces should have the eagle striking strategy, to fight the battle outside… I said that we should have the war 2,500 miles away (from our mainland). I resolutely insist that our first military ability should be to provide 2,000 – 2,500 miles of defensive depth. Because we do not have allies, aircraft carriers, or strategic pivots, what should we do? The task falls on our air force. We should start the war far beyond 2,500 miles. If anyone has the thought of hurting us, we should kill him first…” [2]

“I have not got to the point of the vertical direction. On this direction, we should close out the open window on our country (as China is weak in defending its air and space). In the future, the war will start from above. Therefore, I said that we should develop upward to the sky perpendicularly and develop to the direction of the ocean horizontally. We definitely cannot let the threat come from these two directions. That is why I resolutely insist that our military reform should clearly focus on these directions, stepping towards the ocean and the sky. We should not waste our resources on the land and continue to that direction. The reason is that our coastal areas are the places where fortune concentrates, the heart of the country, and we cannot afford to let them be threatened by any countries.” [2]

“(As for the South China Sea), at present, the countries around us have over 1,100 oil wells but we do not have even a single one. Why? Personally, I think it is because we take awareness of marine territory too lightly. It is the territory of our country. Whether to explore the resources in this area should not just be based on direct economic benefits. It should be considered from the perspective of the safety of the territory of our nation’s land and sea. It has strategic implications.” [4]

“Even though it may have a high cost, and even if it costs more than buying oil, we still should explore the natural resources there. Also, even if the cost is high, it is temporary. In the long run, once it reaches a large scale, the cost may no longer be high… Therefore, in this place, if we have oil wells, we can use them to develop fishing industry, tourism, etc. All those aspects can form a large economic circle. In addition, those places are close to Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macao. Once we use them as a large resource base, the whole ecological environment will change.” [4]

“Therefore, the foremost and the most critical thing is to take actual action. By now, those small neighboring countries have constructed airports in places they have occupied. However, we can only send small ships, but not large ships, because we do not have the base. We should construct a large base there. The base should be able to support large helicopters. With future development and expansion, it should support small or mid-sized airplanes. Also, the navy should construct some deep-water ports so that large warships and large commodity and fishing ships can port. Thus, it can provide all kinds of services to the oil companies and large fishing companies.” [4]

[1] Dai Xu’s Personal Blog
[2] “U.S. Strategy, China Crisis” (Dai Xu’s Speech at Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province) 
[3] Speech at the Global Times, “The Strategic Challenges for China in the Next Ten Years”,w1252941371916731
[4] 22 Degree Observation, “How Should China Respond to the Escalation in South China Sea?”,w1251214874128521