Report: China has deployed missiles giving it second-strike capability against U.S.

Insight Magazine ^ | 8/7/2006 | Staff

[Paul Ross]

Report: China has deployed missiles giving it second-strike capability against U.S.
Insight Magazine, August 3, 2006

The U.S. intelligence community has determined that Beijing has developed and deployed a series of missiles that would give China second-strike nuclear capability in any confrontation with the United States. The determination of a sea-based deterrent is said to have significantly increased Beijing's threat to the United States.

"It is clear to me that China is now embarking on a significant investment in a second-strike capability to ensure the survival and, thus, viability of its nuclear forces," said Richard Fisher, a researcher at the International Assessment and Strategy Center and a leading U.S. expert on China.

In a presentation to the American Enterprise Institute on July 11, Mr. Fisher said China has launched or tested a series of nuclear missiles and platforms.

He said the first Type 94 submarine ballistic nuclear missile has been equipped and launched.

The Type 94, which began construction in 1999, is designed to contain the JL-2 submarine-launched nuclear missiles. Each submarine is meant to contain 16 JL-2s, or DF-31s, with a range of 8,000 kilometers, which would allow Chinese submarines to target portions of the United States from areas near the Chinese coast.

The disclosure of the completion of the Type 94 submarine appeared to mark a significant acceleration in China's nuclear submarine program. As late as May 2004, the Pentagon asserted that the new Chinese missile submarine would not be operational until around 2010.

"The JL-2 SLBM has undergone a series of tests," Mr. Fisher said. "The potential for this to be armed with multiple warheads is there."

U.S. intelligence sources agree with Mr. Fisher's assessment. They said Beijing has made the production of nuclear warheads and launchers a priority, with emphasis on mobility and decoys.

The Pentagon has determined that China plans to deploy the DF-31A, an extended-range variant of the mobile long-range DF-31, in 2007. The sources said the new three-stage, solid-fuel, mobile missile, with a range of 12,000 kilometers, could carry up to three payloads that would separate and overcome existing U.S. missile defenses.

"For China, nuclear weapons largely have four purposes: one, strategic deterrence; two, retaliation; three, counter-coercion; and four, great-power status," Rand Corp. senior analyst Evan Medeiros said.

Another Chinese missile, the DF-5 Mod 2, with a range of 13,000 kilometers, is said to have completed deployment in 2005. The sources said China has developed the two-stage, liquid-fuel missile to carry between five and 10 warheads.

Beijing has also sought to overcome the vulnerability of its fleet by building a huge naval base on Hainan Island in the South China Sea. The sources said the base would contain an underground facility to shelter platforms, such as nuclear submarines, against any potential U.S. attack.

Intelligence sources said Beijing has been developing an anti-ship ballistic missile. They said the weapon could be a sea-based version of the DF-11 Mod 1 land-based missile.

"One could easily imagine that there is a plan to drop, in a surprise manner, 10 to 12 warheads on either side of the continental United States in conjunction with a build-up to rescue Taiwan from whatever kind of attack China seems to be contemplating," Mr. Fisher said. "I can easily imagine, I do not know, President Hillary Clinton sitting in the White House wondering, 'Gee, we could not do anything to stop those 12 warheads that did not explode but landed off of all our major cities on both coasts.' And do we really want to be sending our single carrier that might be deployed with the Seventh Fleet into this maelstrom? That is the kind of coercion potential that is out there."

[DoughtyOne]

LOL

And thanks for not pointing out "save" should have been "safe". Drat!!!

[Abd al-Rahiim]

I don't think China and the U.S. will have any armed confrontation. To my knowledge, China has never supported the U.S. in international affairs as much as the U.K. has (to give an example), but that doesn't mean that China is "against" the U.S. by any means.

[Mo1]

But now they have our technology

Thanks to Clinton

[Centurion2000]

He said the first Type 94 submarine ballistic nuclear missile has been equipped and launched.

And will be shadowed at ALL times with a neat little SSN from our side ready to send it to the bottom if he hears launch prep.

[DoughtyOne]

I should have inserted 'series' and 'hugh' along with that 'save', just to be uniform.

[staytrue]

"Why does China think we will attack them??"

Because we might. Imagine a world where china was wiped off the map. Manufacturing jobs for everyone and cheap oil. It has to look very attractive to 10% of the population of the US. Ok, extermination of over a billion people has its drawbacks but the people of the US have gotten used to the good life and being top dog in the world. Exterminating china would solve a lot of problems.

I will say that 90% of the US is opposed to this because they are decent people, but 10% of the US would kill their mother for cheap gas, lots of money and returning the US to top dog status. Hell, we have 20,000 people killing US citizens every year for a lot less than that.

[Thunder90]

Russia is the one barking the orders to the skillet manners...

[RightWhale]

We have known about China's boomer capability for several years. It is not alarming. China knows we can see to the bottom of the ocean as if it were a clear air on a sunny day at the beach.

[Arkinsaw]

I believe that the Chinese are copying are strategies during the Cold War against us. They may believe that they are the up and coming economic power and can outbuild, outgun, and out-quantity the United States in the long run until our economy cannot compete with them and we end up retrenching like the USSR did.

It wasn't a bad strategy then, and probably not a bad strategy now.

[staytrue]

I don't think China and the U.S. will have any armed confrontation.

It is not in the interests of either side so I agree, but if it happens it will be like this.

US trade deficit, oil shortages and massive layoffs in the manufacturing sector, combined with an unbearable debt burden, trigger a near depression in the US. The only way out is for the US to position a nuclear sub near china, launch a chinese looking missle and nuke a small city in the US. This would be a good excuse for elimnating china, having all the treasury bonds they own (about 1 trillion) go into default, lower prices on all commodities, immediately have US manufacturing boom, cure the US trade deficit, have oil a plenty, have a large new frontier area available for US colonization in about 100 years or so (the US would demand this as reparations), etc.

[staytrue]

I agree with your post 29 completely.

[colrpfournier]

And besides the gentle, panda-like, Chinese leaders who supervise the manufacture of ALL our Christmas decorations (e.g. mangers, stars, lights, tinsel, angels, etc. etc.) would never want to wipe out the USA. Would they?

(Answer: you bet they would.)

[Paul Ross]

...as long as we build up our defensive capabilities

Not really happening. Bush has still firmly kept Theater Ballistic Missile Defense, TBMD, cancelled. He has kept cancelled any fix of Aegis's SM-3, refusing to authorize the Flight IIa upgrade (undoing the damage of Xlinton's down-grading the engineering...preventing it from being a real ICBM-killer) .

Light weight Kinetic Interceptor, still cancelled.

All NMD Deployments...limited to futility. Even THEL, theater High Energy Laser remains cancelled. Still. Despite the insanity in Lebanon.

All limits in place. The withdrawal from the ABM Treaty was mere political pandering. He took its practical impact away with his side-deals.

... as well as retarget, and improve, our existing arsenal to deal with China.

You are aware that we are still drastically reducing our strategic arsenal...?

Last couple of articles I read on our (U.S.) Defensive/Strategic posture...we're doing exactly that.

Wrong. Read here. Independent Working Group on Missile Defense.

Wake us when W officially renounces the "strategic framework agreement" that he signed with Vladmir Putin as a secret attachment to the Moscow Strategic Armament Reduction Treaty in '02....and announces his intention to deploy real Aegis NMD, dedicated NMD ships, with an upgraded SM-3 Flight IIa interceptor... and a robust fleet of Brilliant Pebbles satellite missile interceptors ASAP.

From what I have seen, he is wearing full-time the same rose-colored glasses worn by his buddy Bill Xlinton.

[FFIGHTER]

While China has been devoting massive resources to equip, upgrade and provide the necessary resources to their military to compete if not move ahead of the U.S. The U.S. has stifled defense budgets, ransacked defense programs, targeted military spending cuts, and has sought actively to undermine our military at every level.

[caver]

I'd say any missles left after the first strike can be considered second strike. Is this anything new?

[bobdsmith]

What I don't get is you never hear any tests of these missiles. How can you know a 13,000km range missile actually works unless you test fire a couple 13,000kms?

[uncbob]

Thanks to Bill Clinton.

Thanks to dumbass NIXON who opened up the USA to the CHICOMS

He was a complete disaster in foreign policy including Vietnam and his domestic policies sucked

[staytrue]

would never want to wipe out the USA. Would they?

Why wipe out the US when they can and are buying it up instead ?

If anyone launches first, it will be the USA in order to regain ownership the stocks, bonds, debt instruments, title to land that the chinese are accumulating.

[bobdsmith]

and the most ridiculous idea award goes to..

[bannie]

Thank you, billclinton, you SOB.