I worked for the author before. He's a genius and is adamant about China's minimum deterrence rather.
China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread
- Thread starter peace_lover
- Start date
- Status
Blackstone
Brigadier
I hope I'm wrong, but given advances in US strategic missile defense, China might come to believe their small stockpile of nuclear weapons may not be enough to guarantee second-strike capability. If that happens, then it's probable they'll not only modernize their current stockpile, but build new nukes to reach whatever threshhold CCP leaders believe necessary to overcome all likely missile defense systems. India and Japan will surely react to China's rising stockpiles. That would be a scary day.
Ultra, The US is not "diictating," anything to anyone.
Analysts and others in the US writing about their opinions does not equate to the "US dictating."
Now you are giving your opinion on what the "American perspective," is, based on pure opinions from others who only speak for themselves and not for America.
The US is not saying...or anyone else from my perspective...that China cannot defend itself.
Actually, the underlying systems (single party rule, versus free and open elections), are ideologically opposed. But that is not the point and is completely off topic. So let's just not go there.
I believe the Chinese people do wish for exactly the things you mention.
I do not characterize the situation as "failing and spiraling." Perhaps it depends a lot on perspective and what has been experienced over 60 years.
Yes, there are some ebbs and tides...but all in all, both nations have a lot more areas where they depend on each other and are tied together than what separates them.
That does not mean that everything is rosy...and there are certainly potential areas for opposition and mistrust. But that is always the case between many nations...even allies on occasion..
I've raise five teenagers to adulthood. You analogy is not necessarily a very good one because it implies that the US should act like a parent of some sort to China...which I am sure is not what you mean or want.
In relations between nations, the best policy on both sides is "trust but verify." If either side feels that the verification of what it perceives is happening does not equate to what it has either been told, or thought would happen...then you have to get together and hash out the differences.
Sometimes that is not so easy to do.
For example, I view the entire issue in the SCS right now as such an event.
As it is, this entire line of discussion...about the US somehow being uber-reactionary and trying to dictate something to China as a result of the PRC MIRV'ing its warheads, is simply OT on this thread.
Perceived US reactions based on analysts pornouncments is not what the thread is about. The thread is simply about the factual news taking place in the PRC with respect to its arsenal.
Zool
Junior Member
I don't expect China to massively increase their overall number of nuclear warheads ala the US/Soviet Cold War path (beyond the MIRV upgrades). Rather I think they realise, as most nuclear powers do, that the delivery system and supporting C4I systems are the critical part of the chain. This is where investment in hypersonic technologies and survivable satellite networks becomes necessary to maintaining a viable deterrent between peer nuclear powers.
That is still too much. Keep in mind that China's plutonium stockpile (2 tons) is only enough for around 500 bombs. And if they want to build the 1992 type 1 megaton warheads for the DF-5B, DF-31(A), and DF-41, then the plutoniums are probably only enough for around 300 warheads. By the way, I don't think any of China's nuclear industries are manufacturing weapon-grade plutonium anymore (Both the Jiuquan and Guangyuan plutonium reprocessing plants have switched to civilian operations). Therefore I think SIPRI's estimation of 250 warhead is a reasonable number. That number might increase to 300-400 warheads given China's sea-based nuclear deterrent though. Also, I think the recent MIRV upgrade of DF-5 series might be a transition to DF-41. Once the DF-41s become fully operational (say 2018-2020?), I don't think the Chinese want to keep the early 1980s DF-5s anymore. Nevertheless, if the DF-41's guidance system is Beidou, then the DF-41 won't be operation until 2020 since the Beidou-2 global coverage won't be completed until then.
Ultra
Junior Member
Problem with China's production of nuclear weapon is not limit by the readily avaliable uranium which China has 171,400 tonnes in reserves (which they most likely use it for nuclear weapon as they are supplied by other countries such as Australia and Russia for their civilian stock pile) - just a little bit less than America's 207,400 tonnes in reserves. China theoretically has enough for over 1,000 warheads. The real limiting factor is the Tritium as China only has a stockpile for around 300 weapons.
"Tritium is an important component in nuclear weapons. It is used to enhance the efficiency and yield of and the fission stages of in a process known as "" as well as in for such weapons."
Stretching my nuclear chemistry to the limit. Can anybody please tell me what kinds of facilities, reactors, and other equipment you need to produce tons of tritium enough for more than 1,000 warheads? If China were to expand warhead production, how will it likely expands its tritium supply?
antiterror13
Brigadier
The latest news is Beidou-2 global coverage will be reached in 2017, 3 years earlier than original plan
- Status