China's Defense Budget 2017

[Shotgunner51]

China is spending the lowest (by far) as a percentage of GDP out of the top 5 military spenders. China has the largest population in the world to protect, and military spending makes a very tiny portion of China's annual government budget (especially compared to every other major country). It should be increased, either officially or unofficially.

Yes China's 1.28% is far on the low side, see the comparison with NATO countries.

Data source: http://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_2016_07/20160704_160704-pr2016-116.pdf

IMO, China should:

1. Increase absolute size of spending naturally as economy expands. Re-investing a good share of tax monies back into China's state-owned military-industrial complex, which is almost an autarky (as result of Wassenaar Arrangement), is favorable for national technological advancement.
2. Maintain fiscal discipline, targets major tech-industrial powerhouses, say Germany 1.19%, and Japan which maintains at 1%. Like China these countries are capable to run surplus economy and maintain top net creditor status.
3. Moreover, a fair spending level is already good for its strong domestic purchasing power. Down to each steel bolt, blade, chipset, parts, composites and machine tools, supplied by competitive and gigantic industrial base.

 

[T-123456]

Yes China's 1.28% is far on the low side, see the comparison with NATO countries.

View attachment 381159

Data source: http://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_2016_07/20160704_160704-pr2016-116.pdf

IMO, China should:

1. Increase absolute size of spending naturally as economy expands. Re-investing a good share of tax monies back into China's state-owned military-industrial complex, which is almost an autarky (as result of Wassenaar Arrangement), is favorable for national technological advancement.
2. Maintain fiscal discipline, targets major tech-industrial powerhouses, say Germany 1.19%, and Japan which maintains at 1%. Like China these countries are capable to run surplus economy and maintain top net creditor status.
3. Moreover, a fair spending level is already good for its strong domestic purchasing power. Down to each steel bolt, blade, chipset, parts, composites and machine tools, supplied by competitive and gigantic industrial base.

Do private companies build China's military equipment?

 

[Shotgunner51]

Do private companies build China's military equipment?

Weaponry supplies strictly limited to state-owned enterprises, at least in the downstream of the supply chain. In the upstream, that could be materials (e.g. HS steel), parts, components (e.g. a LCD panel) or tools (e.g. a CNC machine tool) manufactured by carefully selected private companies.

Since end of WWII and inception of CoCom (and later Wassenaar Agreement), for decades China's state-owned military industrial complex (MIC) has been running in almost autarky mode with minimal interaction with outsiders, domestic and foreign. Such a practice continues after 1979 market reform till nowadays, it's still kept highly enclosed and largely isolated from civilian economy.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/un-w...g-of-171-countries.462744/page-8#post-9172947

 

[T-123456]

Weaponry supplies strictly limited to state-owned enterprises, at least in the downstream of the supply chain. In the upstream, that could be parts, components (e.g. a LCD panel) or tools (e.g. a CNC machine tool) manufactured by private companies.

Since end of WWII and inception of CoCom (and later Wassenaar Agreement), for decades China's state-owned military industrial complex (MIC) has been running in almost autarky mode with minimal interaction with outside world, domestic and foreign. Such a practice continues after 1979 market reform till nowadays, it's still kept highly enclosed and largely isolated from civilian economy.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/un-w...g-of-171-countries.462744/page-8#post-9172947

See,then the 1.28% of China is far more worth then what it looks like.
So,not comparable.

 

[Shotgunner51]

See,then the 1.28% of China is far more worth then what it looks like.
So,not comparable.

Exactly, that's why I mentioned earlier that current level might seems to be low both as % of GDP (1.28%) and in nominal value (~1 trillion yuan), but its absolute purchasing power is adequate.

 

[PRC2025]

Here is the problem with spending more now, Chinese military technology is increasing at such a fast rate, that if you spend money now, there will be a better platform later on that you could have bought instead.

It's like buying a smartphone. I bought a OnePlus 3, and then a few months later they released a superior version (OnePlus 3T) for exactly the same price. If I had waited a few months I would have had a vastly better smartphone for the same cost.

That said, I also agree that military spending should be increased, China is spending the lowest (by far) as a percentage of GDP out of the top 5 military spenders. China has the largest population in the world to protect, and military spending makes a very tiny portion of China's annual government budget (especially compared to every other major country). It should be increased, either officially or unofficially.

I can see your point, but it's very dangerous to think like that. While PLA Forces has upgraded considerably over the past few years, they are still nowhere near where they should be in term of quantity. I know that the technology is developing fast and that is catching up to the U.S. in many areas now, but China is still having these Type 053 frigates in active duty and some so-called "destroyers" fra early / mid-1990s, which are not even close to the U.S. destroyers from 1980s and 1990s.

I don't even need to start with the use of planes such as J-7 and various J-8. Those things should have been target practice of some kind of drones long time ago - ALL of them 100%. Same goes for various T-59 MBT tanks and similar military hardware.

There are also still some old submarines in active duty. They should have been scrapped long time ago.

China needs to think of their sailors, pilots and soldiers and you cannot and should not put them in platforms such as T-59, J-7, J-8 and things like that. At least, this should have been replaced with more T-96 which are cheap and more J-10 fighters which are also cheap.

I mean, even when you start the engine of one J-7, J-8, T-59 etc and start spending fuel LOL, it's ALREADY a WASTE - that fuel should have been in some other fuel tank, in a platform that is much more modern.

China is spending too little of defense and it needs to start spending more. Spending doesn't have to used 100% on new platforms. One can use 50% for new platform and training, and 50% for even more research.

The point is - U.S. is not a military superpower because U.S. has 1 Nimitz-carrier. No, the U.S. is superpower because they have 10 of those.
The U.S. is not a superpower because the U.S. har 1 or 5 or 10 Arleigh Burke destroyers. No, the U.S. is a superpower because the U.S. has over 65 of those. And the same apply to Improved LA and Virginia-class SSN, etc.

So not only quality, but quantity matters a lot also. First quality, but then quantity.

So in order for China to also become military superpower in the world - beside being already an economic and almost technological superpower, China must spend money militarily like a superpower should - or like Chinese main competitor / possible enemy does.

Spending less than 2% of GDP is just too little. Increasing that to 3,5 percent at least should be the way to go. It's not much at all - and it's also time to really break the economic back of couple of regional enemies who still dream in their head that they can cause trouble with their extremism and hate against China and the Chinese people and interests.

Each time I see that China owns 1 trillion in U.S. bonds, I want to throw up when I know how many J-20 and Type 055 cruisers only HALF of that amount could produce. Even 1 / 3 of that amount.

China must make it clear - if the U.S. wants 2,400 F-35, China will build a mix of 2,400 J-20 and J-31. There should not be any discussion around this.
Whatever the U.S. decide to build, China should match, because Chinese economy is now larger in PPP compared to the U.S. and China builds most of their own weapons themselves. Hence, use of PPP is more appropriate to compare with.

If the U.S. wants to keep 65 - 70 destroyers, then China should have a mix og 65 Type 055 and Type 052D / E, etc.

It's very simple to make it clear to the U.S. that whatever the f#ck the U.S. starts to irritate others with, including irritating China, then China should match that with the same number of comparable units that will be built.

For instance: The U.S. says bla bla in 2017 / 2018. China should just match that next March, etc.

Now that we know that Crazy Don wants to spend additional 54 billion USD, China should at least match that - either officially or unofficially + spend add-on which China planned to increase with before the Crazy Don's annoncement.

I know, it's "too much" to expect, but this is the only way. If you want a powerful military, one must spend money and keep it top notch. There should never be a compromise on a safety of the Motherland.

 

[F-22Raptor]

BEIJING (AP) — China will raise its defense budget by about 7 percent this year, a government spokeswoman said Saturday, continuing a trend of lowered growth amid a slowing economy.

Total defense spending would account for about 1.3 percent of projected gross domestic project in 2017, said Fu Ying, spokeswoman for the legislature. She was speaking at a news conference on the eve of the opening of the body's annual session.

The precise figure will be provided by Premier Li Keqiang in his address to the National People's Congress on Sunday morning.

Fu reiterated China's contention that its military was purely for defense and constituted a force for stability in Asia.


"We advocate dialogue for peaceful resolutions, while at the same time, we need to possess the ability to defend our sovereignty and interests," Fu said. "The strengthening of Chinese capabilities benefits the preservation of peace and security in this region, and not the opposite."

Depending on the final figure, this year's budget could mark the third consecutive year of declines in defense spending growth rates. The budget grew by 7.6 percent last year and 10.1 percent in 2015.

The increase of about 67 billion yuan ($9.7 billion) would push the total defense budget past the 1 trillion yuan ($145 billion) mark for the first time. The percentage increases do not track in U.S. dollar figures because of variations in the exchange rate.

China's defense budget has for years been the world's second largest, although still lagging far behind the U.S. President Donald Trump has asked for a 10 percent increase in U.S. defense spending this year, adding $54 million to the budget that topped $600 billion last year.

China points out that, as a developing country with a population of 1.37 billion, its defense spending per capita is a fraction of those of other nations. Fu also said the percentage of GDP China spends on defense is below the 2 percent the U.S. calls on NATO allies to spend.

"The gap in capabilities with the U.S. is enormous, but China's military development and construction will continue in keeping with our need to defend our national sovereignty and security," Fu said.

While China insists its military is purely for domestic purposes, it has been spending heavily on technologies allowing it to project power far from shore, including aircraft carriers, long-range bombers and its first overseas military base located in the East Africa nation of Djibouti.

Beijing has also come under criticism from the U.S. and others for militarizing man-made islands in the South China Sea, which China claims virtually in its entirety.

Fu turned those accusations back on the U.S., saying the strategically vital waterway through which about $5 trillion in trade passes each year was basically calm.

"As to how to the situation develops in future, that depends on U.S. intentions. American actions in the South China Sea have a definite significance in terms of which way the winds blow," she said.

https://www.usnews.com/news/busines...nse-budget-to-rise-by-about-7-percent-in-2017

 

[samsara]

China to raise defense budget by around 7% in 2017
By Bai Tiantian Source: Global Times - 2017-03-04

The press conference on the fifth session of China's 12th National People's Congress (NPC) is held at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, capital of China, March 4, 2017. The fifth session of the 12th NPC is scheduled to open in Beijing on March 5. (Xinhua/Jin Liwang)

China will raise its defense budget by around 7 percent this year, making it the smallest military budget increase in recent years, said a spokesman for the National People's Congress (NPC) on Saturday in Beijing.

Fu Ying, spokeswoman for the annual congress, said military spending is budgeted to grow by around 7 percent in 2017, which accounts for around 1.3 percent of China’s GDP.

China increased its military spending by 7.6 percent in 2016, 10.1 percent in 2015, 12.2 percent in 2014 and 10.7 percent in 2013.

The 954.35 billion yuan ($146.67 billion) military budget for 2016 was around a quarter of the US’ $573 billion defense budget that year.

China's economy expanded 6.7 percent year on year in 2016, the slowest in a quarter century.

Chinese President Xi Jinping is seeking to transform the People's Liberation Army into a modern force, vowing to cut 300,000 jobs and revamping its Soviet-style command structure.

The current military reform aims to transform the PLA into a more maritime-oriented force and away from its traditional army-heavy continental defense structure.

Song Zhongping, a Beijing-based military expert, told the Global Times on Saturday that the slowdown in military budget increase shows China’s budget is already very large and any small increase amounts to a big boost to the country’s military reforms.

“As China aims to cut 300,000 jobs by the end of 2017, some personnel and maintenance fees can be saved so that the money can be used to establish other arms of the military. From this perspective, a 7 percent increase is sufficient,” Song said.

http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1036024.shtml

 

[Dungeness]

Only 1.3% of GDP? I thought they were going to go for 10% , considering US is going to raise 9% with a much larger base. Sounds like a peace loving country to me!

 

[TaiShang]

China to raise 2017 defense budget by around 7 pct: spokesperson
(Xinhua) 11:51, March 04, 2017

Fu Ying , spokesperson for the fifth session of China's 12th National People's Congress (NPC), speaks during a press conference on the session at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, capital of China, March 4, 2017. The fifth session of the 12th NPC is scheduled to open in Beijing on March 5. (Xinhua/Jin Liwang)

BEIJING, March 4 -- China's 2017 defense budget will expand by around 7 percent, a spokesperson for the annual session of the country's top legislature said Saturday.

Fu Ying, spokesperson for the 12th National People's Congress (NPC) annual session, said the increase is in line with China's economic development and defense needs.

The country's defense budget rose by 7.6 percent in 2016.

The fresh raise could be the country's slowest defense budget rise in more than a decade, and mark the second time that defense budget dip to single-digit increase since 2010. In 2009, the figure was about 15 percent.

U.S. President Donald Trump last month pledged to further strengthen his country's armed forces.

In his first address to Congress after taking office, Trump proposed a huge 54-billion-U.S.-dollar surge in the country's military spending, up 10 percent from the previous year.

Fu, meanwhile, noted that China's defense spending accounts for about only 1.3 percent of the country's gross domestic product, as compared with NATO members' pledge to dedicate at least 2 percent of GDP to defense.

"You should ask them what their intentions are," Fu told reporters.

 

[Get Ya Wig Split]

China to raise 2017 defense budget by around 7 pct: spokesperson

what a joke

 

[lcloo]

I don't really think that increasing the defence budget by around 7% is a joke nor is it disappointingly low.

Firstly China is cutting down the strength of PLA by 300,000 men. What is the defence budget for 300,000 men army? Salaries, housing, food, training, weapons and equipment acquisition and maintenance etc for 300,000 men is enormous.

So the money saved from cutting 300,000 men can be channelled to others remaining in service. Add this to the around 7% increase, the actual "net increase" per person in armed services is more than that 7%.

Secondly, the active anti-corruption action has get rid of many "big tigers" in the armed service. This means PLA's expenditures are getting more value for money, i.e. corrupt money paid for non-existence of physical or intangent goods/ services, or over-pricing thereof has been drastically cut down. Every RMB allocated in the budget is getting bigger "bang" than before.

In short, savings from (1) man power reduction and (2) positive financial returns from anti-corruption plus (3) around 7% increase in annual budget, should be sufficient for a normal peace time year.

Of course if Mr. Trump wants to get things ugly around China, the budget can be changed.

 

[cnleio]

China is building Aircraft Carrier and many type052D / type055 DDGs for the Navy ... building more type99A MBTs and new light tanks to replace old Type59, more new combat IFVs to replace old Type89, also more armed helos for the Army. The Airforce focus on stealth fighters mass-production and more J-10B fighters ... above all need more money from China. And these money many also spend on new ICBM and nuclear sub development, new anti-aircraft missiles research.

Without money we(you) can't do nothing ... !

 

[帅的一匹]

I can see your point, but it's very dangerous to think like that. While PLA Forces has upgraded considerably over the past few years, they are still nowhere near where they should be in term of quantity. I know that the technology is developing fast and that is catching up to the U.S. in many areas now, but China is still having these Type 053 frigates in active duty and some so-called "destroyers" fra early / mid-1990s, which are not even close to the U.S. destroyers from 1980s and 1990s.

I don't even need to start with the use of planes such as J-7 and various J-8. Those things should have been target practice of some kind of drones long time ago - ALL of them 100%. Same goes for various T-59 MBT tanks and similar military hardware.

There are also still some old submarines in active duty. They should have been scrapped long time ago.

China needs to think of their sailors, pilots and soldiers and you cannot and should not put them in platforms such as T-59, J-7, J-8 and things like that. At least, this should have been replaced with more T-96 which are cheap and more J-10 fighters which are also cheap.

I mean, even when you start the engine of one J-7, J-8, T-59 etc and start spending fuel LOL, it's ALREADY a WASTE - that fuel should have been in some other fuel tank, in a platform that is much more modern.

China is spending too little of defense and it needs to start spending more. Spending doesn't have to used 100% on new platforms. One can use 50% for new platform and training, and 50% for even more research.

The point is - U.S. is not a military superpower because U.S. has 1 Nimitz-carrier. No, the U.S. is superpower because they have 10 of those.
The U.S. is not a superpower because the U.S. har 1 or 5 or 10 Arleigh Burke destroyers. No, the U.S. is a superpower because the U.S. has over 65 of those. And the same apply to Improved LA and Virginia-class SSN, etc.

So not only quality, but quantity matters a lot also. First quality, but then quantity.

So in order for China to also become military superpower in the world - beside being already an economic and almost technological superpower, China must spend money militarily like a superpower should - or like Chinese main competitor / possible enemy does.

Spending less than 2% of GDP is just too little. Increasing that to 3,5 percent at least should be the way to go. It's not much at all - and it's also time to really break the economic back of couple of regional enemies who still dream in their head that they can cause trouble with their extremism and hate against China and the Chinese people and interests.

Each time I see that China owns 1 trillion in U.S. bonds, I want to throw up when I know how many J-20 and Type 055 cruisers only HALF of that amount could produce. Even 1 / 3 of that amount.

China must make it clear - if the U.S. wants 2,400 F-35, China will build a mix of 2,400 J-20 and J-31. There should not be any discussion around this.
Whatever the U.S. decide to build, China should match, because Chinese economy is now larger in PPP compared to the U.S. and China builds most of their own weapons themselves. Hence, use of PPP is more appropriate to compare with.

If the U.S. wants to keep 65 - 70 destroyers, then China should have a mix og 65 Type 055 and Type 052D / E, etc.

It's very simple to make it clear to the U.S. that whatever the f#ck the U.S. starts to irritate others with, including irritating China, then China should match that with the same number of comparable units that will be built.

For instance: The U.S. says bla bla in 2017 / 2018. China should just match that next March, etc.

Now that we know that Crazy Don wants to spend additional 54 billion USD, China should at least match that - either officially or unofficially + spend add-on which China planned to increase with before the Crazy Don's annoncement.

I know, it's "too much" to expect, but this is the only way. If you want a powerful military, one must spend money and keep it top notch. There should never be a compromise on a safety of the Motherland.

you really believe the figure they.give?

 

[UKBengali]

China is building Aircraft Carrier and many type052D / type055 DDGs for the Navy ... building more type99A MBTs and new light tanks to replace old Type59, more new combat IFVs to replace old Type89, also more armed helos for the Army. The Airforce focus on stealth fighters mass-production and more J-10B fighters ... above all need more money from China. And these money many also spend on new ICBM and nuclear sub development, new anti-aircraft missiles research.

Without money we(you) can't do nothing ... !

But China is spending the required money

As an example let us compare the unit cost of the Type-55 as opposed to the Arleigh Burke Flight IIA.
Estimated cost of Type-55 is 750 million US dollars as opposed to 1.2 billion for the Arleigh Burke.
Once you factor is much cheaper Chinese labour costs then we can increase the PPP by x2 and we get a Chinese
defence budget that is 50% of that of the US.

US cannot keep increasing it's defence budget by 10% every year, whereas China will keep increasing at 7% a year for as long as it's economy keeps expanding at this rate. Chinese GDP growth is likely to be higher than US for many decades to come.

No need to worry, China has ample funds to take on the US.