Nukes For China

We have heard all the spurious arguments for the nuke policies for Iran and North Korea……but what about a strategy for a nuclear power and one of our biggest opponents? China.

A diverse range of external stimuli, including technological trends and geopolitical shifts, is leading the strategic community of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to reconsider existing nuclear policy, strategy, and operations. According to Chinese open sources, U.S. global conventional precision strike systems, U.S. missile defenses, and India’s nuclear weapons modernization, among other threats, could shake the PRC’s faith in longstanding nuclear doctrine and posture. The 2013 Science of Military Strategy confirms that “the nuclear security circumstances facing China in overall terms are trending toward complexity.”   In response to such challenges, some Chinese analysts have proposed loosening the no-first-use policy and undertaking quantitative and qualitative improvements to China’s nuclear forces.

A departure from enduring nuclear policy and strategy may also reflect China’s growing power and sense of purpose as it seeks to reshape its surroundings and accelerate the erosion of the U.S. position in the Western Pacific. Indeed, Chinese analysts are exploring Cold War history in Europe, from which they may be drawing lessons about the vulnerabilities of U.S. extended deterrence in Asia. While it remains unclear how and to what extent Chinese nuclear strategy will advance Beijing’s expanding ambitions, the internal debates suggest that China may be increasingly inclined to adopt a more coercive nuclear strategy.

https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2019/07/17/chinese_nuclear_weapons_strategyleaning_towards_a_more_proactive_posture_part_ii_external_drivers_of_potential_changetechnical-military_developments_and_perceptions_of_credibility.html

China continues to confront the US and its Asian allies on many fronts and yet the president is concerned over a country that is not yet a nuclear power…..where is the sanity there?

I believe you ignore China’s nukes at your own peril.

Advertisements

16 thoughts on “Nukes For China

  1. We have a Chinese company building and running a nuclear power station in the UK.
    As with all these issues, using any nuclear weapon is going to bring on that ‘mutually assured destruction’ we used to hear about. More likely some renegade state or terrorist group would use one, rather than the big powers.
    Best wishes, Pete.

  2. “president is concerned over a country that is not yet a nuclear power…..where is the sanity there?”

    Why do you consider the “no nukes” policy of Trump spurious ? I think it is very bold and a well thought out policy for the security of the world. No other US leadership or ally has accepted the challenge. It is a challenge that must be faced and resolved to make a less dangerous world. Why can’t the Trump haters see the wisdom and fortitude the president is using to keep the world safer ? It is a far greater matter of importance than the petty nonsense they think is important. Everyone else seems to think if Iran and NK have full nuke systems it is of little or no consequence. Both countries will expand their mischief and destabilization and behavior of making demands and we would have no recourse except to capitulate and tolerate their blackmail. With no nukes and sanctions they have to curb their behavior. The goal is to have them realize they become prosperous without nukes being then allowed into the international trade market and other normalizations. As far as China we must accept them as a nuclear power and that is irreversible. The technology race will continue in all areas of science. Finding as much common ground as possible and creating interdependence keeps the peace. Same with Russia. Not so with a nuked up rogue NK or Iran. What I don’t understand is why Russia would feel “safe” with a nuked up Islamic Iran as a neighbor or why China feels “safe” with a nuked up NK as a neighbor. Do they think these cobras will never bite them ? If NK or Iran do attack neighbors in the region China and Russia will get contaminated with residual radiation much greater than Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters. I fully understand now what is meant by the adage “There will be no WW IV”.

    1. Against Iran…..that is a huge screw up just to undo something Obama had done…..NK is bluffing…..the missiles help sell the bluff. Iran is only a threat in the minds of neocons but to no one else. chuq

      1. Iran largest exporter of terrorism, missiles, Islamic militants financiers and has mindset to be as powerful in region as ancient Persia and allied with Russia and China in effort to thwart US interests. That’s not an illusion or delusion in minds of neocons or policy makers in general. Obama, H Clinton, Kerry never recognized reality. Iran Deal of Obama allowed end of sanctions giving Iran time and money to remain wealthy and secretly still work on nukes. Trump trying to unscrew Obama screw up. They are brazen enough to attack/capture US and British ships. No threat ? Huh ?

      2. Every body inn the State department knew about Iran….we do not want them doing what we do….let me see we are capturing their ships…..but that is somehow alright. chuq

    2. I think it is highly questionable whether you can call Trump’s policy “bold” and “well thought out”. Or rather – it is certainly “bold”, for what he has done is to scrap the international agreement which kept Iran from acquiring nukes.
      The effect? Iran is now well past the limits previously imposed upon them and on the way to actually acquiring those very same nukes which Obama prevented them from having…

    3. I think Iran is a significantly larger threat with nukes than without, and Trump’s abolition of the nuclear treaty agreement with Iran means that they will get nukes.

  3. China feels they need better nuke capacity to protect themselves. Makes the world more dangerous. China’s and India’s continued growth and power seems inevitable. And along with the is stronger military including nuclear capacity.

  4. Why do so many people think the Obama Iran Deal prevented Iran from getting nukes ? The only thing it restricted was the amount and to what degree uranium would be enriched. They continued to refine and develop nuke tech. The sanctions against Iran are about much more than nukes. Iran is now too broke to finance much of its terrorist mischief and the diminished quality of life suffered by Iranian people puts pressure on regime for policy change. I talk with several people from Iran. From my albeit limited sample I am led to believe they want to live like Americans and Europeans culturally without the repression of Sharia law and the end their country’s terrorist financing but the mullahs have a firm grip as most dictatorships do.

    1. It did not prevent it limited their development…..a deal they were sticking to until Trump crapped on it and now they will enrich at a higher rate….it is not our place to tell others how or what to believe…..so stick to policies and let their beliefs stay their beliefs. chuq

      1. Well, yes, we allegedly uphold the idea of self determination of all people. But when their beliefs threaten my life and culture – well that’s a problem. When they consider me an agent of Satan therefore having no right to life – that’s a problem. Do you think the Russians, Chinese, NK’s and Iranians actually follow treaties and agreements ? They sign to gain this or that advantage and all the mischief continues in the back room. And they laugh at us. I suggest that anyone who had a sense of comfort and security with the Obama Iran deal is naive beyond a little child’s world vision.

        Enriching uranium is the least worrisome matter in nuke development. It’s the tech advance that’s the problem which continues without uranium. Refinement of delivery systems continues. On paper research continues. They can merely acquire ready made nukes or buy quality uranium secretly as well. Trump crapped on the deal because it did not address the bigger picture of financing terrorism and murdering Muslims, Jews and Christians. I do not understand why people are not 100% behind and supportive of a president that finally draws the line and postulates “Under no circumstances with this or that rogue regime have nukes.Nor will the nuke ‘family’ increase in membership.” At the same time he offers a sincere welcome into the economic prosperity in the cooperation in the family of nations. That is a glorious effort at security and peace and very wise. Seems Trump hate disables this estimation of the effort.

      2. NO naivete just a feeling that more progress could be made than now…..at least we were not on the brink of war…..as we are now…..personally we do not need another war for our children to fight and pay for….if there was some sort of policies in place other than insults and macho BS then I might feel differently but right now there is NOTHING that appears to be policy. chuq

  5. I don’t see us at the brink of war with Iran. They certainly do not want a war as their entire infrastructure could be destroyed in a week or less. They see that damage in Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq and don’t want that duplication of scenery in their country. I don’t see mere macho BS and insults. Thought the policy was 1.”you will not have nukes and will continue to be strangled if you try”. 2. “you will not continue to finance terrorism and destabilization and you will continue to be strangled if you do”. Without this policy Israel is left with no alternative other than preemptive strikes against the facilities. The pre Trump policy was “we can’t do anything to modify their behavior and cannot stop them from getting nukes” which is certainly an inevitable set up for war with graver repercussions , a situation which you admirably condemn and reject. I see the policy as keeping the peace by stopping terrorism and nukes acquisition as opposed to we hope they don’t use nukes if they get them. Can you propose and alternative course for dealing with Iran ? Just being against war does not keep the peace. I did not comment on you recent anti war piece just put a like as I agree with your sense of humanity. I will also curse LBJ from beyond my grave for the Vietnam War and the murder of over a million of those people in that folly plus our own suffering and losses. 7 young fellows from my senior class of ’67 at North Miami Senior High school did not return. Lost several more from graduating classes of late 60’s at Florida Southern College. I knew each of them too.

    I certainly share your anti war sentiments. Army ROTC was required at Florida Southern back then in freshman and sophomore year. At that point you had to decide to sign contract for continued ROTC and entrance into officer school and lengthy service. I was one of 600 men chosen in 1968 nation wide for a full college scholarship to sign up. But night after night I watched those jets drop napalm on innocent starving rice farmers and decided that God did not put America here to drop fire on people. I declined the scholarship, almost entered Presbyterian seminary but served my country as a classroom teacher for 34 years instead. That said, I support any policy that denies NK and Iran nukes = war or not.

    1. Nuclear energy is not weapons…can be but does not mean it outright…..all this information is second hand and organizations confirmed that they we abiding by the deal…..the problem is it was made by Obama….that is all that was wrong with it chuq

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.