Global Military Spending - NEWS ONLY

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202103/1217416.shtml
Chinese defense spending for 2021 projected at 1350 trillion Yuan. Which would constitute a 6.8% rise up from previous year. If using current dollar to yuan rate, one gets 208 billion dollars.

Trying to adjust that figure for differences in costs is harder. One could go about it two ways. Using just the purchasing power parity ratio, as defined by IMF. Or using anecdotal living costs / average wave differences. The latter is certainly less precise but it perhaps is worth mentioning as using that the Chinese budget blooms to a few times its size.

Using PPP, Chinese budget may translate to 312 billion USD, trying for an apples to apples comparison with US budget.
Using average wage difference, Chinese budget may translate to as much as 416 to 520 billion USD.

While the later set of figures may very well be exaggerated, it's plausible the actual difference is at least at the level of the PPP difference,
meaning the actual Chinese defense spending is comparable to over 300 billion dollars.
 
Last edited:
Given that China's military spending is more shrouded within their commercial (state-owned) sectors than the US, I believe the best way to pragmatically understand their budget & intentions is to measure pure output. We know their defense manufacturing infrastructure is increasing every single year, their production capacity is increasing every single year, they are working hard to modernize their military across the board, taking huge strides to do so. They are clearly developing their military to be an expeditionary force with the emphasis on aircraft carriers, amphibious craft, & aerial refueling.

The actual number value is inconsequential.
 
In_A_Dream said:
Given that China's military spending is more shrouded within their commercial (state-owned) sectors than the US, I believe the best way to pragmatically understand their budget & intentions is to measure pure output. We know their defense manufacturing infrastructure is increasing every single year, their production capacity is increasing every single year, they are working hard to modernize their military across the board, taking huge strides to do so. They are clearly developing their military to be an expeditionary force with the emphasis on aircraft carriers, amphibious craft, & aerial refueling.

The actual number value is inconsequential.
Click to expand...

Problem is, trying to measure and count just the theoretically countable stuff (number of vehicles, planes, ships, missiles etc) they put out is extremely hard to do.

For example, one can sort of do it for the big items. Ships for sure. And even combat aircraft to a fairly precise degree. But when one gets to less sexy systems which aren't really photographed often - like various special mission planes- then it already becomes much harder to track what China has procured.

Imagine trying to make up a list of what China got in the last 5 years.
Special mission planes?
Helicopters of various kinds?
Ballistic/Cruise missiles?
Tanks?
IFVs and APCs?
Artillery pieces?
SAMs?

all those items are so hard to track that the estimate value could easily be X or 3X for each of those items on the list.

Without those figures, it's not really any more precise than just using the defense spending figure over the last 5 years and going with that.
 
totoro said:
Problem is, trying to measure and count just the theoretically countable stuff (number of vehicles, planes, ships, missiles etc) they put out is extremely hard to do.

For example, one can sort of do it for the big items. Ships for sure. And even combat aircraft to a fairly precise degree. But when one gets to less sexy systems which aren't really photographed often - like various special mission planes- then it already becomes much harder to track what China has procured.

Imagine trying to make up a list of what China got in the last 5 years.
Special mission planes?
Helicopters of various kinds?
Ballistic/Cruise missiles?
Tanks?
IFVs and APCs?
Artillery pieces?
SAMs?

all those items are so hard to track that the estimate value could easily be X or 3X for each of those items on the list.

Without those figures, it's not really any more precise than just using the defense spending figure over the last 5 years and going with that.
Click to expand...
Welcome to the wonderful world of Covert ISR & Espionage.
 
International deliveries of arms were flat in the period 2016-2020, ending more than a decade of increases, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) said in a report on Monday.


The United States, France and Germany - three of the world's biggest exporters - increased deliveries, but falls in exports from Russian and China offset the rise, SIPRI said.


It was the first time since 2001–2005 that the volume of deliveries of major arms between countries - an indicator of demand - did not increase from the previous five year period, SIPRI said.
Click to expand...
https://reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN2B60QB
 
On a somewhat amusing note:
https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2021/3/19/study-nato-needs-its-own-bank
The United States has been pushing its European allies to invest more in defense. How might it facilitate that? Help establish a new financial institution, suggested a new think tank report.

NATO’s renewed focus on modernization is being spurred by Russia’s resurgence. However, the alliance has not fully leveraged one of its potentially most powerful assets — the collective financial clout of its members, said a study by the Center for American Progress, “NATO’s Financing Gap: Why NATO Should Create Its Own Bank.”
Click to expand...
 
A) that article is wrong. Chinese equivalent spending of 2020 is roughly 450 billion, and Russian equivalent budget of 2020 is roughly sub 200 billion. Combined, still less than US spending.

B) And even if/when one day Russian/Chinese spending overshadows US one, the combined US, Japan, Taiwan, Australia and UK defense spending will still exceed that of China and Russia.

C) One year spending is meaningless. To make sense, the outspending margin has to be maintained for some 30 or so years. Ergo, Russia/China combo will not really see fruit of their outspending the US until 2050 or so. And that's not counting the broader US led coalition mentioned.
 
I would appreciate snippets/high points of articles linked to. Otherwise, I tend to ignore them.
 
bobbymike said:
This is a news only thread I post articles of interest I don’t necessarily take a position on said article. Feel free to post an article that counters or refutes.
Click to expand...
Nah, it's not even about position shown in article. It's about its meat itself.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom