(Un)veiled threats: The "quiet neutralization" of China´s nuclear deterrent.

StrategyPage.com analyst Harold C. Hutchison maintained last week in his article about the successful test of the interceptor missile of the BMD system that after the Ground Based Interceptor Sytem is extended to 18 missiles in the fall of 2007 a quiet neutralization of China´s meagre DF-5A ICBM force will have been accomplished. After the deployment of 20 additional GBI missiles in 2009 the US will have more than sufficient interceptors for eliminating the entire chinese ICBM and SLBM force after their launch and the 55 SM-3 sea based ABM´s will take care for the rest of PLA´s missiles. Interestingly Hutchison actually does perceive that China develops a new generation of ICBM´s and that the PRC has the capability to field them in substantial numbers.:coffee:

I am aware that StrategyPage.com is not a very reliable source of information but supposing that only a fraction of this article is true China´s leadership should be acutely alarmed. This reckless game of strategic blackmail played by the current US administration has to be foiled if China does not want to succumb to crude bullying by America in the near future. Probably the PLA had intelligence about this truly menacing developments and implemented effective measures years ago but unfourtunately China has yet to learn the lesson that a potential adversary must know unambigously in advance that he will pay an unbearable price if he dares to attack or blackmail China with nuclear weapons. The application of deterrence as an effective political strategy lacks consequence and clarity in China and the security of the entire planet would be improved if the chinese leadership recognises that they have to change course in this respect.

So guys, what is your informed opinion about how China and her second artillery should react on this provocative US threats?

Just my 2 cents. I think China is already reacting to this by improving its tech in ICBM, the DF-31 series comes to mind, nuclear subs etc. They can also increase their stockpile of nuke relatively quickly I believe.
Plus I've seen some reports of Chinese anti-missile systems, perhaps the more knowledgeable forum members can say more.
No one can be sure how effective these steps will be.

Personally, I think the US anti-missile systems are coming along nicely and am a little surprised China and the world are not showing more alarm, publicly at least. Maybe they know it'll not work as well as the US claim or they think there's not much they can do. I hope it's the former.

Our system isn't necessarilly reliable. Most of it is designed to take out missiles as they get close and even then, they haven't proven their effectiveness in real combat, where there'll be no substantial warning and they will definitely not have any idea where the missiles will be, where they will head, and where they will stop. All of this is important.

With nuclear subs and mobile launchers, we wouldn't even know where they're being fired from. Not to mention, if China equipe a squadron of Su-30MKKs with long-range nuclear cruise missiles, they could would be almost impossible to stop unless the fighters are shot down. Subs could do this as well. It relies too much on probability and simulation without any real possibility of combat use, and the ineffectiveness at that point would cost hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of lives. Not to mention likely significant economic and military losses.

MIRVs are immune to the system as well aren't they?

Vlad Plasmius said:

MIRVs are immune to the system as well aren't they?

Click to expand...

Do what the Russians did, use a nuke to destory a nuke warhead... and pray that all that radiation doesn't mutate you :coffee:

It seems sort of childish to brag about such things when all China has to do to counter is increase its numbers of ICBMs which it easily can do. It's not like the 24 ICBMs it already has is China's capable limit. Like as if something uncontrollable and not in their power prevents them from making just one more. I read that China is more than capable of maintaining an arsenal of a least 200 ICBMs. So the 24 now is China showing restraint. Too bad the masturbators of war can't show anything of the sort themselves and will cry and complain when China acts to counter. Strategypage is run by complete idiots.

Actually I am not that concerned about China´s strategic countermeasures since every sane person is conscious about them. China is forced by US actions to implement a plan countering these schemes and obviously PLA has already some success as the DF-31 test last week tells us.

The main problem is that the current chinese leadership has to abandon Deng´s strategy of ´biding your time, never take the lead and hide your capabilties´ since this course is misinterpreted by most western observers as weakness. Of course Deng was right in his time (1978-1992) because China was indeed weak in his era and consequently was compelled seeking accomodation to the mighty US but today these positions become more obsolete and dangerous day by day.

Russia´s president Vladimir Putin talks often and with serene confidence of the russian missile forces and although Russia has far fewer resources than China Putin has begun the determined modernization of this ultimative instrument of power. Currently Russia is building three new SSBN of the Borey-class (17.000 ts, 16-20 Bulava SLBM) and in 2015 likely six of these boomers will serve in the Morskaya Flota. Additionally Russia currently introduces around 7-8 Topol M (SS-27) road-mobile ICBM´s every year and already 40 are deployed making Russia sufficiently safe from US BMD blackmail for at least ten years to come. Furthemore Russia will field a new hypersonic long-range cruise missile (Cha-90?) in the next decade which will add a very potent weapon to the russian arsenal. Without doubt Putin´s statements have to be taken with a grain of salt since russian leaders throughout history have exaggerated their military might but the fact that no one should miss is that he is deadly serious about the security of his country. NO russian head of state, NEVER and under NO circumstances will allow a foreign power to blackmail or attack Russia with nuclear weapons.

Unfourtunately Hu Jintao never talks about China´s nuclear weapons in public and this invites fatal misinterpretations in foreign countries. Assuming China takes similar measures as Russia would mean that China must change the course of restraint also in public. This policy of restraint has served China well in the 80´s and 90´s but today Beijing faces a challenge of an aggressive and militaristic US administration which obviously thinks that restraint means weakness. Consequently China must implement two important policies in the next few years:

1. Create a substantial, modern but also modest deterrence force which must be able to defeat US steadily expanding missile defences. China should take a close look at Russia´s plans and if Moscow can achieve a sufficient capabilty China will be able to emulate that feat with her enourmous industrial and financial resources. (Failing to do so would imply that China´s leaders are not willing to make a lesser (in terms of relative cost) sacrifice for their own national security than russian leaders are obviously willing. I refuse to believe that.)

2. China must explain her new nuclear doctrine to friends, foes and also to her own population. Of course hardliners in the US will use their chance of painting China as a dangerous enemy but they will inevitably do so since nothing China does will ever change their line (anything short of capitulation and implosion like the former Sovietunion naturally ). Chinese officials often talk nervously about the ´China threat´ theory touted around the world by the american hegemon for propaganda purposes but they appear so anxious about giving US propaganda some excuses that they are completely oblivious to the obvious: Propaganda cannot be influenced by ´good behaviour´ it has simply to be countered by your own effective counter propaganda.

A simple capabilty mutates into a threat only by subjective perception, accordingly China must achieve two feats in the next 8-10 years: 1. Create that capabilty 2. Create the perception for people in Asia, Latin America, Europe and Africa (US will probably be a non starter) that China´s forces are a legitimate security need for an ascending world power and definitely no threat for anyone on the planet.

Violet Oboe said:

......A simple capabilty mutates into a threat only by subjective perception, accordingly China must achieve two feats in the next 8-10 years: 1. Create that capabilty 2. Create the perception for people in Asia, Latin America, Europe and Africa (US will probably be a non starter) that China´s forces are a legitimate security need for an ascending world power and definitely no threat for anybody.

Click to expand...

U make very good points.
I think China is already quite successful in convincing the world, except of course US, Japan & some parts of Europe, that China's rise is mostly beneficial to them.

The kind of nuclear capability that US and Russia has today, is the result of the MAD-buildup during the Cold War era. Through the Cold War, the US produced an estimated 70,000 nuclear weapons, and the Russians 55,000.

Today the US maintains 7,000 operational + 3,000 reserve warheads, 500 ICBM's, 200+ heavy bombers, and a fleet of 12-14 SSBN's. Of the 7,000 operational warheads, 1,490 are ICBM warheads, 2,737 SLBM warheads, 1,660 bomber warheads, and 800 tactical warheads. Each Ohio-class SSBN can carry 24 Trident II SLBM's, and each SLBM armed with up to 8 MIRV warheads.

The Russians have an esimated 7,200 active warheads + 8,800 inactive reserve warheads. The Russian strategtic Rocket Forces operate approx. 560 ICBM's with 1,970 warheads, and the Russian Navy operates approx. 26-28 SSBN's with 440 SLBM's and 2,272 warheads. By 2015 the Russian navy is expected to operate a fleet of 5 Borei-class SSN's, each with 12-16 Bulava SLBM's that can carry 6-10 MIRV warheads.

In 1998 the Brookings Insittute published an estimate that the US had spent $5.48 trillion dollars on its nuclear arsonel (in 1996 dollars). That's about $35 billion/year, or roughly equal to the official Chinese military budget for 2006.

It's economically suicidal for the PRC to match that kind of nuclear build-up, dollar-to-dollar. The Russians can still somewhat match-up because they have a huge recycled stockpile from the cold war, China does not. The PLA has to spend its smaller resources carefully to maximize its effect.

In addition, we're not in the strictly nation vs nation era anymore. Today we have many sub-national organizations and terriorist groups that doesn't depend on an ICBM rocket. Sooner or later we'll have to start dealing with unconventional nuclear/WMD warfare. "Missile defense" isn't just billions spent on interceptor missiles anymore. Try screening every incoming package, inspect every car that comes over the border, every boat that comes into your costal waters, and somehow secure your borders against people running across.

Dear adeptitus, reading my post carefully will reveal that an effective but modest capability is exactly what I have recommended. Of course China would not be served well by simply equalizing quantitavely the US or even the russian strategic missile forces.

The central point I wanted to discuss is certainly not about current US capabilities but about future US ABM systems and their impact on China´s security. China´s whole security environment will be affected very negatively since her leadership will be woefully vulnerable towards a reckless US strategy of nuclear blackmail and bullying threats. Preventing this from happening should be central for chinese top leaders in the coming 5-10 years.

Some clever people of chinese thinktanks maintain that owning 360 bn $ of US treasury bills is equal of pointing 360 ICBM´s on US cities which in contrast to financial assets are also only useful in the times of armageddon. My answer to them is quite simple: Nothing is better than having it both ways. Accomplishing having the guns and the butter is the challenge to be mastered by China´s leaders.

Assuming that one DF-31A plus warhead costs 50 m $ and the launcher plus some infrastructure 15 m $ (may be that is too high) a force of 150-200 missiles would cost around 9.75 bn $ to 13 bn $. Most of the necessary infrastructure and the skilled personnel already exists in the second artillery and the money would be spent over a period of 5 -10 years. Currently the Central Peoples Bank of China owns a forex reserve of 951 bn $ which is swelling by more than 20 bn $ a month, additionally tax income of the central state has risen around 25% for the third straight year. The generals of the PLA obviously do not need a degree in economics for recognizing that a pivotal security project could be financed easily by a deal with the state and his banks providing even for a hefty profit going to the chinese defence industry. In the end everybody would be happy: CPC keeps her power without being pressured too much by ´big bully´, PLA secures China´s deterrence and achieves a new level of competence, industry introduces new and better technologies and makes profit and thousands of qualified chinese get or keep their job.

But unfourtunately some people cannot be approached with logic and pragmatism and they keep fretting about the cost and what ´big bad bully´may do to them in hegemonic anger for ever.

"Currently the Central Peoples Bank of China owns a forex reserve of 951 bn $ which is swelling by more than 20 bn $ a month"

Why are they saving so much money...wuts it for...