Recently, the high-profile participation of Chinese military-industrial enterprises at the European International Defense Exhibition in Paris has sparked attention. Analysts believe that amidst wars breaking out in various parts of the world, Chinese arms companies are seizing business opportunities, competing in the arms market, and expanding their political influence. However, China’s imitation of NATO military equipment seems to be merely a superficial attempt, and with the current poor political and economic conditions in China, breaking through in this manner may prove to be difficult.
At the recently concluded Eurosatory in Paris, the number of Chinese military-industrial enterprises far exceeded the previous session, with more than 60 companies participating compared to less than 10 exhibitors in the previous edition.
Eurosatory, held biennially since 1960, with a history of over 50 years, is the world’s largest defense exhibition, bringing together military, defense, and security enterprises from around the globe.
During the exhibition, China’s largest land-based weapons manufacturing company, China North Industries Group, showcased two 155mm self-propelled howitzers, both following NATO standards.
For decades, China had been using Soviet-designed 152mm caliber howitzers. Since the 1980s, it began attempting to introduce advanced Western howitzer technology to replace the outdated Soviet systems. According to reports from Voice of America, China purchased a complete set of design and manufacturing technology for the 155mm howitzer from Western howitzer genius Dr. Bulbo, enabling a breakthrough in 155mm howitzer technology.
Assistant Researcher Wang Xiaowen from the Taiwan Institute for National Defense and Security on the 27th told Dajiyuan, “Of course, if even howitzer technology requires spending a lot to acquire Western designs and technology, China may be aiming to improve the quality of its weapon production by moving away from Soviet-era technology and specifications.”
Despite Russia being touted as the world’s second-largest military power, its performance in the Russia-Ukraine conflict has been lackluster. Wang Xiaowen said this demonstrates that Soviet weapons may not be as formidable as anticipated, leading Beijing to possibly consider adjusting its arms production specifications and embracing a larger share of the Western-standard arms market.
Regarding China’s shift towards NATO-standard equipment, Su Ziyun, Director of the Institute of National Defense Strategy and Resources at the Taiwan Institute for National Defense and Security, analyzed for Dajiyuan, “This can only be described as imitation, as the hardware specifications align, as seen in artillery types, which is relatively easy to imitate. However, China lacks comprehension when it comes to electronic components because if NATO does not provide compatibility with electronic codes, the weapons and equipment produced by China would not be able to communicate with NATO’s equipment, thereby becoming isolated.”
“So, the exports of NATO equipment are limited to items like artillery and ammunition calibers that are compatible. In such cases, providing these compatible ammunition or artillery can indeed increase some export share, but the revenue from these products is relatively small, serving as only a drop in the bucket.”
Eoin Micheál McNamara, a researcher at the Finnish Institute of International Affairs, also believes that while China showcased its NATO-standard howitzers in Europe, NATO member countries are unlikely to become buyers. He told Voice of America, “NATO governments consider it safer to purchase from Western companies than from China. China is aware of this and has practically no chance of exporting weapons to NATO member countries.”
The ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict in Europe has lasted for over two years, with the Middle East experiencing conflicts like the Hamas war last October. In the Asian region, under Chinese provocations, neighboring countries like Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, and Taiwan are all preparing for potential conflicts.
Against the backdrop of escalating international tensions and conflicts worldwide, China has prominently displayed its military products at exhibitions. Wang Xiaowen analyzed that China evidently believes that in times of global chaos with countries increasing arms purchases, there are greater global business opportunities for China’s military industry.
“Especially, Beijing showcased the 155mm self-propelled howitzers manufactured to NATO standards, China’s indigenous drone systems, etc., allowing buyers to swiftly mix and match with Western-standard ammunition, expanding opportunities for China’s arms exports.”
Wang Xiaowen believes, “Similar to other ‘Made in China’ products like Huawei smartphones, under the incentive of good quality at low prices, China’s military industry can secure many arms procurement orders from developing countries, establishing long-term trade and technological cooperation relationships.”
“On the other hand, China (the CCP) likely sees the continuous Russia-Ukraine conflict causing a shortage of US and Western military weapons as an opportunity to make a killing.”
Su Ziyun thinks, “The Chinese government aims to seize the global arms export market because following the Russia-Ukraine conflict outbreak, global military spending surged to nearly $2.4 trillion last year, with potentially $700 billion allocated for arms procurement.”
In April of this year, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute released a report showing a 6.8% increase in global military expenditure in 2023, the highest annual growth rate since 2009. The largest increases in military spending were seen in Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. The top five countries in military spending were the United States, China, Russia, India, and Saudi Arabia.
China has increased military spending for the 29th consecutive year, with a 6% increase, totaling $296 billion, which also prompted neighboring countries like Japan and Taiwan to invest more funds into defense. Japan’s 2023 expenditure was $50.2 billion, while Taiwan’s was $16.6 billion, both growing by 11%.
Apart from aiming to seize the global arms export market, Su Ziyun said, “More importantly, China seeks to acquire political influence, solidifying its political power. This is its greater ambition.”
“At present, South Korea’s arms exports have significantly increased. Although detailed statistics have not been released, it is generally believed that South Korea may surpass China to become the fourth largest exporter, climbing from the previous tenth position.”
“Conversely, the United States remains the world leader as its weapons’ quality has been proven in wars, demonstrating excellent performance.”
In the report on global arms trade from 2019 to 2023 released by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, the top five largest arms exporting countries were the United States, France, Russia, China, and Germany. Russia, preoccupied with the invasion of Ukraine, saw a 53% decline in arms exports, while China’s arms imports dropped by 44% compared to the previous five years.
Su Ziyun said, “Russia’s exports have sharply contracted, and in this scenario, China aims to fill the void of missing foreign exchange on one hand and seek political influence or enhance the political influence brought about by increased military spending on the other, mainly targeting certain countries in Asia and Africa, with Asia referring to nations in the Indochinese Peninsula such as Myanmar and Pakistan, while Africa includes emerging markets that China has set its sights on.”
Elio Calcagno, a defense project researcher at IAI, a defense program at the Italian Institute of International Affairs, told Voice of America that Chinese companies are seeking more export markets, which would evidently bring commercial advantages. However, arms exports often accompany political influences, particularly when buyers depend on the products.
Wang Xiaowen suggested that China (the CCP) is extremely eager to replace the United States as the regional or even global leader. Seizing the opportunity when the US and Western countries are preoccupied with the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the Hamas conflict, China proudly showcased the quality and capabilities of its arms production, aiming to flex its muscles to other developing countries. This also reflects China’s characteristic of not addressing problems properly but only pursuing illusory notions of ‘rising in the East and falling in the West’ and the ‘great rejuvenation of the nation.’
After three years post-pandemic, China’s economy is deteriorating. With the real estate sector on the verge of collapse, sluggish domestic demand, capital outflows, declining exports, and high unemployment rates, a series of related economic data exhibit prolonged fatigue.
Official Chinese data released on Thursday (27th) showed a significant slowdown in profit growth in May for industrial enterprises. Following a 4% growth in April, industrial enterprise profits in the previous month only increased by 0.7% from a year earlier. The growth rate of industrial profits in the first five months of this year fell to 3.4%, down by 0.9 percentage points from the 4.3% in the January-April period.
Su Ziyun believes that in the context of China’s economic decline, an increase in military spending could potentially offset some losses in foreign trade.
Regarding China’s high-profile attendance at the European defense conference, Wang Xiuzhen also remarked, “This might indicate that under China’s worsening domestic economy, it is striving to find a way out. Regardless of what is being sold, as long as it earns foreign exchange, generates revenue for companies, and prevents unemployment.”
“This also suggests that China (the CCP) may be facing problems even in the military industry and is therefore very eager to engage in business for NATO-standard weapons.”
On Thursday, as the Communist Party of China determined the timing of the Third Plenum, it also announced the handling of two major “tigers,” Li Shangfu and Wei Fenghe.
Su Ziyun told Dajiyuan that the CCP releasing news of dealing with two “tigers” at this time may be termed as anti-corruption, but it is hard to tell if it is actually political purging. Even if there were cases of corruption, both of these individuals were ministers appointed during Xi Jinping’s tenure, revealing Xi’s poor personnel judgments and potentially exerting a negative impact on morale.
“In any case, the ultimate political responsibility should fall on Xi Jinping, and indications like the dismissal of a Minister of Foreign Affairs (Qin Gang) shows that the Xi regime indeed has inherent instability.”
Previously, dismissals of Rocket Force generals and military-industrial enterprise officials were reported, with current affairs commentator Zhong Yuan telling Dajiyuan, “The CCP is essentially admitting to significant issues within the military.” He believes that this is akin to officially unveiling the ‘internal turmoil’ of the CCP’s military.