Making sense of Chinese expansion of nuclear stack

The discovery of China building around 110 nuclear silos in the Xinjiang region caught the attention of quite many concerned parties, but not quite enough. That is to say, it is a move of great historical significance and it also demands an understanding from the lens of history.

In the conference of the socialist bloc in 1957 Mao Zedong opposed Nikita Khrushchev who gave a speech on coexistence with the ‘capitalist world’ by declaring, “We should not fear war,” he said-

It was termed “deeply disturbing’ by Nikita Khrushchev not so much because how Mao trivialized nuclear Armageddon, but Mao used his speech to show how USSR is weak against China that USSR might have the bombs but China is ‘indestructible’ therefore nuclear deterrence is not going to operate in Sino-Soviet relationship. Such was also the reasoning of Mao behind not joining the Warsaw pact then. A year after that infamous speech the second Taiwan Strait Crisis broke out and then President Eisenhower was ready to use nuclearized artilleries against Mao’s China. Two crises in the strait in such quick succession (’55 and ’58) made Khrushchev realize that Mao’s ‘recklessness’ is very likely to push USSR into a real nuclear confrontation with USA as an obligation, so at one level that speech by Mao was also a threat resulting in a successful concession from USSR in the form of their assistance in the Chinese nuclear program.

Lop Nur site testing in 1964 came about by very risky bets carried out by Mao Zedong, but such a penchant for risk did not reflect in China’s adopted posture after the test. Once established as a nuclear power Mao was fully aware that China had limitations other nuclear powers did not. Mao followed Sun Tzu’s diktat on “knowing oneself” and he picked ‘assured retaliation’ as a posture. Primarily, because he knew along with China’s limitation vis-à-vis its two adversaries- USSR and USA, but also China’s geographic and manpower advantage which makes it capable in absorbing a conventional attack. The risk involved in escalation was a cost China simply wasn’t ready for.

In hindsight, China never found a good enough reason to expand its nuclear stack substantially from then until now primarily because today’s adversary of China was once its greatest economic partner and moreover it never had to face an adversary which made it a point to talk about ‘nonproliferation’ at least not as a trilateral or a bilateral issue. American insistence on the nuclear agreements to include China and pursuant to that USA also withdrew from the INF treaty under the Trump administration such moves by design had an interest in a bilateral dialogue i.e. US-China, as it very well knew China with its very limited nuclear arsenal relatively would never join such a treaty. Last year, USA made it a point by calling for ‘nuclear arms’ talk’ with China that nuclear option is still not as dead as China’s actions and insistence on conventional capabilities signals. Perhaps, that served as a point of concern for China as US has overwhelming nuclear capability that disarmament is simply a farce and even if China attains naval superiority at some future date then also USA can keep China circumscribed in its own periphery. Now, comes a point where it seems that China’s understanding of its security is not driven by resource as constraint as much as it now searches for an avenue for singularity in resource.

It seems the thought that is driving USA in pushing China for disarmament is also the objective George Kennan sought by laying down the famous strategy termed ‘containment’ in the 50’s. Simply put, arms race resulting in implosion of the USSR’s economy. It doesn’t take a great observer of history to find the missing ingredients here in pursuing Kennan’s objective against China as China has been very conscious of not being weak where USSR was. China has maintained political stability and moreover its economy notwithstanding some elaborate reports calling it fragile seems strong enough but most importantly in-terms of technology it has almost attained equivalence with America. So, why would USA pursue this form of diplomacy? The simple answer is being too conscious also runs the risk of being too fearful which in-turn creates the need to show strength in order to counter that perception. It is likely, that those images of missile silos are also the acceptance of the American challenge by Xi Jinping. If the Chinese strategy has changed in that sense then it is the beginning and there will be a visible move towards ‘asymmetric escalation’ as a posture.

Though, there is also this argument that maybe those silos are dummies to enhance survivability, but it misses the crucial point that in principle it doesn’t matter whether China is using dummies or not. If an immediate war was impending such an argument could have fared well, but China has now already decided to signal its stand. If not immediately strategic, at least it is a move to enhance its survivability as the surveillance and monitoring system of USA in the Indo-Pacific is so pervasive that all Chinese SSBNs are under close watch and moreover to circumvent the US Naval preponderance in its neighborhood by an internal and relatively secret deterrence. Survivability is one side of the argument, but incomplete without understanding maneuverability.

Continuance of the conflict between US and China in nuclear terms has the potential to push India into a position France adopted in the Cold War. But, for now it cannot alter the balance between India and China. Nevertheless, India must keep a close eye on such developments and keep improving on its own deterrence as DF-26 and DF-21 are China’s most potent land based missile systems which are believed to be deployed in around the Sino-Indian border.

Related posts:

Since I took over as Head of Design at Nuri seven months ago, a lot has changed. The design team is now bigger than ever and the company as a whole is going through exponential growth. These huge…

recently had a discussion with my uncle, who I have the greatest respect for as you may have seen in previous blog posts. He has worked in various areas from construction, sales, his own businesses…