I don't like our military exchange programs with the Chinese. I think the Chinese learn the lesson that they can beat us. Wwhether that is true or not is irrelevant to their decision to go to war. What is relevant is whether they believe it to be true. I don't think that the lesson we hope to teach that we can't be beaten is the one conveyed.
Strategypage disagrees:
The government has offered to increase military cooperation with the United States, via joint exercises, officer exchanges and staff planning for future coordination. While these efforts have obvious espionage opportunities for both sides, they are more of an eye opener for American officers, because China is still a police state, and military matters are much more closely guarded than in the United States.
I respect Strategypage, but I can't go along with this view. We want the status quo which means we want no fighting. We are also stronger than the Chinese so mutual ignorance helps us more than the Chinese. If we learn something important about the Chinese military, it will likely go to waste since we want peace--the status quo suits us fine. We won't initiate conflict to exploit some particular piece of knowledge.
China on the other hand is the dissatisfied power. They want Taiwan. They know we stand between them and Taiwan. So they have the need to learn ways to stall our intervention and nullify our superiority for long enough to conquer Taiwan. What the Chinese learn is useful toward taking action that risks war. What they learn about our forces may even prompt an attack if they fear their knowledge identifies a weak spot but that we could correct it as time passes.
And consider that the Chinese want these exchanges. And want more. That alone should tell you all you need to know about the relative value of the exchanges.
