| Submit your comments on this article |
| China-Japan-Koreas |
| Chinese Threaten Pre-emptive Nuclear Use Over Taiwan |
| 2005-07-14 |
| China is prepared to use nuclear weapons against the US if it is attacked by Washington during a confrontation over Taiwan, according to a senior Chinese military official. "If the Americans draw their missiles and position-guided ammunition on to the target zone on China's territory, I think we will have to respond with nuclear weapons," Zhu Chenghu, a major general in the People's Liberation Army, said at an official briefing. Mr Zhu, who is also a professor at China's National Defence University, was speaking at a function for foreign journalists organised, in part, by the Chinese government. He added that China's definition of its territory includes warships and aircraft. "If the Americans are determined to interfere [then] we will be determined to respond," Mr Zhu said. "We Chinese will prepare ourselves for the destruction of all of the cities east of Xian. Of course the Americans will have to be prepared that hundreds. . . of cities will be destroyed by the Chinese." Mr Zhu is a self-acknowledged "hawk" who has warned previously that China could strike the US with long-range missiles. But his threat to use nuclear weapons in a conflict over Taiwan is the most specific by a senior Chinese official in nearly a decade. Rick Fisher, a former senior US congressional official and an authority on the Chinese military, said the specific nature of the threat "is a new addition to China's public discourse". China's official doctrine has called for no first use of nuclear weapons since its first atomic test in 1964. But Mr Zhu is not the first Chinese official to refer to the possibility of using such weapons first in a conflict over Taiwan. Chas Freeman, a former US assistant secretary of defence, said in 1999 that a PLA official had told him China could respond in kind to a nuclear strike by the US in the event of a conflict with Taiwan. "In the end you care more about Los Angeles than you do about Taipei," Mr Freeman quoted this official as saying. The official is believed to have been Xiong Guangkai, now the PLA's deputy chief of general staff. The rationale for the new threats is unclear. China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs could not be reached for comment. Mr Zhu, who has risen from the rank of colonel over the past five years, insisted he was expressing his personal views, and that they did not represent the policy of the Chinese government. Nor was he anticipating war between China and the US. But he said that, because China did not have the capability to fight a conventional war against the US, the threat to escalate might be the only way to stop a war. His comments could provide insight into the thinking among some in the PLA amid growing anxiety in Washington about its capabilities. Last month, Donald Rumsfeld, defence secretary, voiced concern about China's military build-up. |
| Posted by:Anonymoose |
| #38 MacArthur's ghost smiles ... |
| Posted by: borgboy 2005-07-14 23:57 |
| #37 "I am 97% certain Taiwan has Nukes..." That's a serious scorched-earth denial policy... |
| Posted by: .com 2005-07-14 23:32 |
| #36 I am afraid that the diverting action will be Kimmy giving Osama a Nuke to hit us with... |
| Posted by: 3dc 2005-07-14 22:55 |
| #35 I am 97% certain Taiwan has Nukes... The Taiwanese now run Taiwan not the Mainlanders so the likelyhood of Taiwan actually using theirs in response is higher. The Taiwanese generals have confidence that you would not expect if they didn't. Taiwan has had reactors for decades. Taiwan has lots of stuff carved into their marble mountains. Taiwan was involved somehow in the Israeli-South African flash in Carter's term. Taiwan has done military papers on fighting a nuke war with China. Does taiwan still require hardened bomb shelters for each building built? |
| Posted by: 3dc 2005-07-14 22:51 |
| #34 Robert Crawford: The 400,000 evacuated at Dunkirk only needed 35 ferries and 40 barges, with some extra civilian shipping. Leaving their elite forces to faster military ships, how many riflemen could be carried across the Taiwan Strait in 1,000 civilian ships? 5,000? The distance is about 200km. Assume their top speed is 10 knots, almost minimal for those waters. This means that if the Chinese can keep it tight, their first civilian ships would arrive in 12 hours, the vast majority within 18 hours. Assuming that first, the Pacific fleet is at its furthest patrol distance when they launch, then a violent US diversion occurs to distract the US government and people, can even the Pacific fleet take out *enough* PLA to stop the invasion? Taiwan itself would have already been devastated by the 1,000+ rockets fired at their defenses. Remember that an army or two in the major cities would mean that Taiwan is lost. In other words, small sea mines, as I suggested before, are not only easy to make and inexpensive, they may be even more effective than a US fleet in stopping such an invasion. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-07-14 22:21 |
| #33 Hi Barbara :-) Well no, I don't think that anything but extremely foolish behaviour on both sides of the Pacific would lead to a (nuclear) military conflict between the US and China. As long as Taiwan maintains its status quo, no invasion will happen. Time is on China's side: Why should they risk their economical rise to the top? If there is any comparison it's with Germany 1900. But I'd say the Chinese are smarter than the Kaiser. But make no mistake about it: They are not our friends. |
| Posted by: True German Ally 2005-07-14 22:14 |
| #32 Actually China is more dependent on imported coal than imported oil. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2005-07-14 22:09 |
| #31 RC #22 Interesting observation -'their one and only sons'. I wonder just how long public support for a war - even one sold as a patriotic war of reunification - would last if it led to heavy casualties. Whole national psychologies change when the biological continuity of each family is so at risk. In a way, it was the 'lost generation' of France and England during WW I that made those countries so hesitant to confront Hitler. And possibly the ~1.5 birth rate in most of Western Europe today is a significant cause of their hesitance to confront Islamofascism. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2005-07-14 22:05 |
| #30 The Chicoms could have Taiwan in 20 years by economic interdependence as it is deveilping now. So they are on the world power trip and they are using Taiwan to rattle the US resolve during this difficult time for the West due to the WoT. The Chicoms are just like the Nazis before WW2. They started setting up shop in South America, africa, etc. They are looking at the big picture. The only thing holding them up is the US. Threatening nukes is just another part of unnerving the US. The EUniks are wussified, they are out. Just the US now. |
| Posted by: Al-Aska Paul 2005-07-14 22:04 |
| #29 Hi, TGA! Missed ya' lately. You do know how to cut to the chase, don't you? ;-p |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2005-07-14 22:01 |
| #28 Just ask yourself: Who can cut off oil supply to the enemy more easily: China or the U.S.? End of debate. Oh and a nuclear winter is not the solution to global warming, right? |
| Posted by: True German Ally 2005-07-14 21:58 |
| #27 Article: But he said that, because China did not have the capability to fight a conventional war against the US, the threat to escalate might be the only way to stop a war. This is the telling part - China's buildup notwithstanding, the Chinese brass do not apparently feel confident about their ability to to fight off a conventional US response, despite Taiwan being at their doorstep. Whatever happened to their much-hyped carrier-killing exercises? |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2005-07-14 21:39 |
| #26 Couple o' random thoughts: General Zhu's statements may be for American public consumption and designed to allow the Chinese government go gauge the reaction of Washington but they display a stunning ignorance of his intended audience. The larger the force or threat of force employed against the US, the more violent the reaction demanded by the American people will be. If official China or any significant portion of it is really unaware of that fact then this game will quickly become far more dangerous than the Cold War ever was. There is no longer any question as to the Chinese aiding & abetting North Korea's nuclear program. It should be absolutely clear now that North Korea is China's canary in the coal mine of international relations. Lack of overwhelming US response to continued North Korean threats and provocation has, and will continue, to embolden the Chinese to follow suit. Just as the Norks were a trial balloon for China, Zhu is lofting the first trial balloon for Chinese officialdom. Lack of a very strong and immediate response from Washington will firmly embed this meme in official Chinese foreign policy. Taiwan's the tripwire but it's far from the whole game. If China can minimize/eliminate US interference in their pending invasion of Taiwan via only a threat of the use of nuclear weapons against the US they will (correctly) believe that same threat will be effectual during future actions against other neighbors in East Asia. It's critical that a few Asian states grow backbones and serious deterrent capabilities in very short order. It's equally critical that the US develop a strong response to this outrage pronto. Zhu puts the US in a position of having to respond forcefully right now. Failure to do so will be read by official China as acquiescence / weakness and that's far more dangerous than any non-military action we might take against China tomorrow. I believe China still holds most favored nation status, revocation of that privilege would be a great place to start IMHO. Or, if we were feeling particularly frisky and though the consequences would be drastic, we might cancel the $250,000,000,000 or so in US treasuries held by the Chinese and announce that we'll follow suit against nations who actively threaten our interests. |
| Posted by: AzCat 2005-07-14 21:09 |
| #25 Ima thinkr that Chinee economy kinda needs US, no? /Muck |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-07-14 21:04 |
| #24 ROFL, Matt! Indeed. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-07-14 20:55 |
| #23 So: who's got tickets to the Beijing summer Olympics? |
| Posted by: Matt 2005-07-14 20:49 |
| #22 The biggest threat from China is still unlimited manpower. *sight* Where's the unlimited food to feed that unlimited manpower? Or the unlimited shipping to move that unlimited manpower and the unlimited food it needs around? Or the unlimited ammunition they'll shoot off? What happens to your economy when that unlimited manpower stops working in factories and growing food? What do the people left at home do when you start throwing away thousands -- millions? -- of their one-and-only-one sons because they haven't got food or ammunition, or their troop transports are lining the Taiwan Strait? |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2005-07-14 20:23 |
| #21 ZF, I think the people in the current White House think the Chinese are crazier than the Russkies ever were. The Russkies never had a nuke-loaded nutball like Kimmie on their payroll rattling swords at people so close to them. What may very well happen is that the Taiwanese may suddenly announce that out of sheer national necessity they have become a nuclear power and armed themselves with enough of them to waste most of Eastern China. They're sufficiently advanced (with a little bit of US help) to have nukes available to them in a big hurry given that now the reaction data can all be simulated on computer. If the Chinese decide to start some trouble, we'll finish it--and them. |
| Posted by: mac 2005-07-14 20:06 |
| #20 The only conventional response the US could possibly use to defeat such raw numbers would be millions of small robotic attack weapons. Both flying and carried by ocean currents, each about as expensive as a cell phone. They could mine the entire strait for days or even weeks I want some of whatever you're smoking - LOL |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-07-14 20:05 |
| #19 Anonymoose: The biggest threat from China is still unlimited manpower. The biggest threat to a Chinese invasion is American intervention. USAF planes from Okinawa and perhaps South Korea would sweep the PLA Air Force from the skies, leaving Taiwanese aircraft and artillery to eviscerate the Chinese landing force in the Taiwan Straits. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2005-07-14 19:57 |
| #18 mac: Watch them damned closely. Then nuke them first, starting with Peking. The world can do without China. If Uncle Sam launched nuclear attacks on the basis of verbal threats, the Soviet Union and North Korea would be parking lots. It's a good thought, but unlikely to happen. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2005-07-14 19:53 |
| #17 The biggest threat from China is still unlimited manpower. The D-Day invasion could have still succeeded with 90% casualties, and that is what the Chinese are planning on. The only conventional response the US could possibly use to defeat such raw numbers would be millions of small robotic attack weapons. Both flying and carried by ocean currents, each about as expensive as a cell phone. They could mine the entire strait for days or even weeks. If the Chinese can land a single army on Taiwan, it will be impossible to dislodge. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-07-14 19:51 |
| #16 Watch them damned closely. Then nuke them first, starting with Peking. The world can do without China. |
| Posted by: mac 2005-07-14 19:48 |
| #15 BK: I know Dar, things were getting a little chummy for my taste. Has anyone heard a peep out of russia over this? I think the Russians won't have a problem with it. First off, it's rhetorical, a bluff. Second, a nuclear exchange between China and the US would leave Russia in charge. Does anyone really think it above the Russians to use their nuclear arsenal to extort money from other countries, once they're the only country around with thousands of nukes? |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2005-07-14 19:48 |
| #14 I think you are correct, Zhang Fei. China is just waiting for us to get tied up with Iran, North Korea, Pakistan or some other complicated mess. |
| Posted by: Neutron Tom 2005-07-14 19:46 |
| #13 I know Dar, things were getting a little chummy for my taste. Has anyone heard a peep out of russia over this? |
| Posted by: bigjim-ky 2005-07-14 19:37 |
| #12 MD: Further, I think it cost CNOOC the Union 76 deal. I hope Zhu feels like a big man now. I don't think it's bluster. China is probably ready for an invasion. It is just testing the waters to find the most suitable moment - preferably a moment of hesitation during which they can seal the deal without foreign intervention. Note that unification (under Nationalist rule) was also the holy grail for the Nationalists ever since the Communists took over the mainland - a stance that has never been popular with the native Taiwanese. Talk about unification is not about quieting domestic unrest - it is about realizing a long-cherished dream held by the majority of the Chinese I have spoken to. Why now, after all these decades? Because it is only now that the Chinese military has become strong enough to attain that dream - much as one buys an expensive toy only after saving enough money to make the purchase. Bottom line is that China will invade Taiwan. The only questions are when, and what Uncle Sam and China's neighbors will do about it. Some of the recent Chinese belligerence may have to do with preparing the Chinese populace for war. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2005-07-14 19:32 |
| #11 "We Chinese will prepare ourselves for the destruction of all of the cities east of Xian." You damn well better prepare to lose the cities west of Xian too. "In the end you care more about Los Angeles than you do about Taipei," How about you, PRC? How much are you willing to risk for Taipei? How much good is Taiwan to you if you have to cross a nuclear wasteland just to get to the water's edge on your side? |
| Posted by: Neutron Tom 2005-07-14 19:30 |
| #10 MD: ZF, This feels like a Chinese wacko running his mouth off or trying to deflect internal tension to the external Satan. I'm not taking anything I hear from China seriously till February 2009. Till then, they know W's not to be screwed with. They're just playing the Chavez game of how much can I get away with, challenge and retreat. It's all atmospherics. If they detect weakness, then they'll make a move on Taiwan. If they frighten the Taiwanese enough, it might even be a bloodless takeover. Being able to start the Olympics without a separate Taiwanese (Chinese-Taipeh) contingent would be a real feather in the Chinese leadership's cap. This may also be aimed at American public opinion - enough Americans may think the likelihood of a Chinese nuclear strike high enough to want to avoid a confrontation over Taiwan. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2005-07-14 19:21 |
| #9 Further, I think it cost CNOOC the Union 76 deal. I hope Zhu feels like a big man now. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2005-07-14 19:18 |
| #8 ZF, This feels like a Chinese wacko running his mouth off or trying to deflect internal tension to the external Satan. I'm not taking anything I hear from China seriously till February 2009. Till then, they know W's not to be screwed with. They're just playing the Chavez game of how much can I get away with, challenge and retreat. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2005-07-14 19:14 |
| #7 Yay! The Cold War is back! |
| Posted by: Dar 2005-07-14 19:01 |
| #6 This feels like a trial balloon by the Chinese government. They want to test the waters - if foreign reaction is unyielding, then they can always claim they were misunderstood. If the reaction is appeasement, then the Chinese can make invasion preparations. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2005-07-14 18:52 |
| #5 FG: ZF - 3 gorges is a piece of concrete crap. Flyash 3-4X what is allowed in structural concrete. A nuke would knock it out, possibly even the local overpressure from FAE, but I wouldn't count on that. What I'm alluding to is that the German dams were knocked out, yet the downstream damage was insignificant. FG: This isn't the first time the Chicoms have alluded to "losing L.A." over Taiwan. Dangerous game by cowards who pufff themselves up by bluster. We have always known this was a possibility, spelling it out is for public consumption Actually, this is a very safe game. They know Uncle Sam isn't going to start a war over Chinese threats. Such statements could even deter American intervention over Taiwan, saving the lives of thousands or tens of thousands of Chinese troops - perhaps even resulting in a bloodless Taiwanese capitulation. It also reminds neighboring powers* that might want to side with Taiwan of the possibility that China might attack them with nukes if they intervene. All in all, a very useful bluff, and potentially, a war-winning one. * Note that many, including Australia, are trying to straddle the fence over this issue. It's a combination of no one wanting to confront the Chinese colossus and the feeling that China hasn't really said anything yet that directly threatens their interests since most countries in the region have accepted that Taiwan is a part of China. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2005-07-14 18:46 |
| #4 ZF - 3 gorges is a piece of concrete crap. Flyash 3-4X what is allowed in structural concrete. A nuke would knock it out, possibly even the local overpressure from FAE, but I wouldn't count on that. This isn't the first time the Chicoms have alluded to "losing L.A." over Taiwan. Dangerous game by cowards who pufff themselves up by bluster. We have always known this was a possibility, spelling it out is for public consumption |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-07-14 18:35 |
| #3 BS: We wouldn't even need a nuke - just a MOAB on the 3 Gorges Dam. Dam attacks are overrated - just research any of the successful attacks on German dams during WWII. Heroic and spectacular attacks, but essentially ineffectual. And these were dams built using WWII-era safety mechanisms. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2005-07-14 18:31 |
| #2 It's a good bluff, but it's a bluff. I don't believe the Chinese will use nuclear weapons over Taiwan. Just as Eisenhower threatened to use nukes against Peking during the Korean War, the Chinese are now threatening to use nukes over the Taiwan issue. However, just as Eisenhower never delivered, the Chinese will also hold back. The primary reason? Taiwan is not worth losing Beijing over, let alone the thousands of Chinese cities that would be obliterated in an American counter-strike. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2005-07-14 18:28 |
| #1 Biiiggg mistake. We wouldn't even need a nuke - just a MOAB on the 3 Gorges Dam. And some smaller ones for the so-called leadership. Think the missle shield is a good idea now? |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2005-07-14 18:25 |