China's Anti-Nuclear Capability
- Thread starter rhino123
- Start date
China does not have anti-nuclear capability, nothing near missle defence like the US is developing in the Interceptor system (as expensive and ineffective as it is) and THAAD. China does not have second strike capability. It needs more nuke subs, and more missles to hit targets intercontinentally. China does have a lot of mobile launchers, so that is an area it does have an advantage. I'm sure China does have a lot of tunnels and stuff too. During Mao's time, he ordered the building of dozens of tunnels to allow the nation's essential war industries to survive a nuclear strike that he feared would come after the US threatened to nuke China at the end of the Korean War. Some of those must still be around.
But ultimately, China's best protection against nuclear annihilation is its population's sheer size.
But ultimately, China's best protection against nuclear annihilation is its population's sheer size.
PanAsian said:
I totally agreed with you. However I must point out that less than half of China is suitable to support large population. And there might be a shortage in resources especially water and oil.
These coupled with quite a poor infra-structure in the form of roads would also hinder the dispersion of the population.
Finn McCool said:
IMO the PRC doesn't have effective secondary (retailatory) strike capability vs. the USA, but that's not true against all nuclear powers. For example nations within MRBM range, such as India and Pakistan, or possibly even Russia. The "gap" is in ICBM and SLBM, but not in SRBM & MRBMs.
China's missile defense capability has increased quite a bit over the past decade. It's not on the same level as THAAD, but not defenseless either. For example:
A People’s Liberation Army’s bulletin in China reported Sunday that China succeeded in test launching an interceptor missile similar to the U.S. Patriot missile.
(This might be a HQ-17 test)
See articles titled:
Chinese Missile Defenese in Reponse to Taiwan
China Developing Two versions of FT-2000 missile defense system
China to purchase additional S-300 interceptors
etc.
Besides imports, China also produce its own S-300 based systems (according to Missile threat.com, with license from Russia), such as the HQ-10 and HQ-15, with 70% domestic hardware and 30% imported (Russian?) hardware.
Last edited:
tHIS thread has been initially off topic...i mean...IS CHINA A NUCLEAR POWER? HELL YES!
The topic is ANTI-NUCLEAR, and thank you for the person who finally mentioned the SAMs China has....now this forum can get moving...
China has nukes...bottom line.
China has no MD as capable as the US, that could theoretically intercept and shoot down missiles from half way around. However, even so, this system has not been tested before, and I heard US only possesses 20-30 of these interceptor missiles. That is probably enough to defend the Eastern Seaboard from a nuclear onslaught if the missiles all work effectively. In addition, the number is so far sufficient in taking down most DF-5 ICBMs (as the Chinese have only an estimated 20) but once the DF-31 enters service, it could turn the tables around.
Chinese defense against ICBM is probably virtually nonexistent. Best defense now is purely the fact that China possesses nuclear second strike capability. But perhaps in the near future, with advancements in space technologies and radars, an early warning system could be set up in the next few decades.
Against SRBMs however, I'd say China has a good chance in defending against these. The S-400, S-300 and HQ-9 are all capable of making ballistic missile interceptions. Even the late variant HQ-2 is claimed to do so...though this is highly doubtful against more advanced ballistic missiles.
The topic is ANTI-NUCLEAR, and thank you for the person who finally mentioned the SAMs China has....now this forum can get moving...
China has nukes...bottom line.
China has no MD as capable as the US, that could theoretically intercept and shoot down missiles from half way around. However, even so, this system has not been tested before, and I heard US only possesses 20-30 of these interceptor missiles. That is probably enough to defend the Eastern Seaboard from a nuclear onslaught if the missiles all work effectively. In addition, the number is so far sufficient in taking down most DF-5 ICBMs (as the Chinese have only an estimated 20) but once the DF-31 enters service, it could turn the tables around.
Chinese defense against ICBM is probably virtually nonexistent. Best defense now is purely the fact that China possesses nuclear second strike capability. But perhaps in the near future, with advancements in space technologies and radars, an early warning system could be set up in the next few decades.
Against SRBMs however, I'd say China has a good chance in defending against these. The S-400, S-300 and HQ-9 are all capable of making ballistic missile interceptions. Even the late variant HQ-2 is claimed to do so...though this is highly doubtful against more advanced ballistic missiles.
it is, unless if those nuke can't hit their targets. china's SBN capability is limited even today, and the mobile launcher are not very effective and aging. the silos are limited in numbers and can't really do enough damage on their own. honestly, china having second strike option available today is still shaky.
yes, those new missile are greatly needed...
However, one of the important reasons for Chinese reluctance is the suspicion about the U.S. intentions in Asia, where the U.S. had been developing strategic convergence in its relations with India. This was made clear in China’s Defence White Paper 2008 that spoke of ‘increasing US military presence in Asia-Pacific.’ China is wary of a US sponsored creation of an anti-Chinese axis extending from India to Japan
Franticfrank
New Member
I think its certainly a topic the Chinese are very secretive about and its quite hard to find information on it. With nuclear powers like Russia & India and of course the US constantly on your doorstep, I'm sure the Chinese made nuclear weapons and dealing with a strike one of their top priorities. They were of course threatened in the past with nuclear war by MacArthur.