- Hillary Clinton dogged for refusing reporters’ questions on book tour
- EPA tweet baffles: ‘I’m now a C-List celebrity in Kim Kardashian: Hollywood’ iPhone game
- Australian P.M. Abbott: MH17 evidence tampered with on ‘industrial scale’
- Rep. Luis Gutierrez tells Hispanics to vote and ‘punish those’ who oppose amnesty
- Country singer Tim McGraw not sorry for slapping female fan: ‘Things happen’
- Iraq vet cited for owning 14 therapeutic pet ducks
- White House takes credit for drop in unaccompanied children at border
- International crises be damned, Obama’s fundraising trip must go on
- Friend of bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev found guilty of impeding probe
- Train with MH17 plane crash bodies leaves rebel town in Ukraine
Red tide: China deploys new class of strategic missile submarines next year
Question of the Day
“I would just say that I’m vigilant,” he said in response to questions about the Chinese submarine buildup. “I would hate to say that I’m worried, yet, because I’m not necessarily worried. Very vigilant and we need to pay attention and understand the intent. And challenge them on that intent.”
David Helvey, deputy assistant defense secretary for East Asia, told reporters in May that the Chinese are investing heavily in undersea warfare programs and submarines.
Still, the Chinese have not yet conducted an underwater test firing of a submarine-launched missile, Helvey said. “We see China investing considerably in capabilities for operations in this area,” he said.
A 2008 report produced for the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission said there are indications China is planning to deploy an anti-satellite missile on its missile submarines.
That missile includes the last stage of a ground-launched “direct-ascent” ASAT missile on top of a JL-2. The commission report quoted a 2004 article by Liu Huanyu of the Dalian Naval Academy as saying “by deploying just a few anti-satellite [missile] nuclear submarines in the ocean, one can seriously threaten the entire military space system of the enemy.”
Mark Stokes, a Chinese military affairs analyst, said the first Chinese ballistic missile submarine patrols next year would not be surprising.
“The most significant question is which organization controls, stores, and ensures the readiness of the nuclear warheads that ostensibly would be mated with the SLBMs on patrol,” said Stokes, with the Project 2049 Institute.
China maintains tight secrecy over its nuclear forces, such as how many are deployed, how they are controlled and stored, over fears that any public discussion would undermine their deterrent value.
“The [Central Military Commission] has traditionally entrusted only the Second Artillery Corps with centralized control over nuclear weapons,” Stokes said. “The CMC granting the PLA Navy the power to develop and maintain its own independent infrastructure for warhead storage and handling would be a significant departure from past. This kind of decentralization would have implications well beyond the navy.”
Richard Fisher, an expert on Chinese military affairs, said the commencement of missile submarine patrols would fulfill the ambitions of Chinese Communist Party leaders since Mao Zedong in the early 1960s.
“With three Type 094 SSBNs now called ‘operational’ by the Pentagon, it is possible that one Type 094 could be maintained on constant patrol,” said Fisher, with the International Assessment and Strategy Center.
“Three Chinese SSBNs versus 14 for the U.S. Navy may not seem to be cause for concern, but if one assumes the JL-2 has a 8,000-kilometer (about 5,000 miles) range akin to its closely related DF-31 ICBM, then the Type 094 could handily cover critical Alaskan air and missile defense bases from protected areas in the Yellow Sea, and from the eastern coast of North Korea, could cover the U.S. Navy’s SSBN base at Kitsap Island in Washington state,” he said.
Fisher warned that Obama administration plans to cut U.S. nuclear forces could increase the risk of a future Chinese first-strike attack.
“Should the Obama administration be successful in its goal of reducing U.S. nuclear warheads down to about 1,000, then it is conceivable that the Kitsap Base could become responsible for a much larger proportion of the U.S. nuclear retaliatory capability,” he said. “Such a move could result in a significant increase in risk for the United States.”
Considering the “uncertainties” about the actual levels of China’s current and future nuclear arsenal, “it would be most unwise to consider further nuclear reductions, and that could threaten a robust U.S. nuclear triad of ICBMs, SSBNs and bombers,” Fisher said.
TWT Video Picks
U.S. appetite for drugs begets violence migrants are fleeing
- IRS seeks help destroying another 3,200 computer hard drives
- Jewish woman booted from JetBlue flight over fight with Palestinian
- YOUNG: A sinking presidency, deeper after November?
- PRUDEN: A deadly enemy within exacerbating immigration crisis
- Edward Snowden to work with Russia on anti-spy technology
- MERRY: Handicaps in Hillary's way
- U.S. scrambles as violence escalates in Israel-Hamas conflict
- Humanists seek support from Congress on military chaplains
- Rep. Jared Polis' anti-fracking crusade riles Colorado
- Big milestone for Britain's little prince
Obama's biggest White House 'fails'
Celebrities turned politicians
Athletes turned actors
20 gadgets that changed the world
Fighting in Iraq