Is it possible for China to stockpile the largest amount of nuke warheads?

lilzz said:

On the flip, in my POV, if country has above 5000 nuke warheads then it would reach saturation point. Any more arm race and build up would be dimishing return and become insignificant, pale in comparison.

My POV is using the nuke buildup and once it reach above the saturation point then it would prevent further arm race.

Click to expand...

If it is possible to get 5000 nukes just like that - *snaps fingers* - quickly, and without potential enemies knowing so that they would not be able to respond fast enough to start an arms race, then maybe it would work. But how likely is that? Are the risks involved (starting an arms race, potentially having to back down, embargos, international relations) worth having more nukes to intimidate enemies with?

Sure, in the end having a large number of nukes and being able to maintain them would definitely be invaluable, but the course that will be taken to reach it might cause the want for thousands of nukes to be undesirable.

If it is possible to get 5000 nukes just like that - *snaps fingers* - quickly, and without potential enemies knowing so that they would not be able to respond fast enough to start an arms race, then maybe it would work.

Click to expand...

Open source Western publications still cite the number of Chinese warheads as between 200-300. This number has remained unchanged for a decade now, and these sources claim that China has been continuing to buildup its nuclear stockpile gradually over the years. However, no unclassified source can give a number on how many warheads China actually has. This demonstrates that it is very possible to build up these nukes without alerting your enemies. Hell, no one even knows how many nukes NK has. China in all likelihood has more nukes than we think. Just most likely the number is still in the 3-digit realm.

Recently a couple of Russian scholars published a paper about Obama's long term vision of a ´nuclear weapons free´ world and how Russia would be affected by this development.

The section regarding China's nuclear strategy and arsenal mentioned also that probably Second Artillery is capable to field significantly more nukes than currently publicly acknowledged in Western academic circles. Curiously the Russian expert maintained that Second Artillery's (...this is somewhat difficult to translate, sorry.) ´principles and structures of deployment´ are completely different from the general approach used by Russia and the three Western nuclear powers.

Unfortunately the guy did not elaborate further, so what the hell does that mean?? Some suggestions dear knowledgeable members?

lilzz said:

Psychological factor for foreign lawmakers.

Click to expand...

Are you serious? The fact that Russia has/had more warheads than other countries didn't un-nerve other powers.

Also you're saying that China is going to be the only big country to increase it's nuclear arsenal at a time Russia and the US are cutting their's? Wow, that's going to reassure the world China's rise is a peaceful one!

Like to add one more, such big quantity will become mission impossible to take out through preemptive strikes. So don't think about preemptive strike any more.

Click to expand...

Pre-emptive strikes target the launch systems, not the warheads. You're going to have to spend loads of money to make China pre-emptive strike resistant. Then all that will achieve is to start a new Cold War and undo all China's hard foreign policy work.

Pre-emptive strikes target the launch systems, not the warheads. You're going to have to spend loads of money to make China pre-emptive strike resistant. Then all that will achieve is to start a new Cold War and undo all China's hard foreign policy work.

Click to expand...

The Chinese are just going to keep around a ton of warheads but no missiles? For China, cranking out the missiles is the easier part, obtaining high-grade nuclear material is the more time-intensive part. All 2nd Arty needs to do is hide DF-31As in caves all over the country.

I always maintained that China does not necessarily need a greater number of nuclear warheads, and that the best way to improve 2nd Arty's nuclear deterrence is to build a sensor network capable of real-time detection of missile launches and nuclear attacks originating from anywhere on Earth. Such a sensor system should be able to give a 20-30 minute warning - enough time to move/launch retaliatory systems if necessary (such a sensor network would be comparable to Russian & US counterparts during the Cold War).

An improved early warning system would allow China to automatically increase the number of retaliatory assets that would strike an enemy, since they would be given time to be launched BEFORE enemy missiles destroy them in a preemptive attack.

Moreover, developing a national early warning system is not nearly as politically provocative as stockpiling greater quantities of nukes, yet in a real conflict it might be more effective, since it would decrease an enemy preemptive strike's likelihood of success against China's limited nuclear arsenal, and increase the number of warheads that would ultimately reach to the enemy in the event of a retaliatory strike.

Mr T said:

Are you serious? The fact that Russia has/had more warheads than other countries didn't un-nerve other powers.

Click to expand...

I list example of Japan got intimidated by Russia in the Kuril island case. I think their numbers clearly does have a factor. I also give alot of exmaple why Russia has easier time than China because of that.

Mr T said:

Pre-emptive strikes target the launch systems, not the warheads. You're going to have to spend loads of money to make China pre-emptive strike resistant. Then all that will achieve is to start a new Cold War and undo all China's hard foreign policy work.

Click to expand...

On the contrary, I think you have spend alot of money to achieve pre-emptive strike. not the otherway around.
China is big country. Alot of those mobile platforms are located in the jungle, mountain, tunnels.Do you realistically think B-2 can bypass all those heavy airdefense and without detection and venture deep thousands of miles into the inland like Sichuan, Gansu, Yunan? How many B-2 you need to get that job done?
B-2 can mostly do things at night. IF you say knock a few near east coast, it might doable. But preemptive strike on all and deep into the inland. In my POV, mission impossible.

duskylim said:

Dear Sirs:

Of all the actual and potential nuclear powers, China is not yet in a position to drastically increase its nuclear weapons stockpile, at least not without significant investment in its nuclear weapons materials infrastructure.

.....

For China to undertake a large build-up of nuclear weaponry will require all this and more.

Still there is no real strategic need for more than a few hundred to a thousand warheads.

China's greater need is for more reliable, longer-ranged, MIRVed ballistic missiles.

Best Regards,

Dusky Lim

Click to expand...

Well, China have an active nuclear program since the 60's and there have more a few nuclear weapons materials infrastructure been operational since then. Of course, these things are top secret in China, so we'll only able to rely on US intel and what China is officially reporting to IAEA. As far as we know, China have been running two plutonium breeders (Guangyuan, Jiuquan) both became operational in 1970's and each estimated at 300 to 400 PU KG/ yr. As well as a Uranium separation plant (Heiping, Lanzhou) running since the 70's with a estimated capacity at 750 to 2450 Kgs of U-235 per year. Combined that means a potential maximum of more 3000 kg of nuclear weapons materials per year for almost 40 years... Now if China choose to produce at full capacity and turn them into nukes, that a lot of nukes.... These are just dedicated weapon plants, there even more research and civilian facilities.

Of course, from a policy perspective China wouldn't do that, and weapon penetration is more valued that number of weapons. But this doesn't mean the capability isn't there.

Violet Oboe said:

Kaijo fanatics in Japan are quite boastful about their mighty ´Japanese improved Aegis system´ (installed on at least 6 Kongo/imp. Kongo-class ´destroyers´ (effectively cruisers of 10500t displacement)) mentioning an acquisition and tracking capability of 1024 different targets. Of course those geeks maintain that the Japanese Aegis is superior to the current USN Aegis (I don't know whether they refer to the 7th or 8th generation) and many USN officers would actually envy their counterparts in JMSDF working with this system. What do you think about that bdpopeye, are they nuts??

Click to expand...

I'd also add that the Korean KDX-III is bigger and carries more missiles. But ultimately, both SK and Japan will only build a small number of these ships, compared with USN at 50-60 AB class DDG's.

IMO the USN doesn't need to envy them. It's more of a concern to China in the East Asia sector because the PLAN has few modern ships. Where Japan and SK only has to worry about one sector, the PLAN has to cover 3 (North-East Asia, Taiwan, South China Sea) and must split it assets to the 3 areas.

Dear Sirs:

There are numerous credible websites devoted to world-wide nuclear weaponry and technology as well as a number of very informative articles in open publication about China's nuclear weapon program.

A good example of the former would be The Nuclear Weapons Archive and other well-known sites like the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (which provides yearly assessments of the arsenals of the various existing and suspected nuclear powers).

With regards to the latter, one of the most outstanding articles I've ever read was published last year in (IIRC) the September 2008 issue of Physics Today - about China's nuclear weapons program.

As far as China's nuclear materials infrastructure is concerned, it runs the full gamut from plutonium and tritium production reactors to domestic as well as Russian-supplied, Zippe-type centrifuges and conventional membrane-type enrichment plants.

The production capacity of plutonium production reactors is estimated from size of their cooling towers while the enrichment capacities (Separative Work Units - SWU's) of the Russian centrifuges and the numbers sold have been stated by the Russians under IAEA regulations.

While China can and does make its own centrifuges it still chose to purchase the Russian Zippe-type for fabricating its own commercial power reactor fuel.

This clearly indicates that Chinese enrichment technology is still behind that of the Russians (who incidentally are the world leaders in this).

China did make several conventional membrane-type enrichment facilities (notably the one at Langzhou), which due to their size are almost impossible to hide but it is doubtful that they are still being operated.

Centrifuge technology is so much cheaper and efficient as well as easier to hide. A nation the size of China can easily disperse such operations around the country and it would be difficult if not impossible to trace them.

So no one really knows how much weapons-grade enriched uranium the Chinese have produced all these years. Especially so because China does extensive mining of heavy metals, rare-earths and transuranics (actinides).

Uranium for military purposes could be recovered during the processing of such ores. This activity would go unnoticed by the IAEA as no diversion of commercial imported uranium is involved.

Note, Western intelligence assessments that China has produced only limited amounts of weapons-grade plutonium derive from their very own claims that known and identified Chinese plutonium production reactors have not displayed heat plumes from their cooling towers for several decades.

Of course it is possible to make nuclear weapons without using plutonium - as the Chinese did in their 1st test in October of 1964, although plutonium will make the weapon more efficient and compact.

In view of all this, we simply do not know how much nuclear materials and weapons the Chinese really have.

However, the Chinese themselves have stated that among the 5 established nuclear powers they have the smallest arsenal - but with the deployment of a new generation of weapons (DF-31/31A, JL-2, etc.) it is the only arsenal that is growing!

Best Regards,

Dusky Lim