ˇ@
China poses challenge to new START
ambitions
By Peter Brookes
Discussion of the US-Russia Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty ˇX aka New START ˇX
has so far pretty much skipped one very important consideration: China.
In the run-up to last weekˇ¦s Senate committee vote to send the treaty to the
floor for ratification this fall, senators quite rightly debated whether New
START overly restrains US missile-defense options, has weak verification
procedures, cuts too many US missiles or warheads or might affect nuclear North
Korea and near-nuclear Iran.
However, lawmakers havenˇ¦t yet fully faced the problem that, as we build down
our strategic nuclear forces in the White Houseˇ¦s hopes that others will disarm,
China is involved in a strategic buildup. So, before thereˇ¦s any final vote,
itˇ¦d be wise to give some thought to Beijingˇ¦s burgeoning bevy of bombs.
While the exact shape of Chinaˇ¦s grand ambitions may not be clear, thereˇ¦s
little question they exist. Few would dispute that Beijing wouldnˇ¦t mind taking
the head seat at the table of global powers, now occupied by Washington. As
such, China has been growing all aspects of its national power. This is not
limited to a break-neck conventional buildup; its strategic forces are booming,
too.
China long relied on a small, land-based nuclear force of ICBMs in fixed silos
and on a limited number of road-mobile missiles, providing for a ˇ§sufficient and
effectiveˇ¨ deterrence in Beijingˇ¦s eyes. However, the force has started getting
bigger, better and badder. While the US strategic arsenal desperately needs
updating, Chinese nuclear forces are being modernized.
And Chinaˇ¦s warhead numbers are up, by some estimates even doubling in recent
years. The Pentagon says Beijing may now be able to put multiple nukes on a
single, newly developed, road-mobile missile.
Indeed, if any country can undertake a so-called ˇ§rush to parityˇ¨ with the US
and Russia, itˇ¦s China, especially considering its aspirations, wealth and
willingness to lavish largesse on its armed forces. Basically, Beijing could
become a nuclear peer competitor of Washington and Moscow in the not too distant
future, in light of the expected arms cuts under New START.
It doesnˇ¦t end there. Chinaˇ¦s 2nd Artillery (nuclear forces) is reportedly
building 4,800km-plus of tunnels in central China, likely providing Beijing with
an enhanced, land-based, second-strike capability. Naturally, Chinaˇ¦s ICBMs are
thought to be targeted at the US.
Beijing is also diversifying its nuclear capabilities by broadening its force
structure into the traditional triad ˇX missiles based not just on land but also
on bombers and subs. Chinaˇ¦s new class of strategic submarine may already carry
its first sea-based ICBMs. And Beijingˇ¦s building another ˇ§boomerˇ¨ sub class,
too, significantly raising its nuclear-strike mobility and survivability ˇX while
lowering detectability.
Itˇ¦s also adding advanced strategic bombers to the mix. Analysts believe China
is developing long-range cruise missiles for these aircraft, which may have both
conventional and nuclear warheads.
Making matters more complex is Chinaˇ¦s highly secretive stance on its nuclear
forces. The Peopleˇ¦s Liberation Army has a penchant for strategic denial and
deception ˇX and an unwillingness to talk about the issue officially. Thatˇ¦s a
real challenge to our intelligence and policy community, leaving lots of
unanswered questions about Chinaˇ¦s strategic doctrine, capabilities and intent
as Beijing bolsters its armed forces ˇX while avoiding arms-control agreements.
As such, senators need to take time not only to consider the other salient
questions about the new START ˇX but also to figure China into their
deliberations on a new treaty with Russia.
Heritage Foundation senior fellow Peter Brookes is a former
deputy US assistant secretary of defense. This article first appeared in the New
York Post.
ˇ@
|