Suchergebnisse

The Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) has since the late 1990s been engaged in an ambitious, concerted, and methodical transformation. As a result, the PLA has noticeably improved its capabilities in several specific areas - particularly missile attack, precision-strike, power projection at sea and in the air, and joint operations. In particular, it has made significant advances in exploiting "informatisation" when it comes to developing advanced weaponry, accelerating the pace of military modernisation, and creating new levers of military power for the PLA. While Chinese military power may still pale in comparison to the US armed forces, the strength of the PLA relative to its likely local competitors in the Asia-Pacific region, such as Taiwan and Japan, has grown significantly, and will likely continue to grow over the next ten to 20 years. As a result, China is definitely gaining an edge over other regional militaries in the Asia-Pacific region. (China Perspect/GIGA)

There is growing concern that Southeast Asia is in the midst of a regional arms race. Certainly many nations in the region have been on a veritable "shopping spree" for advanced conventional weaponry, and this has been enabled by a corresponding increase in military spending. However, these acquisitions do not fit the pattern of an "arms race" as laid out in prevailing theory: mutually adversarial relationships, explicit tit-for-tat arms acquisitions, the intention of seeking dominance over one's rivals through arming and intimidation, etc. Additionally, the actual numbers of arms being acquired are, for the most part, relatively small. That said, the regional re-arming process is significant in that the types of arms being acquired go beyond the "mere modernization" of regional armed forces and could greatly change the nature and character of potential regional conflicts. The resulting arms competition, or arms dynamic, has at least the potential to contribute to a classical "security dilemma", a situation whereby actions taken by a country can actually undermine the security and stability that they were meant to increase. (Contemp Southeast Asia/GIGA)

There is growing concern that Southeast Asia is in the midst of a regional arms race. Certainly many nations in the region have been on a veritable "shopping spree" for advanced conventional weaponry, and this has been enabled by a corresponding increase in military spending. However, these acquisitions do not fit the pattern of an "arms race" as laid out in prevailing theory: mutually adversarial relationships, explicit tit-for-tat arms acquisitions, the intention of seeking dominance over ones rivals through arming and intimidation, etc. Additionally, the actual numbers of arms being acquired are, for the most part, relatively small. That said, the regional re-arming process is significant in that the types of arms being acquired go beyond the "mere modernization" of regional armed forces and could greatly change the nature and character of potential regional conflicts. The resulting arms competition, or "arms dynamic", has at least the potential to contribute to a classical "security dilemma", a situation whereby actions taken by a country can actually undermine the security and stability that they were meant to increase. Adapted from the source document.

During the 2000s, navies in the Asia-Pacific region have experienced a significant, if not unprecedented, bout of naval expansion. This buildup has been quantitative, but more importantly, qualitative as well, and in many cases goes beyond mere modernization. It has been driven by both rising regional defense spending and by an increasingly competitive arms business, which is resulting in the export of some of the most advanced types of weaponry. Regional military modernization activities are intended to increase national deterrent and defensive capabilities, but the process of mutual, reciprocated arming with increasingly advanced conventional weapons can also lead to costly arms competitions, perhaps draining resources from other, more pressing social needs. It also contains the kernel of a classic security dilemma, whereby such arming can actually undermine that very security it was intended to improve.