You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
China-Japan-Koreas
Pinpointing the reasons that lead to the decline of China's military innovation in modern times
2006-04-11
Admitting you have a problem is the first step on the road to recovery.

Major General Yu Rubo, research fellow of the War Theory and Strategic Studies Department of the Academy of Military Sciences, supervisor for doctorial student and vice chairman of China Society for Sun Tsu's Art of War Studies.

China used to pioneer the world in military science and technology for a historical span of over 2,000 years stretching from the Spring and Autumn Period to early Ming Dynasty. However, in the wake of the 16th century, China was progressively out-developed by the West and her military might was equally eclipsed ever since. It will be a profound enlightenment for us even today to earnestly analyze the reasons from the aspect of military science and technology.

China's enclosed environment in modern times served to suffocate the innovative thinking of the Chinese people.
The main environmental elements causing the withering of the Chinese people's innovative thinking mainly refer to the backward social system and the policy of cutting off China from the outside world and all. To begin with, the backward social system hung on by China in modern times stifled the innovative thinking of the Chinese. Secondly, the policy of shutting the door on the world handicapped the growth of innovative thinking.

The gradual inactivation of innovative thinking in China deprived the military its mainstay of innovation.
The main driving force of military innovation rests with human being. Once people lost interest in innovation, military innovation would become a lip service. In the history of China, there was a strong tendency of putting method above instrument, which was reflected in military as attaching importance to strategy while belittling technology, resulting in a high level of stratagem theory in ancient China but a downhill development of science and technology. By striking contrast, military science and technology in the West witnessed a sizzling development since the 16th century outstripping China in no time. Obviously, the dawn of this situation was closely related to the different options of value picked by China and the Western countries.

The disadvantages of the Chinese traditional thinking handicapped military innovation.
The traditional thinking of China features strong philosophical theory and high fuzziness, and good at overall thinking but weak at precise analysis with more reasoning and less logic grounds. The traditional thinking of China contains rich and unique dialectical thinking with wide reference application and long-standing inspiration. However, these features also lead to its fuzziness and poor dividing lines. This undoubtedly would impact the development of military science and technology.

Hell, you don't need to develop technology - either steal it from the wide-open USA, or buy it from the Russians.

By Yu Rubo
(Feb.15, PLA Daily)

Posted by:gromky

#7  China for most of those 2000 years was neither a unified nation nor as large as today. There is little to no innovation becuz China's CCCC/CCP is still end-producer, end-consumer, and final arbiter in any and all things. 2015-2018 > both Russia and China adhere that war against the USA and ONLY THE USA is both possible and desired. Do not forget that both Russia and China's desire for superiority over the hyper-power+ USA circa 2030 -2050 can only be realistically achieved iff something occurs which effectively hinders, stalls, or degrades America's ability to compete -unless something detrimental happens to America, then in reality both nations can expect not to achieve de facto parity or superiority against AMerica until circa 2080-2100 at minima. When Leftperst and the MSM describe the alleged reforms and modernizations taking place in these nations, they are generally aluding to when both nations will be militarily strong enough to combat a weakened or stalled SOCIALIST America.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2006-04-11 23:26  

#6  the politburo also has reasons for not wanting an all-powerful army as well. Better to reduce the numbers of unmarriageable men in any conflict than to lose sleep at night about disloyalty in a superior-armed military
Posted by: Frank G   2006-04-11 11:49  

#5  the Devine Kingdom

If only Andy were here today, he would be so proud.

[wanders off singing]

Born in Arizona, moved to Bejingonia ...
Posted by: Zenster   2006-04-11 11:23  

#4  Interestingly, if you replace "China" with "Europe", and "16th century" with "Second World War", it still makes complete sense.
Posted by: DoDo   2006-04-11 10:51  

#3  What's reassuring about this article is that the problems he enumerates are inherent in the China's political system. They can't fix them without becoming something other than what they are.
Posted by: BH   2006-04-11 10:46  

#2  WhatÂ’s fascinating is the paths China and Japan took towards the latter half of the 19th century. The Japanese looked at the European powers and concluded it was the technology which gave them their global position. They sent out teams to various nations to copy good practices. The ruling clan adopted the French army model, soon switching over to the German after the Franco-Prussian War. Always go with a winner. The competing clan adopted the British Navy model. [The clan rivalry would permeate relations between the two services through the end of WWII]. All sorts of industrial practices were imported. They had seen the power and it was the guns and technology. That ability to adapt is still ingrained into the society today.

The Chinese, never willing to acknowledge that Â’barbariansÂ’ could ever be superior to the Devine Kingdom, observed and concluded that it was a failure of will. The culture, the state had been corrupted by not properly following the great traditions. They had seen the power and, for them, it was a failure of philosophy. Here we are nearly a hundred years plus from that period and as this posting show, there doesnÂ’t seem to be much of a change.
Posted by: Cholutch Spolurt8948   2006-04-11 09:09  

#1  The traditional thinking of China features strong philosophical theory and high fuzziness

This translates to - As long as they stick with the Chinese language they are f&&&ed. I don't speak Chinese but everyone else in my household does.
Posted by: phil_b   2006-04-11 06:39  

00:00