The U.S.-China military scorecard : forces, geography, and the evolving balance of power, 1996-2017

Это исследование анализирует развитие китайских и американских военных возможностей. Анализ представлен по десяти критериям, которые оценивают военный потенциал этих стан и его развитие в течение 1996-2017 годов. The U.S.-China military scorecard : forces, geography, and the evolving balance of power, 1996-2017 Авторы: Eric Heginbotham, Michael Nixon, Forrest E. Morgan, Jacob Heim, Jeff Hagen, Sheng Li, Jeffrey G. Engstrom, Martin C. Libicki, Paul DeLuca, David A. Shlapak, David R. Frelinger, Burgess Laird, Kyle Brady, Lyle J. Morris Опубликовано RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. 1. China—Strategic aspects. 2. China—Military policy. 3. United States—Military policy. 4. Spratly Islands—Strategic aspects. 5. Taiwan—Strategic aspects. 6. National security—China. 7. National security—United States. 8. National security—Pacific Area. 9. China—Armed Forces. 10. United States—Armed Forces. 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.--back Cover Introduction -- Different Paths: Chinese And U.s. Military Development, 1996-2017 -- Scorecard 1: Chinese Capability To Attack Air Bases -- Scorecard 2: Air Campaigns Over Taiwan And The Spratly Islands -- Scorecard 3: U.s. Penetration Of Chinese Airspace-- Scorecard 4: U.s. Capability To Attack Chinese Air Bases -- Scorecard 5: Chinese Anti-surface Warfare -- Scorecard 6: U.s. Anti-surface Warfare Capabilities Versus Chinese Naval Ships -- Scorecard 7: U.s. Counterspace Capabilities Versus Chinese Space Systems -- Scorecard 8: Chinese Counterspace Capabilities Versus U.s. Space Systems -- Scorecard 9: U.s. And Chinese Cyberwarfare Capabilities -- Scorecard 10: U.s. And Chinese Strategic Nuclear Stability -- The Receding Frontier Of U.s. Dominance -- Implications And Recommendations. Eric Heginbotham [and 13 Others]. Rr-392-af--cover Page 4. Includes Bibliographical References (pages 357-389). A RAND study analyzed Chinese and U.S. military capabilities in two scenarios (Taiwan and the Spratly Islands) from 1996 to 2017, finding that trends in most, but not all, areas run strongly against the United States. While U.S. aggregate power remains greater than China’s, distance and geography affect outcomes. China is capable of challenging U.S. military dominance on its immediate periphery—and its reach is likely to grow in the years ahead