By Eric Vandenbroeck and co-workers
China’s Rapid Rearmament
Amid a growing
bipartisan consensus that the United States needs to do more to contain China,
much of the policy debate in Washington has focused on China’s economic and
technological clout. Now, given China’s economic problems—high youth
unemployment, a troubled real estate market, increased government debt, an
aging society, and lower-than-expected growth—some scholars and policymakers
hope that Beijing will be forced to constrain its defense spending. Others go
so far as to say the Chinese military is overrated, contending that it will not
challenge U.S. dominance anytime soon.
However, these
assessments fail to recognize how much China’s defense industrial base is
growing. Despite the country’s current economic challenges, its defense
spending is soaring and its defense industry is on a wartime footing. Indeed,
China is rapidly developing and producing weapons systems designed to deter the
United States and, if deterrence fails, to emerge victorious in a great-power
war. China has already caught up to the United States in its ability to produce
weapons at mass and scale. In some areas, China now leads: it has become the
world’s largest shipbuilder by far, with a capacity roughly 230 times as large
as that of the United States. Between 2021 and early 2024, China’s defense
industrial base produced more than 400 modern fighter aircraft and 20 large
warships, doubled the country’s nuclear warhead inventory more than doubled its
inventory of ballistic and cruise missiles, and developed a new stealth bomber.
Over the same period, China increased its number of satellite launches by 50
percent. China now acquires weapons systems at a pace five to six times as fast
as the United States. Admiral John Aquilino, the former commander of U.S.
Indo-Pacific Command, has described this military expansion as “the most
extensive and rapid buildup since World War II.”
China is now a
military heavyweight, and the U.S. defense industrial base is failing to keep
up. When the Axis powers were advancing in Europe and Asia, President Franklin
Roosevelt mobilized that base, calling it the “arsenal of democracy.” A similar
U.S. effort is necessary today. U.S. defense production has atrophied, and the
system lacks the capacity and flexibility that would allow the U.S. military to
deter China and, if a conflict does break out, to fight and win a protracted
war in the Indo-Pacific region or a two-front war in Asia and Europe.
Washington must fix critical bottlenecks, and it must act fast if it wants to
keep pace. In short, the United States needs to commit much more attention and
resources to military readiness if it is to succeed in assembling a new arsenal
of democracy.
Standing guard on a Chinese destroyer in Qingdao,
China, April 2024
Rapid Buildup
Chinese President Xi
Jinping has made clear that developing a world-class military is central to his
aim of pursuing the “great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation on all fronts.” A
key part of that process is building a defense industrial base that can produce
the hardware (such as ships, aircraft, tanks, and missiles) and software (such
as technology and systems for command, control, communications, and
intelligence) that military forces need. Over the past decade, China’s
production of surface and subsurface vessels, aircraft, air defense systems,
missiles, land systems, spacecraft, and cyberweapons has made the country a
serious competitor of the United States.
Driving this
production are China’s massive state-owned enterprises, which are charged with
developing and building the country’s weapons systems. Today, four of the
world’s top ten largest companies in combined defense and nondefense revenue
are Chinese, including the two largest: Aviation Industry Corporation of China
and China State Shipbuilding. This is a seismic change from a decade ago when
no Chinese firm cracked the world’s top 100 defense companies. Looking at
defense revenue alone, China has five companies in the global top 12, also up
from zero ten years ago. Chinese defense companies now rival such U.S. giants
as Lockheed Martin, RTX (Raytheon), Boeing, Northrop Grumman, and General
Dynamics in size and production capacity.
It is not just the
volume of defense production that is driving China’s military rise. Beijing has
also improved the research, development, and acquisition process for weapons
systems, allowing the PLA to produce advanced platforms in such complex fields
as carrier-based aviation, hypersonics, and
propulsion systems. In addition to military hardware, the PLA has built the
digital architecture that, in the event of war, would help the army coordinate
its command, control, communications, computers, cyber, intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance networks and deploy firepower with the help of
artificial intelligence, big data, and other emerging technologies.
The clearest example
of Chinese military dominance is the country’s naval forces. With the country’s
vast shipbuilding capacity, the PLA Navy has become the largest in the world.
The U.S. Navy estimates that a single Chinese shipyard—such as the one on Changxing Island, located along China’s eastern coast—has
more capacity than all U.S. shipyards combined. China’s naval production now
includes everything from gas turbine and diesel engines to shipboard weapons,
electronic systems, submarines, surface combatants, and unmanned systems. In
the past decade, the PLA Navy has also made major advances in corvette
construction, built eight destroyers, and completed the aircraft carriers Shandong and Fujian.
The design of the Fujian features an electromagnetic catapult
launch system for aircraft, which allows for more comprehensive air operations,
making the carrier more capable than previous Chinese models. It can deploy up
to 70 aircraft, including fighter aircraft and antisubmarine helicopters.
Changxing Island
The PLA Navy still
trails the U.S. Navy in several areas. China has more ships than the United
States, but those it has are smaller. China has a disadvantage in firepower;
its fleet can carry roughly half as many missiles as its U.S. counterpart. The
United States also produces more advanced nuclear-powered submarines than
China. But China’s shipbuilding production would likely give it an advantage
over the United States in a protracted war, and the gap is expected to grow.
Not only do China’s commercial shipyards dwarf their U.S. counterparts, but
many of them are also used for both military and civilian construction, meaning
that China can surge its military shipbuilding capacity more readily than the
United States.
China’s defense
industry is churning out sophisticated aircraft, too. The United States still
operates the world’s largest and most advanced fleet of fifth-generation
fighter aircraft, including F-22s and F-35s. But China is catching up. Its
largest military aircraft company, the Aviation Industry Corporation of China,
produces nearly all of the country’s fighter jets, transport and training
aircraft, bombers, reconnaissance aircraft, drones, and helicopters. The
company oversees a whopping 86 laboratories and applied research centers, and
it has hundreds of subsidiaries and more than 100 overseas entities. In 2023,
Chinese companies produced well over 2,000 fourth- and fifth-generation combat
aircraft, more than doubling the 800 manufactured in 2017. Although the United
States remains ahead, producing more than 3,350 fourth- and fifth-generation
fighters in 2023, China is closing in. China is also ramping up its production
of drones, which it has used in exercises around Taiwan. China North Industries
Group, or Norinco, recently unveiled a new kamikaze
drone with a range of 124 miles and a cruising speed of 90 miles per hour.
Furthermore, China is
modernizing its strategic missile arsenal. The country is on pace to have more
than 1,000 operational nuclear warheads by 2030—up from 200 in 2019. The two
main companies that produce China’s missiles, China Aerospace Science and Technology
Corporation and China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation, have expanded
their facilities and hired additional workers in the last several years. With
this increased capacity, China is building its arsenal of ballistic, cruise,
and hypersonic missiles. In 2021 alone, China launched more ballistic missiles
for testing and training than all other countries combined. In 2020, China
also fielded its first missile with a hypersonic glide vehicle, the DF-17,
which is capable of striking U.S. and other foreign bases and fleets in the
western Pacific. The United States, meanwhile, has struggled with hypersonic
missiles; none of the prototypes it planned to field in 2024 have arrived.
In addition to these
rapidly growing air and sea capabilities, China has made significant progress
in space. In 2023, China conducted 67 space launches—the most in a single year
in the country’s history. China’s launch rockets, global navigation satellite
system capabilities, satellite communications, missile warning systems, and
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance continue to improve. Its
technologies for countering an adversary’s space capabilities, including
jamming and directed energy systems and antisatellite weapons, are also
advancing. China recently launched a new satellite, Yaogan-41, that can
identify and track car-sized objects on the earth’s surface, thus putting at
risk U.S. and allied naval, land, and air assets throughout the Indo-Pacific
region.
Finally, the PLA Army
is the world’s largest ground force. It operates more battle tanks and
artillery pieces than the U.S. Army. Chinese defense companies have increased
production in nearly every category: main and light battle tanks, armored
personnel carriers, assault vehicles, air defense systems, and artillery
systems.
Peacetime Footing
China’s defense
buildup poses a serious threat to the United States and allies and partners,
including Australia, Japan, the Philippines, South Korea, and Taiwan. China
possesses thousands of missiles, some of which can strike the U.S. homeland.
Others can hit U.S. overseas bases, which host U.S. aircraft, runways, ships,
fuel depots, munitions storage sites, ports, command-and-control facilities,
and other infrastructure. China’s suite of antiship ballistic missiles
threatens U.S. surface ships operating in the South China and East China Seas
and beyond. Looking at this array of Chinese military capabilities, U.S.
Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall III bluntly noted, “China is preparing
for a war and specifically for a war with the United States.”
With such a clear
assessment of the threat, it is perplexing that the United States has not
mobilized its own defense industrial base to keep pace. The U.S. military does
not have sufficient munitions and other equipment for a protracted war against
China in the Taiwan Strait, South China Sea, or East China Sea—all areas where
territorial disputes involving China and U.S. partners and allies, such as
Japan, the Philippines, and Taiwan, could turn violent. In war games simulating
a conflict in the Taiwan Strait, for instance, the United States usually
depletes its inventory of long-range antiship missiles within the first week.
These weapons would be critical in an actual war, as they can strike Chinese
naval forces from outside the range of Chinese air defenses. Especially in the
early stages of a conflict, Chinese defenses would likely prevent most aircraft
from moving close enough to drop short-range munitions.
However the U.S.
defense industrial base lacks the flexibility and surge capability to make up
this and other shortfalls. The United States has an anachronistic contracting
and acquisitions system that is much better suited for the leisurely pace of
peacetime than for the urgency of wartime. As a 2009 U.S. Department of Defense
study bluntly put it, “major defense programs continue to take ten years or
more to deliver less capability than planned, often at two to three times the
planned cost.” The fragility of defense industry supply chains poses another
problem. U.S. defense companies produce limited amounts of key components, such
as solid rocket motors, processor assemblies, castings, forgings, ball
bearings, microelectronics, and seekers for munitions. Some types of equipment,
such as engines and generators, require long lead times. Complicating matters,
China dominates the world’s advanced battery supply chains and has a monopoly
on the global market for several types of raw materials used in the defense
sector, such as some iron and ferroalloy metals, nonferrous metals, and
industrial minerals. If tensions were to escalate or war break out, China could
cut off U.S. access to these materials and undermine U.S. production of
night-vision goggles, tanks, and other defense equipment.
A final challenge is
the workforce. The U.S. labor market is unable to provide enough workers with
the right skills to meet the demands of defense production. The problem is
particularly acute in shipyards, which suffer from a shortage of engineers,
electricians, pipefitters, shipfitters, and metalworkers. In 2024, the U.S.
Navy announced that its first Constellation-class guided-missile frigate would
arrive at least a year late because the shipbuilding company, Fincantieri, was short several hundred workers, including
welders, at its Marinette Marine shipyard in Wisconsin. Frigates play a key
role in carrier strike groups as escort vessels that protect sea lines of
communication. Construction of the Block V version of the Virginia-class
fast-attack submarine, which would be critical for attacking Chinese amphibious
ships in the event of war, is at least two years behind schedule for similar
reasons. Some new guided-missile destroyers, which provide antiaircraft
capabilities, are up to three years behind schedule.
A New Arsenal Of Democracy
China’s defense
industrial base is not without problems. It relies on massive state-owned
enterprises with convoluted and sprawling organizational structures that
undermine efficiency, competition, and innovation. It is also plagued by
substantial corruption; late last year, Beijing removed three highly placed
defense industry officials in a purge apparently related to corruption in the
bid evaluation process. China struggles with some supply chain vulnerabilities,
too, particularly with regard to engines, high-end chips, integrated circuits,
and manufacturing equipment. The reporting sinking of a Chinese nuclear-powered
submarine at the Wuchang shipyard earlier this year suggests that China still
has a way to go in producing some complex systems. And even though the Chinese
military is large and well equipped, it has had no major combat experience
since the 1979 Sino-Vietnamese War. But these challenges have not prevented the
Chinese defense industrial base from outpacing its U.S. counterpart in some key
areas.
The United States now
needs to close the gap. The first step is to recognize the urgency of the
problem and the scale of the solution needed. A presidential-led initiative to
revitalize the defense industrial base could achieve this, taking inspiration from
historical models such as Roosevelt’s War Production Board, Harry Truman’s
Office of Defense Mobilization, and Ronald Reagan’s Emergency Mobilization
Preparedness Board. Rather than burdening the Department of Defense alone with
the task of procurement and production, the new body should provide high-level
direction, set priorities, and oversee the policies, plans, and procedures of
the federal departments involved in defense production. Such a structure would
also help integrate the National Security Council, Office of Management and
Budget, Departments of State and Commerce, Congress, the private sector, and
other organizations that play important roles in the defense industrial base.
Washington must also
address the glaring weaknesses in its current defense industrial system. The
Defense Department—including the military services—needs a faster, more
flexible, and less risk-averse contracting and acquisition process. For
starters, it should shorten the timelines for rewarding contracts and help
innovative companies move quickly from prototypes to contracts. Congress also
needs to fund multiyear procurement for key munitions. To address labor
shortages, the Pentagon should offer financial incentives to defense companies
to upskill and reskill workers. The Department of Defense and Congress should
also invest more in high schools, vocational schools, universities, and other
institutions that train and educate individuals for defense industrial base
jobs. And the United States must revitalize its shipbuilding sector. Bringing
back long-dormant subsidies can boost investment in the country’s commercial
shipyards, modernize and expand the industry, and develop a more capable and
competitive workforce in this field.
A year before the
Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor brought the United States into World War II,
Roosevelt exhorted the country to “build now with all possible speed every
machine, every arsenal, every factory that we need to manufacture our defense
material.” China’s rapid rearmament and the ongoing wars in Ukraine and the
Middle East are signs that the clouds are darkening. To be ready for a wartime
environment, the United States must once again follow Roosevelt’s advice.
For updates click hompage here