Military Modernization in China and Israel – Research Proposal

Introduction

A little known Third World country in Asia can aspire for the modernization of its military.¹ It will be interpreted as the expression of a moral right to defense.²

It is the right of every nation to enhance its national defense. But in the 21^st century, there are two countries in the globe that cannot aspire and plan for military modernization without creating a significant discussion in the international community.³

These are China and Israel.⁴ There is a simple reason why the intention to modernize China and Israel is greeted with a serious concern by global players in the world of international politics. The modernization of their respective armies can bring destabilization in their respective regions.⁵

According to the U.S. Pentagon, “China appears on track to forge a modern military by 2020, a rapid buildup that could be potentially destabilizing to the Asia-Pacific region.”⁶

With regard to Israel there is no need to elaborate a never ending conflict in Palestine and, therefore, modernization can easily be seen as a threat to other players in the region.⁷

There is, therefore, the need to understand and attempt to predict what will happen if both countries increase their modernization efforts.⁸

The purpose of this study is to compare the military modernization of China and Israel.⁹ The main reason for doing so is to determine how modernization can potentially destabilize the region, harm foreign relations and increase the tension in the said region.¹⁰

The secondary purpose of the study is to determine how these two countries attempt to modernize their armed forces as well as the motivation for doing so.¹¹

The information can be used to guide policy makers, diplomats, and others who are concerned with the stability of the Asia-Pacific region and the Middle-East.¹²

Research Question

The research question that has to be answered in the course of the study is to determine the impact of the military modernization of China and Israel.

The assertion is that the modernization of China’s military will destabilize the Asia-Pacific region; therefore, it is important to find out how this is possible.¹³

There is also a need to find out what the contributing factors are. The same thing can be said about the modernization of Israeli military.¹⁴

It is imperative to find out if there is evidence to prove the assertion that Israel’s military modernization program threatens the stability of the region.¹⁵

Significance

In recent decades the importance of the Asia-Pacific region has become extremely apparent for U.S. interests.

In the past, the purpose of the Asia-Pacific region was mostly on the strategic issues linked to the need for American forces to have a significant presence in an area that should not fall into the control of the former Soviet Union and their communist allies.

But in the 21^st century, the value of the Asia-Pacific region is more than a location to place U.S. military bases. Today, there are many U.S. based companies that invested in Chinese manufacturing sector.

There are many U.S. based companies that constructed their factories in China and many more American business enterprises that are dependent on cheap labor costs provided by the Chinese economy.

In the case of Israel, U.S. interest in the said modernization program is linked to the peace and stability in the Middle East.

One of the primary reasons why the United States wanted to ensure peace in the said region is rooted in the fact that there is a need for the steady supply of oil.

A full-scale war in the region can harm the import of oil by the organization of petroleum exporting countries and an energy crisis will ensue.

Literature Review

This particular study is consistent with regards to information that can be gleaned from the literature review. An overview of the information gathered so far already reveals a significant discomfort on the part of neighboring countries with regard to the plan to modernize China and Israel’s armed forces.

For example, military analysts are already wary of the fact that China has taken deliberate steps to modernize their military forces. There is a concern coming from the reactions of military analysts and officials.¹⁶

There is also available information with regards to the explanation as to how China can support an ambitious modernization program. For example, one analyst claimed that China has the economic means to purchase needed hardware for the envisioned upgrade.

Analysts pointed to the source of funds and said, “One of the significant aids to Chinese economic development over the past decade has been the inflow of foreign direct investment … estimates for 2006 range around $60 billion.”¹⁷

Therefore, there is not only proof of the attempt to modernize the armed forces but also the means to do so.¹⁸

With regards to the U.S. interest in the Middle East, the paper provides background information on the reason of concern. The discussion for this part focuses on the dependence on the fossil fuel or crude oil that are abundant in the Middle East.¹⁹

The literature review also focuses on the rationale for the modernization program. China’s history will be examined to find out why there is a need for a modernization program. It is linked to the need to strengthen its military force to stand up against perceived challengers like the United States, Russia and Japan.

In the case of Israel, the decision to modernize its military is rooted in long history of conflict with their Arab neighbors. Aside from the need to protect itself from their traditional enemies, it must be made clear in the discussion that Israel had to struggle to maintain its identity.

There was the infamous Holocaust that explains partially the kind of threat that these people face.²⁰ Israel is a newly established country and it needs to remain stable and strong in order to sustain its hold to a fragile political position in the Middle East.²¹

Cases

There is a need to look into how China’s neighbors and the United States view the emergence of a new superpower in the world. It is the rapid rise of China in international politics and global economy that has threatened other countries.²²

Although there is no history of global dominion such as the one that can be compared to the ambition of Western rulers to expand their territories, there is still cause for concern.²³ China is known for its stubbornness to bow to international pressure.

Thus, it can be viewed like other communist countries that do not want to listen to the advice of others with regards to a more diplomatic and morally acceptable stance on a particular issue.²⁴

In the case of Israel, there is a need to look into the core issue in the Arab-Israeli conflict. There is also the need to investigate the perceived strong alliance between Israel and the United States.

It is important to determine how China and Israel can continue with their modernization programs without creating reasons why their neighbors must worry about their military might.²⁵

Structure

In the preliminary stages of the paper, the proponent of this study will outline the main research questions. These questions will be put forth in order for the reader to understand the direction of the paper.²⁶

At the same time it becomes clear to the readers the specific goals that the paper tries to achieve.²⁷ The main assertion of the paper becomes clear in the introductory part of the paper.²⁸

The second part of the introduction is to outline the significance of the study.²⁹ It is also in this portion of the paper wherein readers will find the topic interesting. The significance of the paper will also provide a rationale why the study has to be initiated in the first place.³⁰

The proponent of the study will link the significance of the paper in the context of American interests in the Asia-Pacific region and the Middle East.³¹

Once the significance of the paper is made clear, the proponent of the study begins to lay down the groundwork with regards to the specific steps taken by China and Israel when it comes to their respective modernization programs.³²

This portion is critical because it is the evident to show that there is indeed a modernization program in place being completed by these two parties.³³

After it has been made clear that there is a deliberate attempt by China and the Israeli government to enhance their military program and modernize it using current technology and the latest warfare tools available in the market, the paper will outline how this was achieved.³⁴

There is also the need to determine if there is a connection between China and Israel with regards to their military upgrade.³⁵

The critical step in the process is to examine the reasons and the contributing factors why the respective modernization of their military can result in the destabilization of the Asia-Pacific region and the Middle East.³⁶

It has to be pointed out that there are numerous nations that embarked in the modernization of their armies and yet their attempt did not elicit the same reaction as compared to China and Israel.³⁷

The proponent of the study will use information gleaned from the review of literature to show why there is the issue of concern.³⁸ There is also the need to find out the reaction of the United States and determine what steps have been taken to reduce tension in the said regions.³⁹

At the final stage of the process, the proponent of the study will have enough information to draw a conclusion if the research questions were answered and if there is evidence to support the assertion that the modernization of China and Israeli’s armed forces will not be welcome news by their neighbors and other interested parties.⁴⁰

Bibliography

Ambrose, Stephen. The Supreme Commander: The War Years of General Dwight D. Eisenhower. MI: University of Mississippi, 1999.

Boot, Max. War Made New: Technology, Warfare, and the course of History. New York: Gotham Books, 2006.

Buchanan, Patrick. A Republic, Not An Empire: Reclaiming America’s Destiny. Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, 1999.

Bye, Vergil. 1979. Nationalization of oil in Venezuela: re-defined dependence and legitimization of imperialism. Journal of Peace and Research 16(1): 57-78.

Camejo, Philip. The SRI advantage. Ontario: New Society Publishers; 2002.

Cordesman, Anthony. Arab-Israeli Military Forces in an Era of Assymetric Wars. Washington, D.C.: Center for Strategic and International Studies

Cordesman, Anthony and Martin Kleiber. Chinese Military Modernization. (Washington, D.C.: Center for International Studies), p.15

Dashefsky, Arnold, Sergio DellaPergola and Ira Sheskin. World Jewish Population 2010. CT: Connecticut University Press, 2010.

Dixon, Shirley 2008. Organizational transformation in the Russian oil industry. Edward Elgar Publishing, New York.

Domini, Antonia. Socially responsible investing: making a difference and making money. Chicago, IL: Dearborn Trade Books; 2001.

Fischel, Jack. The Holocaust. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1998. Print.

Fry, Robert. Appreciative inquiry and organizational transformation: reports from the field. Greenwood Publishing Group, Sydney,2002.

Fulbrook, Michael. A Concise History of Germany. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991.

Gilbert, Felix. To the Farewell Address: Ideas of Early American Foreign Policy. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1961.

Goldemberg, John. 1978. Brazil: energy options and current outlook. American Association for the Advancement of Science. 200(4338): 158-164.

Griffiths, Williams. The Great War. New York: Square One Publishers, 2003. Print.

Hall, Anthony. The American Empire and the Fourth World. Canada: McGill-Quuen’s University Press, 2003.

Hiscock, Michael and Caegem, William. The internationalization of law. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing; 2010.

Hobsbawm, Eric. The Age of Empire: 1875-1914, New York: Random House, Inc, 2005. p.17.

Holmstrom, Leif. Conclusions and Recommendations of the UN Committee Against Torture. MA: Kluwer Law International, 2000.

Kobrin, Stephen. 1985. Diffusion as an explanation of oil nationalization: or the domino effect rides again. Journal of Conflict Resolution 29(1): 3-32.

Koppes, Clayton. 1982. The good neighbor policy and the nationalization of Mexican oil: a reinterpretation. The Journal of American History 69(1): 62-81.

Lipton, Edward. Religious Freedom in Asia. New York: Nova Science Publishers, 2002.

Maanen, John. Information technology and organizational transformation: history, rhetoric, and practice. SAGE, Michigan, 2001.

Magone, Jose Maria. The Politics of Southern Europe. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 2003.

May, Ernest. Strange Victory. New York: I.B. Tauris & Co., 2000.

Murray, Williamson. A War To Be Won: Fighting the Second World War. MA: Harvard University Press, 2001

Neiberg, Michael. Fighting the Great War: A Global History. MA: Harvard University Press, 2005.

Rash, Felicity. The Language of Violence: Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 2006.

Reuters, “China could build a modern military by 2020 says Pentagon.” The Guardian. Web.

Rock, Stephen. Appeasement in International Politics. KY: The University Press of Kentucky, 2000.

Smith, Neil. American Empire: Roosevelt’s Geographer and the Prelude to Globalization. CA: University of California Press, 2003.

Stork, Joe. 1973. Middle East oil and the energy crisis: part 1. Middle East Research and Information Project 20: 3-20.

Stork, Joe. 1973. Middle East oil and the energy crisis: part two. Middle East Research and Information Project 21: 3-22.

Tucker, Spener and Priscilla Roberts. The Encyclopedia of the Arab-Israeli conflict. New York: ABC-CLIO, 2008.

Waters, William. Globalization. New York: Routledge; 2001.

Weeks, William E. John Quincy Adams and American Global Empire. Kentucky: University of Kentucky Press, 1992.

Wilson, Isaiah and James Forrest, Handbook of Defense Politics, (New York: Taylor and Francis Group), 2011, p.25.

Wiseman, Herbert. Political Systems. New York: Routledge, 1966.

Zheng, You. Globalization and state transformation in China. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2004.

Footnotes

¹ Buchanan, Patrick. A Republic, Not An Empire: Reclaiming America’s Destiny. (Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, 1999), p.5.

² Gilbert, Felix. To the Farewell Address: Ideas of Early American Foreign Policy. (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1961), p.7.

³ Smith, Neil. American Empire: Roosevelt’s Geographer and the Prelude to Globalization. (CA: University of California Press), 2003.

⁴ Holmstrom, Leif. Conclusions and Recommendations of the UN Committee Against Torture. (MA: Kluwer Law International, 2000), p.14.

⁵ Hall, Anthony. The American Empire and the Fourth World. (Canada: McGill-Quuen’s University Press), 2003.

⁶ Reuters, “China could build a modern military by 2020 says Pentagon.” The Guardian.

⁷ William, Weeks, E. John Quincy Adams and American Global Empire. (Kentucky: University of Kentucky Press, 1992), p.18.

⁸Edward, Lipton. Religious Freedom in Asia. (New York: Nova Science Publishers, 2002), p.35.

⁹ Anthony Cordesman, Arab-Israeli Military Forces in an Era of Assymetric Wars, (Washington, D.C.: Center for Strategic and International Studies), 2007, p.12.

¹⁰ Stephen, Ambrose, The Supreme Commander: The War Years of General Dwight D. Eisenhower. (MI: University of Mississippi, 1999), p.44.

¹¹ Max Boot,. War Made New: Technology, Warfare, and the course of History. (New York: Gotham Books, 2006), p.55.

¹² Vergil Bye,. Nationalization of oil in Venezuela: re-defined dependence and legitimization of imperialism. Journal of Peace and Research , 1979, 16(1) 57-78.

¹³ Ernest, May. Strange Victory. (New York: I.B. Tauris & Co., 2000), p.5.

¹⁴ Michael, Fulbrook, A Concise History of Germany. (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991), p.44.

¹⁵ Williamson, Murray, A War To Be Won: Fighting the Second World War. (MA: Harvard University Press), 2001.

¹⁶ John Goldemberg, 1978. Brazil: energy options and current outlook. American Association for the Advancement of Science. 200(4338): 158-164.

¹⁷ Anthony Cordesman and Martin Kleiber, Chinese Military Modernization. (Washington, D.C.: Center for International Studies, 2010), p.15

¹⁸ Kobrin, Stephen. 1985. Diffusion as an explanation of oil nationalization: or the domino effect rides again. Journal of Conflict Resolution 29(1): 3-32.

¹⁹ Spencer Tucker and Priscilla Roberts, The Encyclopedia of the Arab-Israeli conflict, (New York: ABC-CLIO, 2008), p.15.

20 Stephen Rock,. Appeasement in International Politics. KY: The University Press of Kentucky, 2000,p.19.

²¹ Koppes, Clayton. 1982. The good neighbor policy and the nationalization of Mexican oil: a reinterpretation. The Journal of American History 69(1): 62-81.

²² You Zheng, Globalization and state transformation in China.( New York: Cambridge University Press; 2004), p.5.

²³ William Waters, Globalization.( New York: Routledge, 2001), p12.

²⁴ Isaiah Wilson and James Forrest, Handbook of Defense Politics, (New York: Taylor and Francis Group), 2011, p.25.

²⁵ Joe, Stork. 1973. Middle East oil and the energy crisis: part 1. Middle East Research and Information Project 20: 3-20.

²⁶ Michael Hiscock and William Caegem, The internationalization of law, (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing), 2010, p.4

²⁷ Anotonia Domini, Socially responsible investing: making a difference and making money, (Chicago, IL: Dearborn Trade Books, 2001), p.14.

²⁸ Joe, Stork,. 1973. Middle East oil and the energy crisis: part two. Middle East Research and Information Project 21: 3-22.

²⁹ Jose Maria, Magone,. The Politics of Southern Europe. (Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers), 2003.

³⁰Michael, Neiberg. Fighting the Great War: A Global History. (MA: Harvard University Press), 2005.

³¹ Philip Camejo, The SRI advantage, (Ontario: New Society Publishers, 2002), p.17.

³² Herbert, Wiseman. Political Systems. New York: Routledge, 1966.

³³ Arnold Dashefsky, Sergio DellaPergola and Ira Sheskin, World Jewish Population 2010, (CT: Connecticut University Press, 2010), p.45.

³⁴ Jack Fischel, The Holocaust. (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1998), p.4.

³⁵ Eric, Hobsbawm,. The Age of Empire: 1875-1914, (New York: Random House, Inc., 2005), p.19.

³⁶ John Maanen,. Information technology and organizational transformation: history, rhetoric, and practice. (SAGE, Michigan, 2001), p.12.

³⁷ Robert Fry, Appreciative inquiry and organizational transformation: reports from the field. (Greenwood Publishing Group, Sydney, 2002), p.14.

³⁸ Felicity Rash, The Language of Violence: Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf (New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 2006), p.75.

³⁹ Shirley, Dixon,.. Organizational transformation in the Russian oil industry. (Edward Elgar Publishing, New York, 2008)

⁴⁰ Williams Griffiths, The Great War, (New York: Square One Publishers, 2003), p.14.