‘Nothing new': US Army parade holds no surprises for Chinese military minds
The
US Army's parade through Washington on Saturday offered no surprises, Chinese military observers said, while cautioning that the full force of American power was not on show.
The parade for the US Army's 250th anniversary showcased a range of American equipment, including Abrams tanks, Paladin artillery, robot dogs, reconnaissance drones, AH-64 Apache helicopters and Joint Light Tactical Vehicles.
Most of the technology is well known, with machinery such as the Abrams tanks deployed widely in conflicts ranging from the Middle East to
Ukraine.
The US equipment also has well-established Chinese equivalents, such as China's
Z-20 helicopter , which is considered comparable to America's Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawk. The Z-20 has advanced fly-by-wire controls, a five-blade main rotor for improved lift and range, powerful domestic engines and enhanced defensive systems.
Less is known about newer equipment such as the drones and robot dogs, and the roles those weapons would play in a conflict
Song Zhongping, a military commentator and former People's Liberation Army (PLA) instructor, said that many of the US Army's weapons were developed well before their Chinese counterparts, and although there had been upgrades in recent years, there were 'some shortcomings to a certain extent' in the American equipment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Standard
2 hours ago
- The Standard
China downplayed nuclear-capable missile test: classified NZ govt papers
Military vehicles carrying DF-26 ballistic missiles travel past Tiananmen Gate to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II in Beijing, China, September 3, 2015. (Reuters/File)
South China Morning Post
2 hours ago
- South China Morning Post
US court lets Trump keep control of National Guard troops deployed to Los Angeles
It said that while presidents do not have unfettered power to seize control of a state's guard, the Trump administration had presented enough evidence to show it had a defensible rationale for doing so, citing violent acts by protesters. In its decision, a three-judge panel on the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously concluded it was likely Trump lawfully exercised his authority in federalising control of the guard. The deployment was the first by a president of a state National Guard without the governor's permission since 1965. The decision halts a ruling from a lower court judge who found Trump acted illegally when he activated the soldiers over opposition from California Governor Gavin Newsom. An appeals court on Thursday allowed US President Donald Trump to keep control of National Guard troops he deployed to Los Angeles following protests over immigration raids. 'The undisputed facts demonstrate that before the deployment of the National Guard, protesters 'pinned down' several federal officers and threw 'concrete chunks, bottles of liquid, and other objects' at the officers. Protesters also damaged federal buildings and caused the closure of at least one federal building. And a federal van was attacked by protesters who smashed in the van's windows,' the court wrote. 'The federal government's interest in preventing incidents like these is significant.' It also found that even if the federal government failed to notify the governor of California before federalising the National Guard as required by law, Newsom had no power to veto the president's order. Trump celebrated the decision on his Truth Social platform, calling it a 'BIG WIN'. He wrote that 'all over the United States, if our Cities, and our people, need protection, we are the ones to give it to them should State and Local Police be unable, for whatever reason, to get the job done'. Newsom issued a statement that expressed disappointment that the court was allowing Trump to retain control of the Guard. But he also welcomed one aspect of the decision. US National Guard troops prepare for duties. Photo: Reuters 'The court rightly rejected Trump's claim that he can do whatever he wants with the National Guard and not have to explain himself to a court,' Newsom said. 'The President is not a king and is not above the law. We will press forward with our challenge to President Trump's authoritarian use of US military soldiers against citizens.' The court case could have wider implications on the president's power to deploy soldiers within the United States after Trump directed immigration officials to prioritise deportations from other Democratic-run cities. Trump, a Republican, argued that the troops were necessary to restore order. Newsom, a Democrat, said the move inflamed tensions, usurped local authority and wasted resources. The protests have since appeared to be winding down. Two judges on the appeals panel were appointed by Trump during his first term. During oral arguments Tuesday, all three judges suggested that presidents have wide latitude under the federal law at issue and that courts should be reluctant to step in. The case started when Newsom sued to block Trump's command, and he won an early victory from US District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco. Breyer found that Trump had overstepped his legal authority, which he said only allows presidents can take control during times of 'rebellion or danger of a rebellion'. 'The protests in Los Angeles fall far short of 'rebellion',' wrote Breyer, who was appointed by former president Bill Clinton and is brother to retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer. The Trump administration, though, argued that courts cannot second-guess the president's decisions and quickly secured a temporary halt from the appeals court. The ruling means control of the California National Guard will stay in federal hands as the lawsuit continues to unfold. Advertisement
South China Morning Post
5 hours ago
- South China Morning Post
Caught in the chip war, Malaysia must rethink its US–China balancing act
Malaysia has landed in another tight spot – this time over claims Chinese engineers may have accessed high-end Nvidia chips on its soil to train artificial intelligence models, potentially breaching US export controls. Advertisement The timing could hardly be worse. Trade Minister Tengku Zafrul Aziz and Second Finance Minister Amir Hamzah Azizan were in Washington this week to negotiate down a steep 24 per cent 'reciprocal tariff' imposed by US President Donald Trump in April. Now, their efforts risk being overshadowed by fears in Washington that Malaysia is serving as a backchannel for Chinese firms to access restricted chips – fears that could harden American attitudes and demands. The report, first published by the Wall Street Journal, claimed that an unnamed Chinese firm had booked out Malaysian data centres equipped with Nvidia's most advanced chips. US policy restricts the sale or export of these chips to China and its military-linked entities, including via third countries. A banner showing Nvidia branding at the AI & Big Data Expo 2025 in London on February 5. Photo: Reuters While it is unclear whether any laws were broken, the perception alone could prove damaging. Analysts expect Washington may use the case as leverage to push Malaysia into stricter enforcement of US export controls, especially given the billions of dollars in investments by American tech firms in Malaysian plants and data centres.
