Considering the Chinese Air Force's Best Response

RAND released a report on the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) asserting that "the main driver for Chinese military aerospace power development is the PLA's view that it needs to be prepared to deter and, if necessary, defeat the United States in a high-end clash." And, it states that the Chinese Air Force is closely following U.S. Air Force capabilities and copying or innovating in areas necessary to accomplish its objectives.

The author recommends that the U.S. Air Force should respond by monitoring advancements in Chinese military aerospace capability so it can exploit weaknesses and avoid further capability transfers. These are reasonable suggestions, but the U.S. should also consider how its own behavior may be encouraging Chinese military development.

If the Chinese are truly focused on developing their capability to compete with the U.S., it may be possible to reduce the impetus for additional Chinese military build-up by decreasing the negative rhetoric and providing less overt demonstrations of U.S. capability. The Chinese are responding to U.S. efforts to maintain Command of the Commons. In turn, the U.S. observes the increase in Chinese military capability and responds with additional investment that the Chinese then copy. We find ourselves in a tit for tat scenario of escalating responses. So, rather than overtly label China as a military threat which encourages further Chinese military modernization, the U.S. could preserve the effectiveness of its current capabilities by considering the best response of those concerned with U.S. military advantages. This is especially important at a time when the U.S. is already facing significant national security challenges.

"If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging."
—Will Rogers

Eisenhower School

The Eisenhower School at National Defense University offers senior civilians, military officers, and international fellows a master's degree in National Resource Strategy. The curriculum is unique in that it affords an opportunity for students to study an industry related to national security. These studies culminate in a publicly available report.

The current industries under study are:

  • Advanced Manufacturing
  • Agribusiness
  • Aircraft
  • Biotechnology
  • Education
  • Electronics
  • Energy
  • Financial Services
  • Healthcare
  • Information Communications & Technology
  • Land Combat Systems
  • Private Sector Support & Services
  • Reconstruction
  • Robotics and Autonomous Systems
  • Shipbuilding
  • Space
  • Strategic Materials
  • Transportation
  • Weapons

Russ Roberts' interview with Leonard Wong

I enjoy listening to EconTalk. This week, the host, Russ Roberts, spoke with Leonard Wong about honesty in the military.

Leonard Wong of the Strategic Studies Institute at the U.S. Army War College talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about honesty in the military. Based on a recent co-authored paper, Wong argues that the paperwork and training burden on U.S. military officers requires dishonesty--it is simply impossible to comply with all the requirements. This creates a tension for an institution that prides itself on honesty, trust, and integrity. The conversation closes with suggestions for how the military might reform the compliance and requirement process.

This discussion stemmed from Wong's recent paper:

"Lying to Ourselves: Dishonesty in the Army Profession," by Leonard Wong and Stephen J. Gerras. Strategic Studies Institute, February 2015. PDF file.