The U.S. Think Tank persuaded the U.S. Eagle: Mo Borrow "China Threat" to increase military expenses!

The online magazine of "Responsible Governance of the Country" in the Institute of Qinxi National Affairs Institute on June 16th, the original title: stop using the "Chinese threat" to sprinkle more money for the Pentagon to carry out large -scale national defense construction. Since the end of the Obama administration in 2016, U.S. defense expenditure has increased by nearly 1/3, an increase far exceeding the consumer price index of residents. Based on the price adjustment of the inflation rate, the current defense expenditure in the United States is higher than that at any time during the Cold War, but the Eagle School is still promoting excessive increase in national defense budget. With the convening of important hearings of the Military Commission of Congress (Congress) (Congress) next week and next week, Congress may promote greatly increasing military expenditure and make it far exceeding the 4%increase target set by the Bedde government.

The call for increased military expenditure is largely based on China's "unprecedented threat". As mentioned in the new report of the Quinxi Institute, it exaggerates that the Chinese military threat has been rooted in Washington's words. In the modern history of the United States, there is never a major country that is expected to surpass the United States in total economic and global economic leadership. Therefore, China often appears in the US decision -making circle in an exaggerated way, described as a threat to the United States that is blurred but extreme, and even about the survival of the United States. However, it is emphasized that China is a "extreme military threat" seriously describing the essence of competition in the United States and China, and seriously exaggerate the possibility of China's current military strength and the future of military operations. In fact, the United States has greatly increased military expenditure in response to China's rise, which is likely to damage the national security of the United States.

First of all, although China has more actively enhanced military strength in recent years, there is no clear evidence that China is determined to replace the United States and become a global military -dominated force. It is important to understand that China is currently not owned and has not invested to build a military base network that covers the world like the United States. China's current military expenditure is much lower than the United States, and it does not establish a wide range of military alliances in the world like the United States.

Secondly, China still focuses on its surrounding areas and seek to end the military advantages established in these regions in the past. The report of the Pentagon emphasizes the major progress of the Chinese army in five specific fields: shipbuilding, electronic warfare, ballistic missiles and cruise missiles, network capabilities and comprehensive air defense systems. These efforts are mainly to eliminate the military advantages of the United States in the coast and offshore regions of China, especially around Taiwan. China does not need to scattered national defense expenses to around the world like the United States. Given that China is likely to catch up with the United States economy, the arms competition with China will not only fail, but the endless arms competition will be extremely expensive and dangerous. The competition in China's offshore competition will exacerbate regional instability and increase the risk of disaster misjudgment, which may lead to direct military conflict in the United States and China.

Washington needs to formulate such a military existence and defense strategy in Asia: neither upgrade nor excessive provocations, so that American allies can afford and accept it, but also support a series of foreign policy support. This will not be achieved through unprecedented national defense budget growth and nearly short -sighted ways to achieve greater pressure and military deterrence. (Author Marcus Stanley, Du Haichuan （)

- END -