The best and safest is really going the Russian route of having enough nukes hidden away in many parts of the country so that even after a first strike attempt, there is enough to retaliate where some hidden silos are not destroyed even if all major cities are.
China should honestly revoke the no first use principle or at least change its own stance so that it reserves the right to use nukes against military targets like US invasions on the mainland or islands and their naval fleets.
Agree with those points. China should adopt Russia's nuclear policy of having overwhelming second strike capability. China also needs to modify its NFU policy to the one similar to Russia's version. That China will not be the first to use nukes. But will use them on two conditions:
1) A nuclear attack on China. (obviously off course)
2) A conventional military action that threatens China's very existence.
But the catch is that China would need to approach Russia's nuclear arsenal size for this nuclear policy to work. A nuclear retaliation based condition (2) is practically a first strike. First strike always needs far more warheads than a second strike because there are thousands of places to target such as nuclear weapons sites, bases, fleets, air bases, industrial zones, cities, etc. So thousands of warheads are needed for that to work.
Point (2) is all the more urgent now, because US and friends are constantly poking and testing out China's resolve to keep One-China together. In a Steve Bannon's wet dream, the combined nuclear forces of NATO & India can defeat China in an all out war with limited repercussions for the USA. So China must have the nuclear arsenal to stop such ideas of a 'survivable WWIII'.
I think it absolutely is and the whole "only 300 warheads" is also a part of the same structure. The strategic thinking is an old one, where China shows the other powers that it is not a military threat and will "behave" with their nukes unlike other "rogue states" they like to point out such as North Korea, or even Pakistan and India who have in the past worried people in the 90s. Same would apply to potential Iranian nukes (so they must stop them and really anyone else who isn't on their leash).
Yes I hope you are right, that China already 'grew up' from that 300 warheads strategy. China is not a small state like North Korea or Pakistan. Where it is not worthwhile for the USA or India to suffer a nuclear attack in order to destroy that country. Destroying China, a geopolitical heavyweight and suffering from some of its relatively small nuclear stockpile might seem worthwhile for US and friends.
The Chinese rumours were talking about (last year and this year) the apparent unwillingness to stockpile significant numbers being attributed to the CCP waiting for next generations of weapons which are soon to be ready or have only become ready recently. There are also other methods of MAD being considered and hedged. The attitude is nuclear weapons, even extremely high yield or small tactical thermonuclear (incl neutron bombs) are "ancient" MAD technologies albeit proven, simple, and reliable. The tone is almost fanboyish when describing how much more capable and superior new generations of weapons are and indeed even non-nuclear MAD. Although there is of course a total absence of evidence and the whole thing is word of mouth rumour spreading.
It is rumoured that China already has the 475kt W88 warhead design via espionage. If that is true, then China does have an excellent warhead design to mass-produce for strategic nuclear deterrence. But this is still just rumour and speculation. I still don't know why China's announced MIRV warheads are only maxed out at 150kt if they already have the W88 design.
Sure, other means of MAD such as Cyber attacks and large-scale ASAT can do terrible harm. But nothing comes close to scaring the shit out of your enemies than nuclear weapons. If only China can somehow develop the next step in nuclear weaponry: pure fusion weapons. That would be a game changer.
