Defense/Military - 73. page

Xinhua recently published an article by a teacher of National Defense University on internet war. The article pointed out that, following the United States, France, Germany, Japan, India and South Korea all strengthened their research and established internet war theories as well as development plans. The author believed that internet war by itself created a new and independent warfare. The strategic war competition of Information Age is primarily internet war. The analysis of the form of internet war in the article is solely aiming the US, with all the data and discussions around US military infrastructure and activities. The author concluded that the development of internet war is determined by 3 factors: (1) militarization of the internet; (2) militarization of physical infrastructure network; (3) wireless interconnectivity. The military threats brought forward by internet war are beyond cyberspace.

Source: Xinhua, June 17, 2010
http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2010-06/17/content_13684781.htm

China launched a fourth satellite into space at 23:53 Wednesday June 2, as a part of its satellite navigation and positioning network known as Beidou, or Compass system. The satellite was launched from the Long March 3 carrier rocket. 

China’s state news People’s Daily recently published a short article by Zhou Yaning, a major general and commander of a missile base of the Second Artillery. The article discussed real-life training for future wars. It focused on the necessity for deep understanding of what “real-life” means. The article points out a major mistake about understanding “real-life”: the lack of “enemy intelligence.” Zhou believes there are two cases in which the Army members often misunderstand the situation: (1) imagining the enemy by using past impressions, such as still keeping a “gun shooting group” at the launch field; (2) imagining the enemy situation according to an understanding from the movies. For example, commanders worry too much about satellite capabilities portrayed in a recent foreign movie.

Source: People’s Daily, May 7, 2010
http://theory.people.com.cn/GB/11538382.html

On May 6, 2010, PLA Daily published an article saying that stand-alone network warfare is an imminent development trend.

According to the article, “a stand-alone network war may be a limited type of network warfare, which is a war that relies on network warfare weapons as the major combat means or a war in which network operations have a significant impact.” The example given by the article explained that a network war that had achieved the war purpose was Israel attacking Syria on September 6, 2007. In that war, Israeli warplanes successfully attacked Syria’s Russian-made "Doyle-M1" missile defense system by carrying the U.S.-made “Schutte” network attack system.

The article suggests China’s PLA view the emergence of a stand-alone network war as being “imminent” so as to seize the command ascendancy in future wars. 

Source: PLA Daily, May 6, 2010
http://chn.chinamil.com.cn/xwpdxw/gdylxw/2010-05/06/content_4214595.htm

Jiang Luming, a Chinese military expert, states that China must promote military and civilian integration in the light of the economic globalization and information warfare, but it should blaze its own path. “It is totally unrealistic,” said Jiang, to follow the recommendations of western military economists that China should acquire its military capabilities from the international arms market, instead of building its own. According to Jiang, China should study certain major national and military constraints, such as the fact that China has no military allies to rely on, has been under a long term high tech embargo, and is still relatively weak in technological foundation. Jiang serves as a professor at the Economic Research Center of the National Defense University.

Source: Xinhua, May 5, 2010
http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2010-05/05/content_13468672.htm

China News Agency recently reported that Xiong Guangkai, former General and Army Deputy Chief of the General Staff, commented on China’s security situation. Xiong believes the overall positive security status remains unchanged, but the nation still faces many risks that require the army to remain alert. The “Grand Security Vision” is needed.

Xiong summarized three areas of “traditional risks”: (1) regional wars happen frequently; (2) international military competition intensifies around a core of new age military reforms; (3) nuclear proliferation and control are very much alive. However the Grand Security Vision includes six non-traditional risks: (1) the international financial crisis changes the development model; (2) anti-terrorism needs more attention; (3) information security stands out as a crucial risk; (4) energy safety is becoming a challenge; (5) food supply reliability is increasingly problematic; (6) climate change and public health issues are on the rise.

Source: China News Agency, April 29, 2010
http://www.chinanews.com.cn/gn/news/2010/04-29/2253225.shtml

China’s navy has nine access paths to go to the ocean, but only three or four paths on the east side of China, between Japan and Taiwan, can be used frequently and do not require notification to other countries, the International Herald Leader reported. The U.S. and Japan have beefed up their military and surveillance capabilities to closely monitor and contain China’s navy. The report quoted an anonymous Navy official’s suggestion: China should use these ocean access channels more frequently and familiarize itself with the environment, build large surface ships to cover submarines to go to the ocean during wartime, and improve its capability to control these key access paths.

The report is a comment on the Japanese media’s heavy coverage of ten of China’s navy ships, including two submarines appearing in international waters between Okinawa and Miyako Island on April 10.

Source: International Herald Leader, April 26, 2010
http://news.xinhuanet.com/herald/2010-04/26/content_13424980.htm

On April 19, 2009, www.cntheory.com, which is directly under the leadership of the CPC Central Committee Party School, published an article titled, “China cannot be without an aircraft carrier forever.”

According to the article, Chinese Defense Minister Liang Guanglie said to a visiting Japanese Defense Minister in 2009, "Among the big nations only China does not have an aircraft carrier. China cannot be without an aircraft carrier forever."

The article argues that, for international strategic considerations, China must have an aircraft carrier. To maintain domestic prosperity, it must first maintain its strength overseas. Aircraft carriers are needed not only for the protection of territorial waters and coastal resources, but also for the maintenance of overseas interests and dealing with the potential threats from international hostile forces.

Source: www.cntheory.com, April 19, 2010
http://www.cntheory.com/news/XXSBRDGZ/2010/412/1041210346FD5B4169K6AH6KD06F81.html