China Advances Missile Program

The Washington Times ^ | 6/22/2005 | Bill Gertz

[Paul Ross]

China has successfully flight-tested a submarine-launched missile that U.S. officials say marks a major advance in Beijing's long-range nuclear program.

"This is a significant milestone in their effort to develop strategic weapons," said a U.S. official familiar with reports of the test.

[snowsislander]

The threat looms much larger when you consider the growing Eurasian Alliance

The current acronym is "BRIC": Brazil, Russia, India, China. You can find a lot of links by doing a Google on the search "BRIC Brazil Russia India China".

From Google news, for instance, you can find this June 15, 2005 article:

Will BRIC lead the world economy?

DEBIPRASAD NAYAK

INDIATIMES NEWS NETWORK[ WEDNESDAY, JUNE 15, 2005 10:43:30 PM]

Recently international bank loans recorded one of the strongest growths in three of the four BRIC economies, according to the latest report released by the World Bank. While it doubled in India from $3.5 bn in 2003 to $7 bn in 2004, in Russia it went up from $4.9 bn to $8.2 bn during the period. In Brazil it also more than doubled from $3.8 bn to $8.9 bn. According to investment banker Goldman Sachs, over the next 50 years, the BRIC economies could become a much larger force in the world economy.

What is BRIC?

BRIC stands for four emerging nations, Brazil, Russia, India and China. It is a coalition of emerging superpowers proposed by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The coalition encompasses over 40 per cent of the world's population and holds a combined GDP of $12.14 trillion. The idea was proposed because of growing concerns regarding the domination of the US and the European Union over the world economy and political scene. As all the members have experienced enormous growth in the past few years and are expected to continue this, the coalition will likely grow to be a larger threat to developed countries. Unlike other developed nations, BRIC economies do not want to dominate the world economy. What they want is an end to their poverty and an end to the global and unilateral leadership of the United States.

What is Goldman Sachs report on BRIC?

A recent Goldman Sachs report has forecast that Brazil, India and China together with Russia (BRIC) will outstrip the current dominant members of the global economy within half a century. By 2050, the BRIC’s economies together could be larger than the G6 (the US, Japan, England, France, Italy and Germany) in dollar terms. By 2025 they could account for over half the size of the G6. Currently they are worth less than 15 per cent. Of the current G6, only the US and Japan may be among the six largest economies in dollar terms in 2050. The list of the world’s ten largest economies may look quite different in 2050.

According to Goldman Sachs India’s economy could be larger than Japan’s by 2032, and China’s economy could be larger than the US by 2041. Among the BRIC members, India has the potential to show the fastest growth over the next 50 years. Growth could be higher than 5 per cent over the next 30 years and close to 5 per cent in the next 20 years. By 2030, China’s per capita income could be around $30,000. In the US, income per capita by 2050 could reach roughly $80,000.

What are the driving forces behind this surge?

The major driving force behind the soaring economy is the GDP growth. China will continue to witness a GDP growth of over 7 per cent till 2010 and over 4 per cent till 2035. At the same time, India will grow at a rate of 5-6 per cent. In the case of Russia and Brazil, the growth rate will vary between 3-4 per cent. Both rising currencies and faster growth will narrow the gap between BRIC and developed economies.

What is driving India?

In India, the main driving force behind the constant growth is the technology sector. Other factors like consumer boom, rising stock market, the booming auto and pharma exports and growing real estate market are also boosting the economy.

By 2010, annual export revenues from India's information technology (IT) sector are predicted to hit $50 bn, up from $16.3 bn in 2004-05. Low inflation, encouraging government policy and a lower exchange rate can also help to promote growth.

Over the last few years, restrictions on foreign direct investment and foreign equity ownership have been relaxed. India is home to 17 per cent of the world’s total population and the country has witnessed phenomenal educational development. One factor that puts India in a position of great advantage is its growing proportion of 'intelligent' working population.

How is Brazil moving to be a giant economy?

Brazil's economy is around $560 billion and it makes up around half of South America's entire economic output. From 1930 onwards, Brazil has achieved exceptionally high growth and it is the eighth largest economy in the world. In 1994, rising inflation rates had disrupted economic activity and discouraged foreign investment. However, it has recovered from the recession and is moving towards a bright future. Today, more than 2,000 US companies operate in Brazil and Brazilians purchase 18 per cent of the US exports.

Out of 500 largest multinationals, 405 have a Brazilian subsidiary. If Brazil falls into recession, it is likely to drag the rest of Latin American economy with it. If demand dries up, it could bring an end to the growth in the US economy.

Brazilian economy is distributed widely with 7.5 per cent working in primary sector (agriculture), 35.8 per cent in industry and 56.7 per cent in the services sector.

What about the dragon?

The driving force which has transformed the communist-controlled economy into market giant is the export-oriented development. The Asian Development Bank has reported that the Chinese economy is expected to expand rapidly from 2005 to 2007, with growth rates expected to reach 8.5 per cent, 8.7 per cent and 8.9 per cent respectively. The industry sector is likely to expand by 9-10 per cent over the next few years. China continued to be a favored destination for foreign investment, which rose by 13.3 per cent to $60.6 bn in 2004.

Moreover, the country's infrastructure has been strengthened and its business environment has improved significantly over the last decade. While the GDP growth will remain above 8 per cent, the inflation rate is expected to be around 3.5 per cent. The nation's future economic development will continue to be fuelled by the rapid growth of fixed asset investment, backed by the high savings rate and a major inflow of foreign direct investments.

Will Russia again emerge as the world leader?

Russian growth in 1999-2003 was around 6.5 per cent. Since 2000, the main driving force behind the growing Russian economy is the private oil companies’ performance. The oil industry accounted for slightly less than half of GDP growth. The private oil companies have played a crucial role in keeping Russia’s external balance in surplus. The government has estimated the GDP to grow by 5.4 per cent in 2005. Foreign investments in Russian economy is also expected to reach $100 bn by 2006.

Each BRIC member faces different challenges to keep development on track. If they can remove the barriers, they will be able to oust the developed economies which are shrinking with the passage of time.

[Dont_Tread_On_Me_888]

Ok.... Explain in how we are getting weaker

1] Smaller % of total spending going to military. Domestic and global welfare taking an ever increasing share of total % of spending.

2] What $ do go to military has a very small % going to procurement and R&D (mostly going toward police actions in Middle-East, pay, logistics).

3] Lack of strategic weapon development.

4] We no longer have superior weapons over Russia. Russia can outclass us in certain performance areas of various weapon systems.

5] Spy activity (especially from China) is at historic highs, yet Bush admin seems to do nothing about it.

6] Open borders with a flood of invaders--more so now than ever under any other president.

7] Fixation on giving away the national treasury (Africa, et al.) as we push our debt toward $10 trillion mark.

8] We have lost our edge as world's most powerful economy. Pacific rim has closed gap and trend will continue.

9] Weaker leadership. The RATs no longer care about the nation, only gaining power. It used to be we had statesmen like Sam Nunn, Scoop Jakson et al. in the RAT ranks--no more. Zell Miller, the only RAT holdout, has retired.

10] The major weapon systems we employ were mostly developed in the Reagan years. Our hardware is getting old, and the replacements keep getting scaled back (F-35), delayed (F-22), or eliminated (Crusader et al.).

11] Unilateral disarmament in WMDs (chemical and biological) as other nations ramp up production of WMDs.

12] No new ICBM in years. Russia will soon outclass us in ICBM capability (scramjet, maneuverable warheads/final stages), etc.

This is just a fraction of the many examples. We no longer have the edge. The most important area that we have become weaker in is national focus. Under Reagan, he had a nationalistic undertow to his agenda. Under Bush, there is not a gram of nationalism in his thinking. His sole focus seems to be "what scrap of remaining remnants of national sovereignty can I give away today." Every act undertaken internationally favors foreign nations and weakens our nation, from trade agreements to the draining of our national treasury as we pump it to corrupt dictators.

We are getting weaker. If you don't understand this, you are not crunching numbers and keeping up with international events.

[BringBackMyHUAC]

Thanks for the helpful post...I'll look into that (BRIC).

[Kuehn12]

What we like to see isn't what is likely happen. No president in right mind is going employ a first strike against a large nuclear power. One boomer doesn't make real threat, I think the Russian at the end of the Cold War had 200 according to FAS,and we have now 191 nuclear powered subs. Eighty-seven of which are large platform subs, Ohio, Los Angeles, and Virgina Class.

[Paul Ross]

No one wins in pre-emptive nor follow up nuclear strikes.

The luminaries of the nuclear defense establishment disagree with you: I.e., the late Herman Kahn, Edward Teller,Laurence Beilenson, and President Reagan, plus our current Sec. Defense Donald Rumsfeld all believed that your thesis is dead wrong. Hence Rumsfeld was the principle architect of getting the MX deployed. He started the R&D. And Weinberger and Reagan finished the job. The MX and Tridents counterforce capability had the effect of denying the aggressor Communists from being able to assume they would have anything left to coerce a civilian population with after attacking our military assets. Thus, it was another layer of "deterrence" plugging a very serious and real gap since the Soviets manifestly believed and taught that they could win a nuclear war. (The big secret of the nuclear freeze movement).

You see, what you fail to realize is just how successful a pre-empt can be with modern GPS technology nowadays, the vulnerability of our current low-alert posture (read "sitting duck"), and strikes from the South of the U.S. (not just from SLBMs, but their cruise missiles launched from container "farms" and ships the PLA controls near our shores) where our radar coverage is thin....followed up with a devastating series of EMP explosions. GWB has retired half our Trident fleet, all of our MX missiles. Half our B-1Bs. Most of our B-52s. Kept everything on Xlinton's ordered stand-down.

Your notion of counter-strikes assumes anything survives. Almost all the Tridents will be in one port on the West Coast...sitting ducks. And with the new GPS commonly available, the Chinese could easily take out the few remaining Minutemen we have...which have very few MIRV warheads after GWB signed the Moscow Treaty.

The U.S. could be completely routed in relatively short order. Hence, we need to do a number of things right now to get ready.

First and foremost. Toughen up the domestic infrastructure against EMP. It can be done with federal subsidies and Civil Defense structures now for about $15 billion. The U.S. has to have stashes of vulnerable components stockpiled for emergency replacement. The generators need special emergency trips to prevent over-revving. And the transformers need to have massive fast breakers, and we need an indigenous manufacturing supplier of transformers again. Yes. They got outsourced and left the country entirely.

Second. Plug the leaks in radar coverage. High and low. Cruise missile sneak attacks are to be taken seriously as well. This means massive new deployments of U.S.-based hardware. And deployment of the new NMD-capable SM-3 toting Aegis cruisers stationed around each and every suspected PLA container-farm. All Chinese vessels must be required to obey a restricted approach to the U.S.-- only in convoys where they are "escorted" by such a vessel. Unescorted vessels inside the security zone get immediately sunk by whatever assets we have.

Third. Deploy PAC-3 missile defenses at all extended U.S. military and civilian sites, plus along the entire periphery of the continental ocean-front, particularly defending bases and population centers. No gaps for the Chinese to surprise.

Fouth. Deploy the sea-based NMD system in depth. Fully fund deployment of 25-50 or so DDX cruisers.

Fifth. Deploy Brilliant Pebbles type ICBM defense in orbit. Now. Secretly. Most people wrongly assume we have already done something along the lines of deployment for the money spent on SDI.

Sixth. Redeploy Safeguard, pulling it out of mothballs.

Seventh. Deploy Gatling-type projectile terminal defenses at all ICBM complexes.

Eighth. Reactivate the MX missiles and deploy in road-mobile format. Deploy several hundred dummies as well to complicate targetting.

Ninth.Reactivate all remaining B-1B bombers, and restore to nuclear readiness.

Tenth. Reactivate all Trident missle submarines.

Eleventh. Place all nuclear assets on routine "Cold-War" alert status, reactivating all their decommissioned or soon-to-be decommissioned interior USAF bases with air crews ready for immediate scramble. Submarines in-port time is to be immediately reduced to barest minimums, and constantly redeployed.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Paul Ross]

One boomer doesn't make real threat,

What makes you think, now that they have an effective 1-2 design (sub and missile) that they will stop with the one first of class? We didn't. The Russians didn't. It is believed that their second boat-of-class is ready to launch now.

I think the Russian at the end of the Cold War had 200 according to FAS,

No, they didn't... Boomers are SLBMs. Not attack subs, your number implies you are counting their attack subs...and likely their diesel electric attack fleet as well. Under SALT-I , at their zenith, the Soviets had about 67 Nuclear SLBM submarines, i.e., "boomers." We had about 42*.

and we have now 191 nuclear powered subs.

B'zzzt! Way, Way Wrong.

How many Trident submarines are currently deployed? Would you believe 13? And were you aware that the East Coast Trident base in Bangor is to be closed...leaving us only the West Coast base in Kings Bay?

Eighty-seven of which are large platform subs, Ohio, Los Angeles, and Virgina Class.

The number of attack subs is generally relevant, but not in this particular discussion of strategic deterrence. And you are numerically wrong on your assumptions thereto...we only have 50 Los Angeles Class submarines. And the Virginia and Seawolf class (the latter class's production terminated at two ships) are numerically insignificant.

Again...how many currently active Ohio Class submarines with their full load of Tridents, not converted into Tomahawk wagons do we have, h'mmm?

You may want to check here before you venture any further numbers...

Disposal Note: All previous Poseidon-class SSBNs (George Washington Class) have been discarded, except Daniel Webster (ex-SSBN 626) and Sam Rayburn (ex-SSBN 635) survive as immobilized dockside training platforms, with their missile compartments removed.

[Gone GF]

Not to worry. After all, we stopped Iraq's extremely advanced nuclear program.

[Paul Ross]

I say NUKE THE BASTARDS!!!
It is YOUR attitude which is "agressive and brutal". Look in the mirror.

He is justifiably frightened by the looming threat.

And he likely also does not intend to annhilate their population. I for one, don't.

But I suspect the Chinese masters may not be so squeamish with regard to our population. Look to the unprovoked sneak attack by China upon our troops in the Korean War. We should simply have nuked their forces rear-areas then, rather than try and slug it out conventionally. Truman's political rules of engagement nearly cost us that war. Do you know how many people we lost in their aggression? And how many of their own troops did they heedlessly throw away in suicide attacks on us?

In that alternate approach, then, after surgically dismantling their armies... we should have dictated terms to Mao in Bejing.

Unconditional Surrender, and disband the Communist Party. Stalin would not have dared interfere. Look how he was afraid of the pilots he sent getting caught...unmasking his role in the aggression.

[Paul Ross]

Ok.... Explain in how we are getting weaker... Not the usual crap.. I heard that crap when Reagan was President....

What "crap" are you alluding to???

I assume you don't mean the objective assessments that our military was in gross decline versus the Soviets prior to Reagan's rebuilding of our forces?

[Paul Ross]

Not to worry. After all, we stopped Iraq's extremely advanced nuclear program.

Saddam relocated his Chemical-Bio WMD program to Syria due to the huge amount of advance warning he had we were coming. And he relocated his nuclear program to Iran by a large number of accounts. Suddenly, Iran is on the verge of being a nuclear power. AG Khan was a Chinese puppet, and helped all the players. Fortunately we nabbed Libya's WMD in time. (You lefty's always forget that one)

As Gomer Pyle would remark, "Surprise, surprise, surprise!"

All and all, I guess your "common sense" lefty retort is neither legitimate nor sensible, albeit it is "common."

Saddam's weapons still lurk behind enemy borders. What are you going to do about it?

[Gone GF]

Pleas provide some links with proof of all these weapons movements.

Iraq was not the big threat to the U.S. Iran, N. Korea and China were and are much, much more dangerous.

"Saddam's weapons still lurk behind enemy borders. What are you going to do about it?"

Not a whole lot. Our troops are too tied up in Iraq and new recruits are darned hard to come by. All we can do for now is bluster.

[A. Pole]

Look to the unprovoked sneak attack by China upon our troops in the Korean War.

It was MORE than HALF CENTURY AGO! And it was not a sneak attack - Chicoms issued plenty of warnings:

[...] By late September, China had sent numerous diplomatic signals expressing its concern regarding a US occupation of North Korea. The Acting PLA chief of staff told the Indian Ambassador in Peking that China would never allow US forces to reach Chinese territory. The Indian Foreign Minister conveyed this message to the US Ambassador in New Delhi; in Washington, the British Ambassador passed the same message to the State Department. These private notices were matched by a 22 September public announcement in which the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman issued the statement "We clearly reaffirm that we will always stand on the side of the Korean people, and resolutely oppose the criminal acts of American imperialist aggression against Korea and their intrigues for expanding the war." Also during this period, communications intercepts continued to identify massive PLA troop movements from southern and central China into the Sino-Korean border areas.

Discounting the Chinese Threat

In the face of these warnings, the JCS instructed MacArthur to continue his advance north to destroy the DPRK armed forces as long as there was no threat of a major Chinese or Soviet intervention. These instructions were based upon a National Security Council decision made before the Inchon landing. The Secretary of State also disregarded these warnings, telling the press that Chinese intervention would be "sheer madness."

By the end of the month, the US Ambassador in Moscow reported that Soviet and Chinese contacts told both the British and Dutch Ambassadors that if foreign troops cross the 38th parallel, China would intervene. This specific warning was also repeated to various journalists, and on 29 September, the Associated Press in Moscow reported that both China and the Soviet Union would take a "grave view" of US forces crossing the 38th parallel. Finally, at the end of the month, in a major public policy address celebrating the first anniversary of the establishment of the People's Republic of China, Zhou En-lai branded the United States as China's worst enemy and stated that China will not allow a neighbor to be invaded.

Once again, these warnings were ignored, and US-UN forces continued to push the DRPK forces northward.[...]

[Paul Ross]

The Yalu River border was the only thing that the Chinese had a right to bitch about. One we never crossed. Unfortunatley. As for it being a surprise, obviously it was. It was regarded as bluster, pure and simple. All of their military movements were kept completely secret.

[Paul Ross]

Iran, N. Korea and China were and are much, much more dangerous.

No argument from me on that contention. Obviously they are all part of China's covert Axis. As was Iraq, however. Iraq was apparently deemed to be the "low-hanging fruit" most easily knocked off.

[A. Pole]

As for it being a surprise, obviously it was. It was regarded as bluster, pure and simple.

And it was very stupid. One of the results of the contempt for your opponent is that you lose the ability to predict his moves.

Half of the chess game is calculating enemy's intentions. You do it by imagining yourself in his position - a taboo for those who think that oponent is crazy, subhuman or irrational.

Chicoms just have emerged as victors from the long war against old regime and Japanese invaders. The northern part of Korea was the most critical point of possible new invasion or leverage for destabilizing foreign subversion.

Chicoms HAD to act, at first by sending warning signals and next by sudden "sneak" attack. EVERYBODY in their place would do exactly the same thing and failure to predict it was criminally negligent.

The outcome of Korean war - the division into two stable spheres of influence between USA and Red China could have been achieved without bloody war.

[ninenot]

Ummmnnnhhh

Links to CIA photospying efforts are not usually available to FR members. We know that one helluva lotta trucks went from certain Iraqi locations to certain Syrian/Irani locations, and that the movements were not exports of Oreos or powdered milk.

But that's all that's leaked so far.

[Paul Ross]

Very nice site.

But it doesn't change anything. The "plenty of warnings" were essentially nothing that McArthur or JCS were convinced by. If they even saw the "intercepts" intel at all, they probably wanted aerial confirmation. The JCS instructions were clear, to hold up if there were a real threat. Instead, the Chinese went for the sneak attack from behind the lines coming down from their pre-positioned North Koreanmountain hideouts, rather than an open crossing of the Yalu. All movements had been done at night.

If we had better surveillance then, we would have spotted them, and our bombers would have had a field day while they were relatively immobile. They would have been annhilated, even with our puny forces on the ground.

But such an tactical operational requirement did not in fact warrant the secrecy if they strategically merely wanted us to hold up...they simply had to OPENLY make clear they were serious. Our chicken-shit marching orders would have forced a pull-back.

The main factor in deterrence is credibility.

[ninenot]

I tend to agree with those who maintain that PRChina is xenophobic by tradition and culture, and not a "make war" nation.

That doesn't mean that things can never change...

But for PRChina to keep a zone of influence in N Korea and N Vietnam is consistend with US (MacArthur's) policy--neighbors make good buffer zones, and if THEY get killed before YOU do--that's just fine.

[Paul Ross]

It was MORE than HALF CENTURY AGO!

The Chinese "long memories" pine for making reality again this political map...

This is more than Qing Dynasty boundaries. And we should not be sanguine about their risking direct attacks on the U.S. homeland to perfect their invasions and subjugations of these lands.