You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
China-Japan-Koreas
Our Biggest Problem of All: The Nuclear Threat From China
2007-03-22


By Mark Helprin

Before rejoicing over detente with Kim Jong Il, it might be useful to remember that although agreements were reached in the past, his countrymen later built a number of nuclear weapons and carried out a test. Also, North Korea, with a rich chemical and biological arsenal having long ago neutralized American tactical nuclear weapons on the Korean Peninsula, has embarked solely on a program of survival by extortion and will gladly forfeit a power it does not need in exchange for recognition and some essential commodities. The Asian nuclear power of which we must take account is not North Korea but China. The forerunners of China's government were able to defeat Chiang Kai-shek, fight the United States to a draw in Korea and, merely by means of their country's looming potential, help defeat America in Vietnam. This they did in chaos, poverty and without modern arms, but with strategy bred in the bone. Since 1978, using their extraordinary and sustained economic and technical growth to build military capacity, the Chinese have deliberately modeled themselves on the Meiji (who rapidly transformed feudal Japan into an industrial state able to vanquish the Russian fleet at Tsushima).
Posted by:Zenster

#15  The Chinese are building 5 of the type 94s. The first of it's class is in sea trials. That in no way invalidates that they are heavily building up their long range nuclear forces (from their single Xia 12 tube boat with short ranged missiles single warhead missiles). Since the Chinese are building new classes of boats at 2-3 times the rate of the US, I suspect the 5 JL-2 equipped boomers are only the first of many.
Posted by: ed   2007-03-22 22:57  

#14  G: MAD is not the only deterrant. Chinese and American economies are mutually dependent, and a war between them would mean mutual economic destruction as well as nuclear devastation. Unless you are irrational (Islamofascist) or backed into a corner, you don't kill off your best customer (or supplier). The hard part here is knowing where all the corners are and avoiding them.

We are our own best customer (and supplier). In 2006, we exported $55b worth of stuff to China. That's about 0.3% of our total annual output. We imported $287b worth of stuff from China. That's about 20% of China's annual output.

We can buy stuff from other countries. In fact, prior to China's opening, we used to buy it from other countries (in East Asia). China can't replace the American market, which they use to generate both employment and the hard currency they need to buy modern machinery from the developed world. Yes, a lot of joint ventures that generate sales for US multinationals, but not exports, would go up in smoke. But that's a problem for multinationals, not US economic output.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2007-03-22 22:42  

#13  Um actually ed theres only one type 094 doing sea trials. They're HOPING to eventually build 3-4 more. The current SSBN class consists of about 3 or so Xia's which are extremely noisy and rarely put out to sea (they're drydock queens).The JL-2 missiles which its supposed to carry are still not ready for deployment and are still undergoing testing.
Posted by: Valentine   2007-03-22 17:07  

#12  The US has a 1st strike capability against China and will continue to have one for at leat 10 years.
Posted by: Shipman   2007-03-22 16:53  

#11  The Chinese are in sea trials of a 5 submarine class of ballistic missiles submarines each with 16 missiles with 5000 mile range. The Chinese nuclear arsenal is not small. It's that most of their warheads are on smaller missiles aimed at Russia or India but that is changing.
Posted by: ed   2007-03-22 15:54  

#10  Zenster one of the things thats got the current Russian govt's and even China's govts panties in a twist is that we announced quietly that we're not reducing the warheads on our Minuteman IIIs to solely one warhead per missile. This means we're still keeping at least 800 warheads available via these missiles for use, also almost all of these warheads are of W-87 variety with Mk-21 RV, the same as used on the MX Peacekeeper missiles with their frightening level of accuracy.

This has turned effectively all 500 or so Minuteman IIIs into another first strike level strategic weapon on par with the Tridents on the Ohio class boomers.

As far as China's missiles go, their most modern one is the DF-31A, a solid fuel ICBM of which there are about 2-3 dozen enplaced. Another 2-3 dozen are DF-5s which are liquid fueled rockets (meaning they would be highly visible prepping for launch). So comparatively China wouldn't want to do a first strike in any but the most insane or desparate situation
Posted by: Valentine   2007-03-22 15:32  

#9  Thank you, 'moose. Those were the exact sort of numbers I was interested in. My reason for posting this was not a Chicken Little tirade but to make the case for continued nuclear parity with both China and Russia.

While China and Taiwan are evolving, by default, some sort of stable relationship or status quo, the same cannot be said for other Southeast Asian countries. Even Taiwanese businessmen refer to trade with China as, "Feeding the tiger with one's own flesh." The Mekong hydroelectric projects represent a gun held to the head of many smaller and helpless countries. China could cripple the lot of them by shutting the spillgates for even a single season and halting the majority of water flow.

As an example: Work on the transcontinental Canadian railroad involved running a line through the Fraser River canyon. A single landslide at Hells Canyon caused immense damage to the salmon run.
In 1914 during construction of the CNR a blast caused a landslide which further congested Hells Canyon. The landslide interfered with the ability of the spawning salmon to make it through to their spawning grounds upriver. It is said that the salmon catch was reduced to one third what it had been.
[emphasis added]

This is just one example of how China is still able, through non-military means, to exert undue influence in what remains an unstable region. Intentional communist disruption of the Mekong's hydrology could cause downstream famine and ecological collapse.

Furthermore, despite the strong economic ties mentioned above by others, none of this has deterred China from causing America to expend untold billions in combating the North Korean nuclear threat, a crisis which Bejing could stop with the flick of a wrist. This sort of continuing triangulation should be met with far more serious consequences than it currently is. Instead, China is treated to untold billions worth of Preferred Nation Status trade from the USA.

While it is heartening that China is being forced to begin granting private property rights and other concessions to a capitalist free market economy, none of these private sector developments have much overall effect upon the Politburo's strategy. Again, my only crucial point is the necessity of maintaining MAD with both China and Russia. Neither of them are demonstrating good faith in any sense of the word. That America's missile shield may well be effective against China's meager arsenal is, perhaps, the best news of all.
Posted by: Zenster   2007-03-22 14:36  

#8  It was mentioned a while back that while the US missile defense shield was not sufficient to stop a nuclear attack from Russia, it was, just coincidentally, sufficient to neutralize an attack from China.

I'm sure that this was purely coincidental.

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/china/nuke/index.html

There is a good table on this page that shows their current ICBM and SLBM numbers. It doesn't appear to be a heck of a lot.

"Pentagon Overview of China's Missile Forces, 2006"
Posted by: Anonymoose   2007-03-22 11:50  

#7  MAD is not the only deterrant. Chinese and American economies are mutually dependent, and a war between them would mean mutual economic destruction as well as nuclear devastation. Unless you are irrational (Islamofascist) or backed into a corner, you don't kill off your best customer (or supplier). The hard part here is knowing where all the corners are and avoiding them.
Posted by: Glenmore   2007-03-22 07:59  

#6  Thanks, Sneaze - I was about to slit my jugulars!
Posted by: Bobby   2007-03-22 06:29  

#5  Taiwan has substantial trade relations with the mainland. Many Islanders would like to pursue investments there. It appears that the two states are evolving into some benign accomodation if not associate state status. Pessimism is probably not warranted.
Posted by: Sneaze   2007-03-22 04:14  

#4  You can bet the first thing that happens is a boomer in the south pacfic region launches most of its nukes in retaliation only these wont be EMP strikes in kind.

I hope like Hell that you're right, Valentine. Washington has been so spineless of late that it's been pretty discouraging. What I'd really like to see is a realistic comparison of, not missile or warhead numbers, but actual throw weight in megatonnage with an offset coefficient for aiming accuracy. That would be a little more reassuring. I certainly hope that the missile defense shield will be able to intercept extremely high altitude vehicles. We're going to need that capability.
Posted by: Zenster   2007-03-22 03:18  

#3  WAFF.com > GWADAR Port officially open? China going hell-bent on modernizing the Paki Navy for opers in Indian Ocean, etc.; and investing Milyuhns and Zilyuhns of $$$ on major Paki/Regional highway construx. IONews, INDIA still being flanked.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2007-03-22 02:55  

#2  Faced with victory, or with loss, they might choose to -- and who would venture to guarantee that they would not? -- detonate half a dozen high-megatonnage nuclear charges in the mesosphere, in an electro-magnetic pulse (EMP) strike perhaps not even in American airspace, cooking almost every circuit and semiconductor, rendering the American government blind, deaf and dumber than it is already and the country unable to resist the inroads that would surely follow.

Yeah right like we'd choose to ignore the fact that their are half a dozen or more inbound nukes to ANYWHERE and not do something about that. Let alone treat an EMP strike as anything BUT a nuclear attack. You can bet the first thing that happens is a boomer in the south pacfic region launches most of its nukes in retaliation only these wont be EMP strikes in kind.
Posted by: Valentine   2007-03-22 02:17  

#1  Our Biggest Problem of All: The Nuclear Threat From China

And a caldera could blow sky high again in Mammoth, al-Bore could take down the internets with his ass, and bird flu could attack our wishbones.

Mark Helprin lost me forever when he said, "[China]..helped defeat America in Vietnam".

fact: Our Craven Congress defunded us in Vietnam. ring a bell?
Posted by: RD   2007-03-22 02:05  

00:00