China's SCS Strategy Thread

GreenestGDP

Junior Member
Effective immediately ... ...

PRC shall simply adopt a Nuke policy of ( Launch--Nukes--On--Detect ) only specifically from any ICBM direction originating from USA.
Let's give USA the special VIP Nuke treatment.
On all other non US nations ( India, UK, Japan, and all others ), China shall remain with the present policy of 2nd Strike Nuke Deterrence.

NOTE:
Too many Chinesse who have A-Q spirits forget that Russia has helped China many times in dealing with China eternal enemy USA.
During Korean war, Americans did not attack China with nukes, because US was fearing Russian nuke retaliations on behalf of China.

Thank God at present time, XI Jin Ping still remembers Russian help and forcing many other A-Q spirited Chineses in urgently cooperating with Russia in 30 areas.

Source: Prof. JIN Yi Nan, National Defense University of China
 

N00813

Junior Member
Registered Member
Latest on SCS:
If I remember right, this was basically what was proposed like a decade ago from the Chinese side?

Philippines willing to share South China Sea resources with China
The Philippines is willing to share natural resources with Beijing in contested South China Sea areas even if it wins a legal challenge next week, Foreign Secretary Perfecto Yasay said on Friday. Yasay said President Rodrigo Duterte's administration hoped to quickly begin direct talks with China following Tuesday's verdict, with the negotiations to cover jointly exploiting natural gas reserves and fishing grounds within the Philippines' exclusive economic zone. The Philippines filed a legal challenge with a UN-backed tribunal in The Hague contesting China's claims to nearly all of the strategically vital sea. China's claims reach almost to the coasts of the Philippines and some other Southeast Asian nations, and it has in recent years built giant artificial islands in the contested areas to enforce what it says are its indisputable sovereign rights. (AFP)

(
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
)
 

sinopakfriend

Just Hatched
Registered Member
Philppine needs massive capital injection in it infrastructure. It must lobby to become part of Silk Road. Stop being the front man.

Hopefully, the US and China can come to an understanding of sharing power in Aisa. Then magically all 'disputes' will receed. There is only one hyper power and that is the US. The Chinese actually respect this fact.

Peace must pervail.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Any civilian nuclear reactors China gets from America will have zero national security implications (or else the Americans would not sell them), and access to them will not have any meaningful impact on Chinese nuclear weapons policy.

If anything, I view Chinese nuclear reactor deals with America as China doing America a favour, similar to large Boeing buys. It's a way to easy the trade imbalance and help reduce some trade tensions. But in reality, America needs the sale way more than China needs the reactors.

As for weapons grade nuclear material.

Well firstly I would be extremely sceptical about just how accurate western intelligence is on that.

Most of it seems like circular reasoning projecting backwards based on existing Chinese warhead numbers.

Secondly, it is easily within China's ability to restart enrichment to weapons grade pretty much any time it wants. There are reports and suggestions that China has already been doing that for years, although again, I am skeptical of the accuracy of western intelligence regarding that.

I'm afraid I have to disagree on the first part.

Westinghouse have recently designed the Seawolf reactors and previously did a bunch of aircraft carrier reactors. And now all they have is the AP1000 civilian reactor design to keep them going, which is based on natural coolant circulation with no noisy pumps.

So I think there has been some technology transfer (on the naval side) as they do all work to the same standards and principles. And the US may have allowed it through as part of a deal where China delayed its nuclear warhead ambitions.

This is somewhat speculative, but it would have been a mutually beneficial deal for both China and the USA.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
China and Russia, two nations are facing the consequences for refusing to accept America's primacy.

the NATO meeting is all about Russia, the deployment will go ahead, and the sanction is going to stay, Putin may up his game;

the SCS is boilling, and THAAD will be deployed to SK, how will China respond?

my guess is the "strategic goal" may prevail, that is to maintain the Sino-US relation not to break. it's interesting to see two waiting games here: NATO is waiting for its sanction bite to take effect, and China is playing for time.

The sanctions regime against Russia is going to play out soon.

The US and Russia are now doing joint airstrikes in Syria.
Plus Germany (and therefore the EU) is wavering in terms of economic sanctions against Russia, as it hasn't really worked.
 

hkky

New Member
Registered Member
I'm afraid I have to disagree on the first part.

Westinghouse have recently designed the Seawolf reactors and previously did a bunch of aircraft carrier reactors. And now all they have is the AP1000 civilian reactor design to keep them going, which is based on natural coolant circulation with no noisy pumps.

So I think there has been some technology transfer (on the naval side) as they do all work to the same standards and principles. And the US may have allowed it through as part of a deal where China delayed its nuclear warhead ambitions.

This is somewhat speculative, but it would have been a mutually beneficial deal for both China and the USA.
Take it from someone working in the industry, there is zero link between naval and civilian reactors design. AP1000 is not natural circulation during operation, only in accidents.
 

Lezt

Junior Member
Effective immediately ... ...

PRC shall simply adopt a Nuke policy of ( Launch--Nukes--On--Detect ) only specifically from any ICBM direction originating from USA.
Let's give USA the special VIP Nuke treatment.
On all other non US nations ( India, UK, Japan, and all others ), China shall remain with the present policy of 2nd Strike Nuke Deterrence.

NOTE:
Too many Chinesse who have A-Q spirits forget that Russia has helped China many times in dealing with China eternal enemy USA.
During Korean war, Americans did not attack China with nukes, because US was fearing Russian nuke retaliations on behalf of China.

Thank God at present time, XI Jin Ping still remembers Russian help and forcing many other A-Q spirited Chineses in urgently cooperating with Russia in 30 areas.

Source: Prof. JIN Yi Nan, National Defense University of China

I am sorry, but I find this as propaganda. The first nuclear bomb the soviet detonate is in later 1949; in 1950; the soviet have 5 bombs when the USA had 300; in 1955, the sovied had 200 and the USA had 2400. The soviet only had the Tu95 at 1956; and the TU16 in 1954; the TU-4 with its 5400 km range cannot reach continental USA.

all of the major powers know how it would turn out if it went nuclear, the USSR can send its 200 or so bombs to bomb western Europe and Japan; some will get through but a lot of the bombers will be shot down or intercepted. The USA will then wipe the USSR off the face of the earth by its 2400 bombs, even if 1% got through the USSR would have lost all of its major cities and production centers.

As the Korean war is fought from 1950 to 1953; all talk of the soviet bomb is moot as the soviet does not have a means to delver it to the USA.

And, the soviet union did ask US for permission to nuke china in 1969; Washington said no.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Also, Mao didn't fear the nuclear bomb, however devastation it would be, a country the size of china can take one or two nukes, if more were sent, the fall out will affect everyone on earth. Thus it is brinkmanship; and it have proven till this day that no nuclear power dares to lob a nuclear bomb. if they do, it will be all out.
 
according to USNI News U.S. Officials to Congress: Chinese Response to Pending South China Sea Ruling Unclear
Neither what China will do following the ruling on its dispute with the Philippines over coral reefs in the South China Sea is clear, nor is the United States response beyond “preserving space for a diplomatic solution.”

On Thursday subcommittees from House Armed Services and House Foreign Affairs held a joint hearing on “a region at a crossroads,” as Abraham Denmark, deputy assistant secretary for East Asia in the Pentagon put it to attempt to measure what comes next.

Beijing has already signaled that it does not feel bound by the decision from the Hague tribunal, expected to be announced July 12.

China has distanced itself from other claimants in the vital waterway that include Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan by building islands on coral reefs that house radar sites, military airfields and have created harbors for its coast guard and People’s Liberation Army Navy ships to exercise “low-intensity coercion” in the region. The question he said comes down to accepting the rule of law or “the raw calculation of power,” Denmark said.

His counterpart at the State Department, Colin Willett, said, “The United States has a vested interest” in the South China Sea, but does not take sides in territorial disputes. The pending case does not involve settling territorial claims but in determining whether the land features are islands or something less.

But when asked if China decided to occupy Scarborough Shoal, near the Philippines, she said the United States would consider the move “very destabilizing,” but would go no further. Denmark said that a response depends upon what Beijing placed on the disputed territory. If it was military, it would increase its ability to control the South China Sea, out to its self-proclaimed 9-dash line of claimed territory, he said.

Willett added the United States will “continue to protect our rights and others'” to freely navigate the waters and fly over the air space where allowed by international law.

“Our focus is on [Chinese] behavior after the decision,” she added. The idea behind U.S. thinking and actions even now is “flouting the law … isn’t paying dividends.”

Denmark said the United States is working to deter China with an increased military presence and a higher operating tempo.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
chairman of the Armed Services Committee, commended the administration for the stepped up presence but noted “a shortage of ships” in the Navy to do much more.

Denmark said that America is working with allies, like the Philippines, and other regional partners to build up their maritime capability, develop a common operating picture to work more effectively together and establish their own maritime presence as a deterrent.

“There are a number of nations that want to work with us,” Thornberry said at the think tank. “Working with us” goes beyond security to economic interaction including the TransPacific Partnership (TTP) and diplomacy to settle disputes, Willett said.

“We’ve answered that call,” Denmark said from the region to show the United States continued high interest in the South China Sea. “I do think [the Rim of the Pacific exercise} is a good demonstration … of America’s power.” He added Beijing and Washington are maintaining a “robust military-to- military diplomacy.” The two countries have made strides in decreasing incidents of “unsafe interactions” at sea and in the air, but “it’s an issue that we are going to continue [discussing] with the [People’s Liberation Army].”

Willett said the United States’ efforts are trying to ensure “everyone performs with restraint” after the ruling is handed down. “It’s not about the rocks; it’s about the rules.”

Thornberry said at Heritage, “We can’t just look at the South China Sea in isolation. …There are calculations going on all the time” in Beijing, Moscow and with other potential adversaries about what the United States will do in meeting new challenges and probes across the globe.
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Take it from someone working in the industry, there is zero link between naval and civilian reactors design. AP1000 is not natural circulation during operation, only in accidents.

So the design standards, quality control procedures etc etc are different between civilian and naval reactors?

And they don't share any common parts or design philosophies at all?
 
Top