REWIND

New Delhi, 22 May 2025

DEFENCE DEALS AND SECURITY

By Inder Jit

(Released on 2 September 1980) 

Three weeks ago, I expressed horror over the doings of the Union Energy Minister, Mr Ghani Khan Choudhury, as exposed in the Lok Sabha. I also cautioned against a “dangerous doctrine” advocated by the Union Law Minister, Mr Shiv Shankar, which sought to make corruption by ministers respectable, even lawful. The rot, I now find, is not confined at the Centre to the economic ministries and the recent scandalous deals in regard to massive imports of sugar, crude and much else. Patient probing shows that the cancer has also spread to the vital defence sector. Already, India is being likened in diplomatic circles to Indonesia, where President Suharto’s wife is popularly nicknamed “Madame Ten Percent” and is widely acknowledged as one who can put through any deal for a consideration. In fact, the Singapore High Court reportedly has before it a case filed by the widow of a top Indonesian Director claiming from Jakarta her late husband’s “legitimate” share in some $82 million collected in commissions in various State deals.

We first heard of “slush money” in a big way during the Janata rule when the Defence Ministry under Mr Jagjivan Ram decided to go in for the Anglo-French Jaguar in preference to the French Mirage and the Swedish Viggen. I remember a knowledgeable source calling me up the day the deal totalling about Rs 1,600 crores was announced to ask: Tell me, who has made how much? Don’t be shocked. Some 50 crores have passed hands.” New Delhi is again reverberating with stories which are at once ugly and frightening. Some of the city’s five-star hotels are today said to be crowded with foreign agents who incredibly enough, seem to have access to most persons in authority through local contacts -- and to almost every inside information even about highly sensitive defence patterns and deals. I treated most talk as wild until some weeks ago when responsible persons, well-informed in defence matters, asserted: “Does anyone really care a damn about what is happening in Defence? Many decisions are being taken on extraneous considerations. National security is being jeopardised. We had better watch out!”

Two cases in point are specially mentioned and deserve notice. First, the Government’s decision to review two major defence deals --acquisition and manufacture of Jaguars for the Air Force and purchase of Sea Harriers for the Navy’s aviation wing. Second, the Government’s decision to go in for the West German SSK submarines at a special meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs on June 30. Undoubtedly, Mrs Gandhi’s Government has every right to review any deal struck by the previous Janata Government or by itself in the best national interest or to go in for a particular submarine. But the circumstances in which these decisions have been taken have caused not a few eyebrows to raise even among sober circles, apart from creating suspicion. Talk of a review of the Jaguar and Sea Harrier deals, seems to have followed a somewhat breezy meeting between a VVIP and the Chairman of the British Aerospace, Sir Fredrick Page in New Delhi -- and not on à demand by Air Force or Naval experts for a fresh look into the two deals.

Perhaps there is a case for reconsidering the 1978 decision to build Jaguars at HAL in Bangalore and take a fresh look at Mirage-2000 in the light of President Giscard d'Estaing's visit to New Delhi in January this year and his reported offer of Mirage-2000 and improved versions. (India has agreed to manufacture 115 Jaguars at HAL, in addition to importing 40 in a fly-away condition and another 45 for assembly in a knocked down condition.) Perhaps, there is also a case for reviewing the project in the context of continuing cost escalation. A Jaguar, it is estimated, may cost anywhere from Rs 10 crores to Rs 12 crores each by the time it is manufactured at HAL by about 1985 as against the original price of Rs 1.8 crores quoted in 1970 when the offer was first received. But the manner in which the Government has decided not to import eight Sea Harriers under the deal in addition to the eight already ordered is regarded among Naval circles as nothing short of a dirty trick, ignoring a top-level policy decision in 1976 under which the Navy, after years of heated argument with the Air Force, was made solely responsible for maritime reconnaissance.

Dirty trick? The Union Government appears to have decided not to exercise its option and buy another 8 Sea Harriers for Rs 128 crores at the 1978 rates (as against the original rate of Rs 62 crores) reportedly on the advice not of the Navy but of the Air Force. The Air Force is said to have disfavoured the Sea Harrier on the ground that the plane was sub-sonic and had not been tried. Yet, according to other reliable sources, the Sea Harrier was tried on the Vikrant in 1972 and found satisfactory. What is more, the sub-sonic argument was advanced by the Air Force prior to the deal but over-ruled by the Government on the reported advice of the Scientific Adviser, Dr Ramanna. (The Sea Harrier, experts opine, can take on a super-sonic Mirage in close combat at low levels.) At any rate, the Navy should have been consulted and the issue should not have been left exclusively to the Air Force considering its known opinion and its understandable anxiety to settle scores. In the event of disagreement, the Scientific Adviser could always have been brought in.

The Union Government’s decision to purchase two West German HDW submarines and manufacture another two at Mazagaon Docks is as intriguing as the manner in which it was pushed through. In July 1979, an Inter-Ministerial Committee reportedly decided in favour of the Swedish (Kokum) as its first choice and the West German HDW as second among four. At the end of March this year, the Navy expressed itself in favour of the Swedish offer but added that in case there was any difficulty the HDW might also be acceptable. A new Inter-Ministerial team set up in April this year interestingly found both HDW and Kokum equal in merit and recommended that the final choice be made on the basis of quality of cooperation and financial considerations. On June 30, a special meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs was held, notwithstanding the fact that Mrs Gandhi was still in mourning, and a decision taken in favour of the HDW. Representatives of the West German shipyard arrived in New Delhi on July 7 to meet the Naval Chief and discuss the contract terms. But it seems that, the Naval Chief himself was unaware of the Government’s decision at that time. The talks were, however, held subsequently.

Some observers have taken strong exception to the fact that the Government should have met on June 30 and taken a decision in favour of the West German submarine without obtaining a Memorandum of Understanding from the PRG Government, safeguarding India’s basic interest in regard to the fulfilment of the programme and tο bind Bonn on behalf of the shipyard for the supply of critical spares throughout the life cycle of the submarine, namely 25 years, and transfer of technology. But this is not a major issue. MOUs are normally finalised after a firm decision is taken. What is, however, astonishing is that the decision was announced in the Rajya Sabha in reply to a question before the MOU was obtained. Experts are clear that this was tactically unwise and only compromised India’s bargaining power. (Stiff competition from Sauro, offered by Italy, is said to have greatly helped New Delhi bring down the prices of the Swedish Kokum and the West German – HDW-- as also shorten the delivery period.) Strangely, the answer in Parliament did not mention that the Government’s decision was subject to all formalities being completed to New Delhi’s satisfaction.

Defence deals merit close public interest because of their long-term implications on national security. In fact, experts are clear that national security gets jeopardised in the three following ways. First, when one service is used (or played) against another, as in the case of the Sea Harriers, with a view to securing support for a decision, ignoring the larger need to ensure that nothing is done which may in any way create bitterness between the three wings of the Defence Forces. Second, when expert opinion is disregarded (or “persuaded” to fall in line) in the acquisition of military hardware, causing frustration and demoralisation. Third, when purchase of certain hardware is favoured even when it is twice as expensive simply because it may mean a bigger kick-back. (A specific case mentioned is best left undisclosed in the interest of national security). Quipped an expert: “Ask for a gun these days and you are offered a missile!” Higher expenditure on one item, it needs to be remembered, hits other defence purchases.

Mrs Gandhi has, of late, been emphasing the need to fight corruption. Speaking on Independence Day she declared: “We are determined to end corruption from both political and bureaucratic spheres.” She has also addressed a letter recently to her Cabinet colleagues seeking their cooperation in cleaning up corruption in Government, especially in high places. But rhetoric and letters alone will not do when responsible people start feeling that national security may be threatened. Mrs Gandhi would, therefore, do well both as Prime Minister and Defence Minister to take a hard look at the major defence deals in the first instance and ask for a fresh and unbiased evaluation of India’s requirement of Sea Harriers as also of the S   SK submarine offers. (The SSK submarine to submarine kill -- deal is estimated to cost anywhere from Rs 400 to Rs 500, crores.) Some top experts are not happy with the selection procedure for the submarine which did not follow the healthy like-to-like basis as in the case of the Jaguar and the Mirage. A few feel that New Delhi should seriously consider Moscow’s offer of a “conventional sub” in view of India’s mounting foreign exchange difficulties.

All this is necessary in the context of certain recent oil and other scandals and hushed talk of payment of slush money by some notorious international agents with remarkable capacity to worm their way close to persons who matter whichever the Government -- Janata or Congress (I). An initial payment of Rs 3.5 crores is alleged to have been made on the submarine deal in mid-June. (True, June 30 was the last date for deciding on the various offers and hence the CCPA meeting that day. But the Defence Ministry could have surely obtained a further extension of time to decide in view of Mrs Gandhi’s bereavement.) Interestingly, the Janata Government, I learn, kept various agents out of its talks with West Germany and had suggested that the ultimate price for the submarines be reduced by the commission normally paid on such deals. The SSK deal, it may now be disclosed, was discussed broadly in 1978 by Morarji Desai, then Prime Minister, with the West German Chancellor, Mr Schmidt, at their meeting at Frankfurt airport. Nehru himself is known to have favoured such an approach in Government deals. But to cut a long story short, Mrs Gandhi needs to follow up her declared intentions with firm action. An ounce of practice, as the old saying goes, is worth more than a tonne of precept.--INFA

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

Open Forum

New Delhi, 21 May 2025  

Widening Trade Pacts

DOES INDIA STAND TO GAIN?

By Dhurjati Mukherjee 

The global trade scenario is complex and the situation is unlikely to improve shortly. With the US imposing tariff barriers, it is unclear which countries stand to lose and what willbe India’s position. India reached a favourable free-trade agreement with the UK which has been hailed by business and industry groups as it is expected to facilitate trade, boost jobs and growth for both economies. Analysts are of the opinion that such treaty augurs well at a time when Indo-US trade agreement is under negotiations to substantially reduce tariffs. Not just India but countries like Indonesia, Brazil and South Africa have also to come to the negotiating table.    

After the successful trade deal with the UK, it has also firmed up an economic partnership agreement with Chile to build upon the preferential pact that was signed several years ago. The new deal will cover a broader set of sectors, including digital services, investment promotion and cooperation, MSME and critical minerals. Meanwhile, the negotiations with New Zealand have already started and are expected to be finalised shortly. Additionally, the one with EU, which has been in the pipeline for nearly two years, is also expected to move faster, specially after the Union Commerce Minister’s Piyush Goyal parleys with Marcos Sefcovic, the EU Commissioner for trade and commerce earlier this month. 

India which has a trade surplus with the US must face a big challenge given its dependency on Washington. Though the spectrum of India’s trade has been widening, it has not been successful in penetrating the global market due to lack of proper technology and efficiency in manufacturing. Some sectors such as handloom textiles and hand-knitted carpets endured on the strength of tradition, skill and labour intensity. But many others struggle against efficient and cost-competitive imports. 

Skilling gaps, limited access to capital, high power costs and outdated regulations left manufacturing hovering at around 15% of GDP, a figure that has barely shifted in a decade. Though the license permit raj has been abolished, there’s corruption in getting clearances from the government. India has the capability to benefit from the changed trade scenario, but substantial measures are needed to make this effective. Challenging China at this juncture is obviously not possible but India may try to come near it through technological collaborations with Western companies. 

The automotive sector has been the focus with a target to achieve production of 30 million units by 2026. Similarly, the electronics sector was given importance as the target was to reach production of US$ 190 billion worth of mobile phones and components by 2025. By aiding the production expansion, leading to higher exports from the country, the ‘Make in India’ initiative has boosted investment in India. But manufacturing to the extent desired has not picked up. 

According to the World Bank, India’s exports of goods and services as a percentage of GDP stood at 21.9% in 2023 as compared to 13% in 2000. The enhancement of the export sector improves foreign exchange reserves, stabilizes the national currency and aids the financial health of the country. Achieving a target of US$ 2 trillion in exports holds great significance for India in terms of the social and economic aspect. The objective of this goal is not just about the US$ 2 trillion value but also about the overall growth of the country in being a global force.   

Experts believe that in the near term, the change will yield a more fragmented global economy where efficiency may be subservient to strategic alignment. India has to gain advantage. But for this, it has to concentrate on technological skills and better infrastructure to create a conducive business environment. While the country is working hard to weave out a favourable trade deal with the US, it needs to withstand American pressures to buy more military hardware, which would obviously affect developmental expenditure, specially infrastructure development. But India to develop better economic relations with China for the latter’s technological prowess. 

The expectation that more opportunities will come India’s way remains to be seen. India’s manufacturing sector growth has remained stagnant at 15% of GDP over the years, which should have improved with new policies and incentives of the government. However, it is interesting to note that almost 30% firms plan to invest in upgradation, supporting the robust increase in capital spending for the year despite challenges such as weak demand, geopolitical tensions and high borrowing costs, as per a survey of private sector capital expenditure released by the statistics ministry.  The slightly lower capex for 2025-26 at Rs 4.9 lakh crore, though still above 2023-24 levels of Rs 4.2 lakh crore reflects cautious planning after a strong 2024-25 when the intended capital expenditure was estimated at Rs 6.8 lakh crore. 

No doubt, India will struggle hard to make its presence felt in the international scenario. There should be sharp focus on gearing up manufacturing, facilitating proper infrastructure development and ensuring supply of high-skilled personnel so as to make products competitive and at the same time cost-effective. Another issue relates to the poor R&D spending by the private sector which is imperative to improve quality of products. Though the government has been focusing on these aspects and also urging the private sector to concentrate on R&D, what is necessary is a more integrated strategy that needs to be evolved, preferable in consultation with the industry associations. Only then will Indian products make its presence felt in the international market. 

India, apart from industrial products, should focus on labour-intensive items that have a good market in the West. In this connection, Indian artisans need to be trained to improve the quality of their products. Also, promotional work has to be organised throughout the year, not just by the trade organisations but also by the government.  

Meanwhile, the destruction of the liberal international order doesn’t presage multi-polarity but rather consolidates the bipolarity that will subsist amid increasing entropy in global politics. Trump’s policies will not reduce the conditions for China’s continued rise but increase its legitimacy as a responsible power. The recent Washington-Beijing accord demonstrates that pressure tactics helped China to reduce tariffs as also its capability and expertise in the technological realm. 

Finally, by focusing on high tariffs, Trump appears to have won the battle of perception against India and other developing countries. Experts believe that a new form of colonialism has taken shape through dominance of the western world, primarily the US. Analysts have rightly pointed out that India should focus on national interest in finalising the deal with the US, or for that matter any other country or even the EU.The UK agreement has given the country much leeway specially for labour-intensive sectors and apparel where India will be in a position to challenge Vietnam and Bangladesh. Only time will tell the nature of the trade agreement with the US and the extent of tariffs India will have to reduce.---INFA 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

Political Diary

New Delhi, 20 May 2025

My List Vs Your List

NATION FIRST OR PARTY?

By Poonam I Kaushish

It was a short-lived hum-sath-sath-hain show of outrage, grief and retribution. Barely, has the ink dried on Operation Sindoor post the brutal Pahalgam attack 22 April killing 26, its back to square one: Tu-tu-mein-mein of petty politricking between ruling BJP and its bête noire Congress. Over your list vs my list of MPs delegations to 30 world Capital’s to reinforce New Delhi’s post-Pahalgam diplomatic outreach.

True, Modi Sarkar’s decision to include Opposition leaders in seven delegations is an astute and clever continuation of the tone and tenor of the moment. So also, its decision to name three Opposition leaders of Congress, NC and DMK to head these groups besides allies JD(U) and Shiv Sena. Yet, for reasons best known to them, both Congress and TMC decided to play spoil sport.

While Mamata’s Trinimool has withdrawn its MP from one of the delegation on the facetious plea that it wasn’t consulted about its choice, Congress too criticised Government for “playing games” with a “mischievous mindset” by naming former UN diplomat-turned its MP Tharoor as head of one all-Party delegation, discounting four MPs suggested by it. Never mind, if in the process, it scored a self goal laying bear its divide within, looks resentful and appears churlish as one of its list of four was included in a group, besides three other leaders from the Party.

Predictably, BJP lashed out accusing Congress of internal hypocrisy, “The Party opposes its MP who speaks for India….the Congress leadership is uncomfortable with anyone who overshadows the ‘High Command’.” Adding to Congress discomfiture, Tharoor welcomed Government's decision stating, “This has nothing to do with Party politics.” Sic.

Certainly, the former UN diplomat’s inclusion may not surprise many as he has been one of the vocal supporters of the Government on the India-Pakistan stand-off telling the story clearly and forcefully. Showcasing, the collective political coming together across Party lines. But it also underscores a departure from his Party's stand. So much so, that Congress was forced to announce that his statements were his own views and not the Party’s stand.

To be fair, Congress, like any other Opposition Party, would want its representative to support Government as far as fight against terror is concerned but not give a clean chit or justify almost all Government policies as Tharoor has been doing. Said a senior leader, “He has crossed the Lakshan Rekha.  Congress mein hona aur Congress ka hona mein zameen-aasmaan ka antar hai.

“For instance we raised the issue on US President Trump's claims of brokering a ceasefire between India and Pakistan. However, Tharoor publically dismissed Trump's claims, in sharp contrast to our Party's stand.” Even as Government said the ceasefire was initiated by Pakistan's DGMO.

This isn’t the only time Tharoor has found himself at odds with his Party. Earlier, the Congress MP admitted that he was “left with egg on the face” for opposing India's stand vis-a-vis the Russia-Ukraine war. The former UN diplomat-turned politician also praised the outcome of PM Modi's meeting with Trump at the White House.

The issue is not inclusion of Tharoor or a quibble between BJP-Congress. But it raises a   quintessential question: Nation come first or Party?

Also, while exercising our adult franchise citizens should be completely focused Obviously, at the outset nation and national interest come first. Wherein, every Indian, irrespective of caste, creed or religion is an Indian first. Political ambitions and ideologies have their own place, but country always is first. Leaders and Parties should be mindful of the fact that opposing a rival or an individual should not go against the nation’s best interests.

With India’s global profile changing rapidly with a growing economy, on track to becoming a super power, it par for the political course. Also in times of war, endemic or strife one has to unconditionally support the Government. A leader can oppose another, or voice his opposition against a Party but not become a voice against the country.

on Nation First, as nothing matters more than to see our country progress rapidly. It is time that our netagan start thinking of the progress of Bharat Mata first and keep all individual preferences at bay. It is only when the entire nation starts looking at the larger picture that real growth and progress will take place.

On the obverse, once you pick a side, you have to bat for that side. In today’s milieu for most Parties and leaders Party interest override all else. Caught in the vortex of the I, me and myself syndrome, national interest seems to be fading out. The country may go underwater with Parties vying with each other in promising the moon and stars in the hope of coming to power.  

In this vicious free-for-all tit-for-tat game hitting below the belt is normal, wherein minute fault lines are blown out of proportion. Forgetting that people and nation both exist before a Party is created. Nation and people come first, not vice versa.

What next? Events have their own momentum. Arguably, one can say this is what democracy is all about. Sadly, however, the basic postulates of democracy have got botched over the years. Few care to remember today that democracy is not an end in itself. It is only a means to an end, namely, the greater well-being and happiness of the people. Which is possible only through a clean, honet and stable Government run by dedicated leaders committed to putting country above self and all else.

In a billion plus nation there are 700 million people below 35 years, the nation needs young leaders who can command the change for transformation of India into a developed nation embedded with knowledge society, a Viksit Bharat.  

Time to pause and ponder the long-term ramifications of the future. Will individual egos get the better of collective wisdom? Time for our polity’s evolution as leaders who put nation before Party. Who change the traditional role from leader to coach, manager to mentor, from director to delegator and from one who demands respect to one who facilitate self-respect. The higher the proportion of leaders in a nation, the higher the potential of a nation becoming enriched, self sufficient and successful.

Ideally all should grasp the reality of Parliamentary democracy. We have to start taking our citizens seriously and treating them like worthwhile investments. Our netas need to remember: Power, breeds, arrogance leads to defeat.

The ‘Conduct of Politics’ necessitates reliability, integrity, credibility, conviction and courage. There should be no scope for any lingering doubt or suspicion that politics come after nation. Undoubtedly, a motivated environment will be needed to build a great foundation for our vision of transforming India into a “developed nation”. We need more leaders who are men of conscience, integrity and credibility to build India. What gives? ---- INFA

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

Spotlight

New Delhi, 17 May 2025

Pentagon Report on Chinese Armed Forces

                                          By Dr. EwaFronczak

(Center for International Relations, Poland) 

The numbers don't lie - the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) is currently the largest armed force in the world, and the fact that it is constantly transforming towards greater flexibility and technological advancement increases its combat potential year by year. 

The first "China Military Strength Report" was produced by the U.S. Department of Defence in 2000, and has been updated every year since then, with the latest one appearing in December last year. 

The PLA is the world’s largest active military, consisting of some 2.035 million active-duty soldiers, 510,000 reservists, and 500,000 paramilitary personnel, totaling more than 3 million personnel. The primary goal of China’s military structure is to fully modernize its national defence and armed forces by 2035, and to become a world-class army by 2049; one that can engage in conflict on the periphery of the PRC as well as project power in distant theaters. 

To achieve this, modernization will encompass all domains of warfare—land, air, sea, nuclear, space, electronics, and information. Among the weaknesses and shortcomings in China’s combat capabilities, the report cites urban warfare and long-range logistics capabilities. 

One of the key observations worth noting is that China is in the process of continuous, steady modernization and increasing resources for the development of its military; each successive report records increasingly higher numbers in every area analyzed. According to the authors, this proves Xi Jinping's unwavering determination to have an army that can ensure the achievement of his most important political goals - the "renaissance of the Chinese nation" [1]by 2049 and unification with Taiwan. 

Second, China continues to rapidly expand and modernize its nuclear forces, seeking to give itself greater control over the dynamics of escalation in a potential conflict with a significant adversary. The U.S. estimates that China has more than 600 operational nuclear warheads, up from 500 last year, and will have another 1,000 by 2030. This expansion includes intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), such as the DF-41, which are capable of striking most of the U.S., among other areas. 

The PLA Rocket Force significantly enhances China's missile capabilities, which are:

·         DF-15 (CSS-6) - a short-range tactical ballistic missile from 725 to 850 km enabling precision attacks on regional targets

·         DF-21D (CSS-5 Mod 5) - anti-ship ballistic missile, which, thanks to its range of over 1,500 km, poses a serious threat to ships and aircraft carriers

·         DF-26 - a medium-range ballistic missile with high versatility. It can carry conventional or nuclear warheads to a distance of up to 5,000 km, thus covering the Western Pacific, Indian Ocean and South China Sea

·         The DF-27, currently under development, has a range of 5,000 to 8,000 km and capabilities that include both land-attack and anti-ship capabilities. In addition to conventional anti-ship modes, it can also carry hypersonic, conventional and nuclear payloads for land attack. Potential targets include Guam, Alaska and Hawaii, the Americans emphasize. 

The Chinese are also surprising in hypersonic technology. For example, the DF-17 missile is equipped with a hypersonic glide vehicle (HGV) and has a range of over 16,000 km. Thanks to its high speed and maneuverability, it is difficult to detect and intercept, posing a challenge to existing missile defence systems. 

Third, in addition to expanding its nuclear arsenal, China is also improving the other elements of the nuclear triad. Three new missile fields with 320 silos for intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) were recently completed. In the meantime, work is underway on new, more survivable ICBMs. As the second leg of China’s nuclear triad, nuclear ballistic missile submarines [2]conduct near-constant deterrent patrols. China’s JL-3 ballistic missiles launched from such submarines can reach the mainland United States from bases in the South China Sea or the Bohai Gulf. The nuclear triad is completed by the H6-N air-launched ballistic missile bomber. In addition, work is underway on a new H-20 [3]stealth bomber with a range of over 10,000 km. 

Fourth, China has the world’s largest navy, with over 370 ships and submarines (61 active submarines, including twelve nuclear-powered), while the Pentagon predicts it will have 395 ships by 2025 and 435 by 2030. The Chinese navy is continuing to build RENHAI-class guided-missile cruisers (CG), LUYANG III MOD-class guided-missile destroyers (DDG), and JIANGKAI II MOD-class and JIANGKAI III-class guided-missile frigates from the first half of 2024. The fourth YUSHEN-class (Type 075) amphibious assault ship will begin sea trials in late summer. Construction has also begun on a new YULAN-class (Type 076) LHA, which will be equipped with an electromagnetic catapult for unmanned aerial vehicles. In 2025, the third CV-18 Fujian aircraft carrier will enter service. In the near future, the Chinese navy will be able to conduct long-range precision strikes against land targets from its submarines and surface ships using cruise missiles to attack land targets, which will significantly increase its ability to project power. 

Fifth, the Chinese Air Force is the largest air force in the Indo-Pacific region and the third largest in the world, with over 3,150 aircraft (excluding training or unmanned aerial vehicles), of which about 2,400 are combat aircraft (including fighters, strategic bombers, tactical bombers, tactical multirole aircraft, and attack aircraft). The J-16 is the latest fourth-generation multirole fighter, which will be capable of carrying the PL-17 long-range air-to-air missile. As of 2023, more than 225 J-16s were in service, with plans to produce more in the coming years. As for fifth-generation stealth fighters, the latest acquisition is the J-20, manufactured by the domestic Aviation Industry Corp of China.

Sixth, China is building a global military and investing in capabilities that will allow it to project power far beyond the first island chain. In 2023, the PLA Navy continued to enhance its ability to carry out missions beyond the first island chain, and in the near future will have the ability to conduct long-range precision strikes against land targets from its submarines and surface ships. The PLA’s air force bomber fleet also has the ability to conduct long-range precision strikes against targets in the second island chain from home bases in mainland China. 

The report noted that China is seeking to expand its overseas logistics and base infrastructure and that it has likely considered a variety of countries as locations for military logistics facilities, including: Burma, Thailand, Indonesia, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, the United Arab Emirates, Cuba, Kenya, Equatorial Guinea, the Seychelles, Tanzania, Angola, Nigeria, Namibia, Mozambique, Gabon, Bangladesh, Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, and Tajikistan. 

Seventh, the modernization of the Chinese military is possible thanks to a world-class defence industrial base. Most importantly, China has managed to close the entire production chain at home and is able to independently produce a wide range of combat ships, gas turbines and diesel engines, and ship weapons and electronic systems, making it almost self-sufficient. It has sufficient production capacity to build various classes of ships: submarines, surface ships, and auxiliary and landing ships. This is in stark contrast to the US defence industrial base, which is struggling to produce everything from submarines to surface ships and ammunition, lagging far behind in this field. 

Eighth, the report notes that China’s leaders see unification with Taiwan as a fundamental condition for national rejuvenation, to be achieved by 2049. Throughout 2023, Beijing has been increasing diplomatic, political, and military pressure on the island, using a range of tactics, including maintaining a naval presence and holding major military exercises near the island. According to Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defence, PLA incursions into Taiwanese airspace continued throughout the year, with a slight decrease in 2023 to 1,641 incidents compared to 1,733 the previous year. Chinese documents list a naval and air blockade of Taiwan among possible scenarios, which should be taken very seriously. In March of this year, Beijing held its largest-ever military exercise simulating such a blockade[5]. 

Last but not least, space and counter-space operations. China has devoted significant economic and technological resources to developing an advanced space program, improving military space applications, developing human spaceflight, and conducting lunar and Mars exploration missions. In 2023, 67 space launches were carried out, placing more than 200 satellites into orbit, making China second only to the United States. 

In sum, over the past two decades, China has achieved the most noticeable increase in military power since World War II. Against the backdrop of the global security scene, the modernization of the Chinese armed forces is an element of a broader national policy aimed at strengthening China's position in the world. The main challenge for the Middle Kingdom is the growing rivalry between the powers, and according to China, the culprit is the US, which, in the name of defending its own national interests, is undermining global stability and reshaping the existing balance of power to its advantage. Although the famous Chinese proverb says, "The sound of a weapon is the defeat of a strategist," and Xi will certainly do everything to avoid a military clash with the American superpower, he is also preparing his country for the worst-case scenario. Such a rapid and multi-faceted process of developing the Chinese army (not limited only to equipment modernization, but also encompassing organizational reforms and changes in the command system) is intended to provide greater flexibility and response capabilities in the face of the dynamically changing international situation. 

Xi Jinping seems to understand perfectly well that with an inexperienced army at his disposal, he has no choice but to first and foremost equip and train it perfectly. The Pentagon Report described above, and the twenty-four previous ones, confirm that the leader of the Middle Kingdom is doing this with unwavering determination and effectiveness, increasing his chances of winning the ongoing systemic war of the two largest economic entities on this globe from year to year.---INFA 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)