Defensive Realism and Chinese Maritime Strategy

<p>The development and recent operations of the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) is one of the most pressing issues in the security structure of Asia. Discussions of both the Chinese Navy and China’s rise generally continue to be dominated by offensive realist thinking. This theory sees China as a state seeking power, and eventually hegemony, in its region. However, defensive realism is a more nuanced explanation of China’s rise and the operations of its navy. Defensive realism sees states as seeking security rather than power, valuing what they have more than what they desire. The PLAN itself was founded in 1949 and has evolved in its focus throughout its existence. First the PLAN was focused on defending against attacks from Taiwan, then defending against a possible attack by the Soviet Union. After the cementing of the US-Sino relationship towards the end of the Cold War, and the rise of Deng Xiaoping and his economic liberalisation, the PLAN lost much of its purpose and funding which had always been minimal. The Taiwan Strait crisis in 1995, along with other conflicts like the first Gulf War and the Kosovo War, reprioritised the navy and the need to defend against possible US intervention. This turn to the navy was heightened by economic, resource, energy and regime motivations. This has lead to an effort to modernise a PLAN fleet which was aging and incapable of what was now required of it. This modernisation is ongoing, and it is still to produce a navy which is an entirely modern and near the capability of other comparable forces. The development of para-military maritime forces is one of the most telling aspects of China’s maritime development. China’s navy has engaged in two operations overseas in the past decade; anti-piracy patrols in the Gulf of Aden since 2005, and assisting in the evacuation of Chinese nationals from Libya in 2012. These two operations are not indicative of a new global role, and are instead born of the unique circumstances of the two situations. More telling are the exercises that the PLAN has engaged in since 2010, these show the PLAN’s developing ability to defend territorial claims, such as the South China Sea and Taiwan. There have also been a series of incidents at sea between China and other disputant states over maritime territory. These incidents take a different shape based on the military capabilities of the other state. South Korea and Japan can monitor these areas with large militaries, and so actions by China are low key. In comparison, claimant states in the South China Sea have ships harassed, primarily by the ships of paramilitary maritime organisations. This harassment is a strategy by China to ensure a secure claim to these areas under international law by asserting jurisdiction. Such a strategy serves to defend China’s claim and prevent a negotiated settlement on anything but its own terms. Thus China’s maritime strategy is based on defensive realist principles of defending territory and ensuring security, rather than seeking power.</p>

Defensive Realism and Chinese Maritime Strategy

<p>The development and recent operations of the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) is one of the most pressing issues in the security structure of Asia. Discussions of both the Chinese Navy and China’s rise generally continue to be dominated by offensive realist thinking. This theory sees China as a state seeking power, and eventually hegemony, in its region. However, defensive realism is a more nuanced explanation of China’s rise and the operations of its navy. Defensive realism sees states as seeking security rather than power, valuing what they have more than what they desire. The PLAN itself was founded in 1949 and has evolved in its focus throughout its existence. First the PLAN was focused on defending against attacks from Taiwan, then defending against a possible attack by the Soviet Union. After the cementing of the US-Sino relationship towards the end of the Cold War, and the rise of Deng Xiaoping and his economic liberalisation, the PLAN lost much of its purpose and funding which had always been minimal. The Taiwan Strait crisis in 1995, along with other conflicts like the first Gulf War and the Kosovo War, reprioritised the navy and the need to defend against possible US intervention. This turn to the navy was heightened by economic, resource, energy and regime motivations. This has lead to an effort to modernise a PLAN fleet which was aging and incapable of what was now required of it. This modernisation is ongoing, and it is still to produce a navy which is an entirely modern and near the capability of other comparable forces. The development of para-military maritime forces is one of the most telling aspects of China’s maritime development. China’s navy has engaged in two operations overseas in the past decade; anti-piracy patrols in the Gulf of Aden since 2005, and assisting in the evacuation of Chinese nationals from Libya in 2012. These two operations are not indicative of a new global role, and are instead born of the unique circumstances of the two situations. More telling are the exercises that the PLAN has engaged in since 2010, these show the PLAN’s developing ability to defend territorial claims, such as the South China Sea and Taiwan. There have also been a series of incidents at sea between China and other disputant states over maritime territory. These incidents take a different shape based on the military capabilities of the other state. South Korea and Japan can monitor these areas with large militaries, and so actions by China are low key. In comparison, claimant states in the South China Sea have ships harassed, primarily by the ships of paramilitary maritime organisations. This harassment is a strategy by China to ensure a secure claim to these areas under international law by asserting jurisdiction. Such a strategy serves to defend China’s claim and prevent a negotiated settlement on anything but its own terms. Thus China’s maritime strategy is based on defensive realist principles of defending territory and ensuring security, rather than seeking power.</p>

The legacy of Admiral von Tirpitz: a geopolitical understanding of China's naval buildup through sea-denial strategies

As manifest challenger of the United States (US)-led international order, the People's Republic of China (PRC) has inaugurated a revisionist strategy that encompasses a multifaceted spectrum of initiatives, including an ambitious naval military build-up. History has shown that revisionist and challenging powers tend to defy the established order through arm races. US Admiral Mahan and German Admiral Tirpitz theorized two different approaches to naval strategy, the former focusing on global maritime hegemony and the latter on regional counterbalance based on risk theory. This article attempts at explaining the puzzle of China's naval buildup through the lenses of geopolitics, adding a geopolitical dimension to the current debate. It suggests that the PRC's naval military development does not follow a Mahanian global maritime strategy aimed at challenging the US primacy worldwide, but rather a Tirpitzian regional approach focused on counterbalancing the US presence within the scope of China's sea power projection, that is, the Pacific region. To substantiate this hypothesis, the study compares diachronically contemporary Chinese naval arm race with Wilhelmine Germany's High Seas Fleet. The findings underscore that, in maritime terms, China's revisionism vis-à-vis the US somewhat resembles that of Imperial Germany vis-à-vis Imperial Britain, both aiming at regional counterbalance and anti-access and area-denial (A2/AD) tactics rather than global maritime counterhegemony. Although Chinese sea power is still far from posing a serious threat to that of the US and its allies, an unrestrained continuation of Beijing's naval buildup could encourage arms races and direct confrontation due to regional security dilemmas.