ARmy Rumour SErvice

Financial Times October 26 2005

Chinese military spending is more than double the level the country admits to publicly and is growing rapidly, a defence think-tank said on Tuesday. In its yearly assessment of global military power, the London-based International Institute of Strategic Studies estimated that China spent $62.5bn on defence last year, compared with the government’s official figure of $25bn.

The report follows warnings by Donald Rumsfeld, US defence secretary, in China last week that the US and other countries are concerned about a perceived lack of transparency surrounding the Chinese military budget. The IISS has not yet calculated what it believes Chinese military spending will be this year, but the Pentagon estimates that it could be as much as $90bn, three times the official Chinese defence budget of $30.2bn.

Speaking alongside Mr Rumsfeld at the Chinese defence ministry last week, General Cao Gangchuan, the defence minister, dismissed suggestions that Beijing was ramping up its military defence spending by more than the official figures. He conceded, however, that the budget did not include some expenditures such as the Chinese space programme.

In contrast, the IISS said its own much higher assessment included fundamental parts of defence budgets such as research and development, weapons procurement, military pensions and some nuclear costs. It estimated the Chinese defence budget had grown about 10 per cent in each of the past 10 years.

Tim Huxley, senior fellow for Asia-Pacific security at the IISS, said: “It has become more and more apparent that the official figures do not reflect reality, especially if you look at capabilities the Chinese are developing such as long-range missiles, rapid global deployment and Russian combat aircraft. There is no way you could pay for a fraction of this if the official figures were accurate.”

Originally Posted by PartTimePongo

International Institute of Strategic Studies

*chortle*

Hey, don't "diss the IISS" (ouch).

At least they have a relatively high proportion of prior-government service hacks. Unlike, say, their dastardly brother, the KCL department of War Studies, which pollutes the minds of young Henrys with such ideas as that Vietnam could have been won from the air, and whose departmental head sports so many stupid military badges on his attire that it's easy for a bedazzled bystander to forget to ask whether he's ever actually served (the answer being 'no').

C'mon you War Studies/ULOTC bods, the bait's been presented to you on a large platter!

My favourite IISS staffer must be Nigel Adderley:

educated by Benedictine monks at Downside [sounds like the background for a Jean-Claude van Damme character], he was commissioned from The Royal Military Academy Sandhurst into The Life Guards

How could I not listen to such a man when he speaks?

The IISS is a delightful byproduct of 24-hour news networks requiring constant punditry. Since the real players aren't around, they go for the blusterers and the thunderers. The world would be a sorrier place without the likes of Dr. John Chipman and his strangely effeminate voice.