US media China s military purchasing power is too strong, and the six countries of Britain, France a

Mondo International Updated on 2024-03-02

The strength of the Chinese People's Liberation Army is in everyone's eyes, and the Americans are becoming more and more nervous day by day.

On February 29, U.S. military observers Peter Robertson and Wilson Beaver, in collaboration with the U.S. media, launched a document titled "China Doesn't Just Spend More, It's Spending Smarter," posing a huge challenge to China's defense budget.

According to recently released figures, China's defense spending this year will reach 1,553.7 billion, or 2,247 billion900 million US dollars, an increase of 72%。In stark contrast, in the new fiscal year, the U.S. defense budget will reach $886.3 billion, up about 10 percent year-on-year, approaching the "$1 trillion" threshold. In addition, China's defense spending is less than 2 percent of China's annual gross domestic product, compared with 3 percent for the United States.

However, when the Americans poured sewage on China, they can be said to have exhausted all means.

In the report, they claim that China's defense spending has not only risen from 10 percent in the United States to 37 percent in the United States, but has tripled from before 2000, and that it has also improved the efficiency of its use, with China's military spending increasing by more than 10 percent a year on an average basis, much faster than China's gross domestic product, taking into account factors such as inflation and purchasing power.

They also pointed out that China's military spending was less than that of France in 2000, and today, the combined military expenditures of Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Russia, and Turkey can only be "comparable" with China.

The idea of these two American scholars is interesting, they believe that China can buy the equivalent military equipment of the United States at a lower **, so although China's military spending is not as large as that of the United States, it is developing much faster than the United States.

And their so-called "China is expanding its armaments" is nothing more than "resolving disputes in the Taiwan Strait", "challenging freedom of navigation in the South China Sea", and "subverting the geographical environment of the United States". And the "evidence" in his mouth? The answer is definitely no.

However, they have serious flaws in their theory of the "China threat", and putting aside the real growth indicators of China's strength, the US Department of Defense has no money to buy good equipment, and the US military is slow to develop, so how can China be blamed?

At the beginning, the United States allowed the decline of the American shipbuilding industry, resulting in the labor force and warships of the American shipbuilding industry and navy. The United States is the only one who allows the military-industrial complex to interfere in the development of national defense science and technology and allows the military-industrial enterprises to "squander" military spending. The United States has been maintaining foreign armies at great cost and recruiting so many ** and fighters from all over the world, all this is what they do.

It can be said that the defeat in this war was caused by the Americans themselves and has nothing to do with China. Besides, what kind of "China threat" and the like are even more, China has always pursued a peaceful diplomacy and common development line, and there is no doubt that China does not have the "tradition" of sending warships into the waters of other countries to show off its force. The root cause of the US academic circles' denigration of the people's army is that they limit China to "rivals competing for hegemony." In this regard, we can say that China's defense is only to protect its own country, and China has never wanted to dominate the world, nor does it want the United States to become a "hegemon", but if the United States insists on confronting China, then it seems that it is the United States that will suffer in the end.

Related Pages