The U.S.-China Military Scorecard

SSG Norman Lihou — Thu, 17 Sep 2015 22:54:19 -0400

Over the past two decades, China's People's Liberation Army has transformed itself from a large but antiquated force into a capable, modern military. Its technology and operational proficiency still lag behind those of the United States, but it has rapidly narrowed the gap. Moreover, China enjoys the advantage of proximity in most plausible conflict scenarios, and geographical advantage would likely neutralize many U.S. military strengths. A sound understanding of regional military issues — including forces, geography, and the evolving balance of power — will be essential for establishing appropriate U.S. political and military policies in Asia. This RAND study analyzes the development of respective Chinese and U.S. military capabilities in ten categories of military operations across two scenarios, one centered on Taiwan and one on the Spratly Islands. The analysis is presented in ten scorecards that assess military capabilities as they have evolved over four snapshot years: 1996, 2003, 2010, and 2017. The results show that China is not close to catching up to the United States in terms of aggregate capabilities, but also that it does not need to catch up to challenge the United States on its immediate periphery. Furthermore, although China's ability to project power to more distant locations remains limited, its reach is growing, and in the future U.S. military dominance is likely to be challenged at greater distances from China's coast. To maintain robust defense and deterrence capabilities in an era of fiscal constraints, the United States will need to ensure that its own operational concepts, procurement, and diplomacy anticipate future developments in Chinese military capabilities.

Download the RAND Publication:
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR392.html

The U.S.-China Military Scorecard: Forces, Geography, and the Evolving Balance of Power, 1996–...

A RAND study analyzed trends in the development of Chinese and U.S. military capabilities in two scenarios (centered on Taiwan and the Spratly Islands) and multiple types of operations from 1996 to 2017.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 17 at 2015 10:57 PM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 17 Sep 2015 22:57:15 -0400

Great article. China doesn't need to beat the US military for several reasons, but mainly they only need to be able to cover some area that we can't which is a whole lot easier to do. As mentioned their proximity to the areas they care about also makes a huge difference. We are a long ways away from almost everywhere we have things to worry about. Of course to our own benefit, that is a positive. That means that we are not worried about our immediate neighbors. That says something of our relative security as well.

Response by SN Greg Wright made Sep 18 at 2015 12:56 AM

SN Greg Wright — Fri, 18 Sep 2015 00:56:09 -0400

SSG Norman Lihou China ceases to be an effective fighting force 72 hours after a full-scale engagement (assuming they don't lose thier sanity and use nukes). The US technical gap, experience, and sheer superior firepower ensures this. Their single carrier is inoperable, their (more numerous than ours) subs are outdated and loud, and their largest army is useless in a real-world scenario. This 'scorecard' is fallacy. China has ONE military asset that will stand them in good stead: their nukes.

If they're willing to lose EVERYTHING in their use, then we can talk. Until then, they're nothing more than an adolescent screaming for attention.

Simple truth is, -Japan's- experience alone, gives them an edge in the naval battlefield. Add US support? China loses her entire navy within a week.

Response by CPL Yuki Feng made Jan 20 at 2018 8:56 PM

CPL Yuki Feng — Sat, 20 Jan 2018 20:56:28 -0500

USA should be more carefully about how to protect the technology,see how many Chinese international students in USA?and they still use call BGY,money,power everything everywhere to pomeate into USA