Arms Shopping in the West

Peking decides its "people's war "needs some Occidental punch

They did not exactly go around kicking the tires of Jeeps or thumping the sides of armored vehicles, but in other respects the Chinese officers were behaving just like wide-eyed customers inspecting the new models in an auto showroom. Evincing much more interest than the representatives of the 60 other countries attending Britain's Aldershot exhibit of glittering military equipment last week, a six-member Chinese military delegation moved slowly from display to display. It intently studied the Chieftain tank, asked detailed questions about the Clansman tactical communications system and carefully examined dozens of examples from among the 10,000 other items of defense hardware being offered for sale.

In the meantime, a second delegation of Chinese military men was ending a twelve-day tour of Sweden's defense facilities. There they had looked at, among other things, Swedish-built submarines and the Saab-Scania supersonic Viggen fighter jet. This week the delegation heads southward to see what Italian manufacturers offer in the way of land, air and sea weaponry. A similar delegation of Chinese experts visited France last autumn to inspect materiel there.

The Chinese have been mostly looking, not buying, but they are clearly interested in acquiring advanced Western military equipment. This sharp and very recent departure from the Maoist policy of "self-reliance" in arms betrays Peking's deepening concern over the adequacy of its defense forces and the relevance of Mao's dictum that "the richest source of power to wage war lies in the masses of the people." For decades this "people's war" strategy led Chinese generals to maintain religiously that their hordes of soldiers would triumph over any attacker, no matter how sophisticated his weapons. As a result, Peking all but ignored the advances in weapons technology that other countries have been pressing to achieve. Thus while China today can boast the world's largest standing military force, its 3.95 million soldiers, sailors and airmen (compared with 3.67 million for the U.S.S.R. and 2 million for the U.S.) are equipped with obsolete arms.

The Chinese air force, for example, ranks behind only the American and Soviet in size, but comprises mostly various home-built versions of the MiG-19, a Soviet fighter of the 1950s based on now outdated technology. Facing the obsolescent Chinese MiGs are some of the Kremlin's hottest new war planes, including the high-flying MiG-25 Foxbat.

Peking's ground forces are not in much better shape. While Chinese-produced rifles (based on the Soviet AK-47) and grenades are of high quality, artillery and antitank weapons lack modern infrared and laser aiming devices. Most of China's tanks, moreover, are copies of Soviet products that are at least a generation old and no match for the powerful new T-72s that the Russians are beginning to deploy along the tense, 4,500-mile Sino-Soviet border. Even Peking's atomic force lacks punch. China has 80 nuclear-tipped missiles, but only two or three of them are in the 3,500-mile intercontinental-range category.

To remedy its military deficiencies, Peking's post-Mao leadership is applying to defense problems the same kind of pragmatism that it has used on the economy, education and other matters. While Peking is not expected to abandon the main aspects of the "people's war" strategy, it clearly has a new respect for military hardware. Observed the Liberation Army Daily: "Material strength can only be destroyed by material strength and one cannot smash the enemy's iron tank with one's 'red brain.' "

This year, according to China experts in Hong Kong, Peking will spend $36 billion on defense, of which an estimated $10 billion is earmarked for purchases of advanced Western technology. Says a senior U.S. analyst: "They really need everything--right across the board." High on the Chinese shopping list are communications equipment, radar, artillery, helicopters and vertical-and short-takeoff aircraft, such as Britain's Harrier. But the top-priority items are the kind of antitank and antiaircraft weapons that could be used to repulse a Soviet push across the border.

West Europeans are delighted at the thought of a potentially huge market opening in China for their military goods. Not only would this boost exports and help their trade balance, it would also enable their arms manufacturers to increase the volume and efficiency of their output. A major obstacle to Western arms sales to China has been opposition from the U.S. Explained a senior British official: "There can be no question of Britain selling military hardware to the Chinese on any other basis but full accord with the U.S." Washington has opposed such sales, arguing both that the arms might be used against Taiwan and that the Kremlin would view the sales as an anti-Soviet move that would not be in the spirit of detente.

In the wake of the recent visit to China by National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, however, the U.S. seems to be softening its position on sales of "nonlethal" American equipment to Peking. In early June, for example, the Carter Administration permitted a Michigan electronics firm to sell China $2.8 million worth of geological equipment that could potentially be used for military purposes such as detecting submarines. Only one month earlier, Washington had blocked the sale.

The Administration, moreover, may be concluding that China should even be allowed to buy some of the West's purely military equipment if it would not endanger Taiwan. Notes a senior U.S. official: "The ability of China to feel comfortable about its own defenses is an important part of the world balance of forces, which is important for us." While the U.S. is still opposed to the sale of American arms to Peking, it is widely expected that the U.S. will become increasingly sympathetic to Chinese requests to purchase modern arms from other nations of the West.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.