Why China Should Not Put its Nuclear Weapons on High Alert
China's military wants to put its relatively small nuclear arsenal on hair-trigger alert for the first time, according to newly translated documents. That's not good. Such a radical departure from the country's longtime nuclear policy could pose a threat not only to the U.S., but also to China itself.
Gregory Kulacki, an analyst with the Union of Concerned Scientists, discovered evidence of this potential policy change in a number of Chinese military documents. He published a paper this week that provides the details of what he found.
Why is the People's Liberation Army (PLA) considering such a major policy change?
According to Kulacki, it's due to U.S. intimidation.
"It's a combination of factors," he explained. "First, the PLA is worried that it doesn't have a credible nuclear retaliatory counterweight to highly accurate U.S. nuclear weapons, conventional weapons and missile defense systems. Second, U.S. officials have refused to acknowledge that the United States is vulnerable to a Chinese retaliatory strike, which the Chinese think means the United States is not deterred from attacking them. And third, the United States has threatened China with a nuclear attack a number of times and still refuses to adopt a no-first-use policy. All that makes the PLA very nervous."
But why would it matter if the Chinese put their nuclear weapons on high alert?
Because it's an extremely dangerous policy.
Too Many Close Calls
Since the beginning of the Cold War, both the U.S. and Russia have had a percentage of their respective nuclear weapons on hair-trigger alert, enabling them to be launched within minutes if an early warning system detected an attack. Given that it is highly unlikely that either country would launch a first strike against the other, it's more likely that a technical glitch or human error would cause an accidental intercontinental ballistic missile launch in response to a false warning. In fact, there have been a number of incidents of this kind in Russia and the U.S. over the last few decades that could have prompted a nuclear launch. It's dumb luck that one of them didn't start World War III.
Unlike the U.S. and Russia, China currently keeps its nuclear weapons off alert. Its warheads are not even attached to their delivery vehicles. But Kulacki found passages in a several Chinese military texts suggesting that the PLA is considering adopting a launch-on-warning, high-alert posture. For example, the latest edition of The Science of Military Strategy, a standard Chinese military text, lays out what China would be able to do when its nuclear weapons are on high alert: "When conditions are prepared and when necessary, we can, under conditions confirming the enemy has launched nuclear missiles against us, before the enemy nuclear warheads have reached their targets and effectively exploded, before they have caused us actual nuclear damage, quickly launch a nuclear missile retaliatory strike."
Adopting a hair-trigger policy would require China to build an early warning system like the ones the U.S. and Russia deploy and such a system may be in the offing. An internal November 2014 military document Kulacki obtained includes a chapter on constructing a system and asserts: "There are plans to launch experimental early warning satellites." About a year later, in September 2015, China launched an experimental satellite that an independent U.S. news site, NASASpaceFlight.com, said may be the first in "a new series of Chinese satellites dedicated to early warning similar to the American Space-Based Infra-Red Sensor satellites." An official Chinese press release claimed the satellite was for communications.
Still Time to Nip It in the Bud
The U.S. has a strong incentive to dissuade China from adopting a hair-trigger policy. As noted above, putting weapons on alert increases the risk of nuclear launches instigated by accidents or false warnings. And a mistaken launch due to a false warning is more likely to happen during the development of a new warning system. Indeed, the record shows that it was in the early days of U.S. and Soviet warning systems when technical glitches and human errors were a particular problem.
Kulacki recommended a number of actions the U.S. can take to help keep Chinese nuclear weapons off alert. One is for U.S. officials to recognize China's nuclear deterrent by acknowledging that the U.S. and China are vulnerable to a nuclear attack from each other. A second is for the U.S. to abandon first-strike options by declaring that the sole purpose of its nuclear force is to deter and, if necessary, respond to a nuclear attack by another country.
Kulacki also argued that the U.S. should end its own hair-trigger policy. How can the U.S. credibly argue that China should not put its nuclear weapons on high alert when some 900 U.S. warheads can be fired within minutes? In any event, keeping U.S. weapons on high alert is not necessary for deterrence and increases the risk of a nuclear exchange that could devastate the U.S.
The Union of Concerned Scientists has long recommended that the U.S. take its own nuclear weapons off high alert and President Obama could do that without congressional approval before leaving office. Such a move, which has the support of a significant number of former high-ranking administration and Pentagon officials, would help put international pressure on Russia to do the same and China to refrain from adopting such a policy.
"It's critical for the Obama administration to pay attention to this ongoing debate in China over a hair-trigger policy because it's part of a bigger conversation about the future of the country's nuclear forces," Kulacki said. "They're also talking about abandoning their no-first-use policy and using nuclear weapons to respond to conventional attacks. The alarm bells should be going off.
"But U.S. officials have to realize that China is contemplating these changes because it believes the United States is unwilling to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in its national security strategy—what President Obama promised to do in his famous speech in Prague back in 2009," he added. "What the U.S. says and does regarding nuclear weapons has a profound effect on Chinese thinking. And right now, we're pushing China in the wrong direction."
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
- Thom Yorke of Radiohead Releases Song With Greenpeace to Help ... ›
- Patti Smith, Thom Yorke, Flea and More Featured on Just Released ... ›
- Musicians and Activists Unite at 'Pathway to Paris' - EcoWatch ›
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
A national park in Thailand has come up with an innovative way to make sure guests clean up their own trash: mail it back to them.
- Supermarkets in Thailand and Vietnam Swap Plastic Packaging for ... ›
- Malaysia Sends Plastic Waste Back to 13 Wealthy Countries, Says It ... ›
- Thailand Begins the New Year With Plastic Bag Ban - EcoWatch ›
- Coronavirus Worsens Thailand's Plastic Waste Crisis - EcoWatch ›
- Marium, Thailand's Beloved Baby Dugong, Is the Latest Victim of ... ›
By Ilana Cohen
Four years ago, Jacob Abel cast his first presidential vote for Donald Trump. As a young conservative from Concord, North Carolina, the choice felt natural.
But this November, he plans to cast a "protest vote" for a write-in candidate or abstain from casting a ballot for president. A determining factor in his 180-degree turn? Climate change.
Fractures Among Young Climate Conservatives<p>While young conservatives have united around the urgency of climate change, they remain divided over how to bring their concerns to the ballot box. Some embrace right-wing <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/biden-attacks-republican-convention/2020/08/24/434e5b46-e66d-11ea-970a-64c73a1c2392_story.html" target="_blank">attacks</a> painting Biden as a "tool of the left" and find his climate agenda "radical." Others can't find a way to justify voting for Trump, even if it means breaking with their party.</p><p>Patrick Mann from Orange County, California, voted for Trump in 2016. But today, he's leading Aggies for Joe at Texas A&M University and is co-founder of Texas Students for Biden. </p><p>Mann grew up watching wildfires ravage his home state, nearly forcing his family to evacuate in 2017. The GOP is failing to "meet the moment" for climate action, Mann said. He's hoping Biden will deliver on a promise to "<a href="https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/columnists/caucus/2020/01/06/joe-biden-democrat-president-iowa-caucus-restore-soul-our-nation/2806422001/" target="_blank">restore the soul of our nation</a>." </p><p>Taylor Walker from Pensacola, Florida, is also determined to make her voice heard on climate, including by casting her first-ever vote for president—but not for Biden.</p>
A False Equivalency<p>Young climate conservatives may fear climate denial and delayed climate action, but more than that, they fear the growing political momentum around the Green New Deal, the massive spending it entails and <a href="https://joebiden.com/climate-plan/" target="_blank">Biden's citing of it</a> as a "crucial framing for meeting the climate challenges we face."</p><p>Many don't want to split with their party to support a Democrat whose <a href="https://www.npr.org/2019/09/03/757220130/joe-biden-on-bipartisanship-gun-control-and-regrets-over-inaction-after-a-traged" target="_blank">allegedly bipartisan intentions</a> they doubt. If stymieing what they consider a radical green agenda means re-electing a climate change denying president, so be it. </p><p>"I'm scared of climate change, but I'm also scared of the Green New Deal and what it means for America," said Ben Mutolo, a republicEN spokesperson and junior at SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry. </p><p>Mutolo felt encouraged by former Ohio Governor John Kasich's <a href="https://www.rollcall.com/2020/08/17/kasich-speech-to-democratic-convention-follows-years-of-building-conservative-credentials/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">appearance</a> at the Democratic National Convention, but he still struggles to see himself voting for Biden. Though the candidate paints himself as a <a href="https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-08-12/harris-biden-different-generation-similar-political-instinct" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">centrist,</a> Mutolo believes he's "cozying up to the ultra-progressive left." </p><p>Mutolo, who wants to see market-based climate solutions like a carbon tax, feels torn between a candidate whose climate plan relies on taking an "<a href="https://joebiden.com/environmental-justice-plan/#" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">All-of-Government approach</a>," and one with no efforts to reign in global warming at all. <span></span></p><p>Leiserowitz said he appreciated how a conservative might feel Biden's climate plan "doesn't jive with their limited government, free-market approach."</p><p>But he sees a strong distinction between voting for a presidential candidate with a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/14/us/politics/biden-climate-plan.html" target="_blank">$2 trillion climate plan</a> that includes large renewable energy investments, which have <a href="https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/politics-global-warming-april-2020/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">bipartisan support</a>, and a candidate trying "to take the country in the opposite direction, towards more fossil fuels."</p>
- 7 Republicans Joined Senate Democrats in Vote to Fight Climate ... ›
- Climate Change Acknowledged by Increasing Number of ... ›
The World Health Organization (WHO) announced Monday that 64 high-income nations have joined an effort to distribute a COVID-19 vaccine fairly, prioritizing the most vulnerable citizens, as Science reported. The program is called the COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access Facility, or Covax, and it is a joint effort led by the WHO, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) and Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance.
- Trump Denies CDC Director's 2021 Timeline for Coronavirus Vaccine ›
- CDC Tells States to Prepare for a Vaccine Before November Election ›
- Fauci Warns Pre-Pandemic Normalcy Not Likely Until Late 2021 ... ›
By Gloria Oladipo
In the face of dangerous heat waves this summer, Americans have taken shelter in air conditioned cooling centers. Normally, that would be a wise choice, but during a pandemic, indoor shelters present new risks. The same air conditioning systems that keep us cool recirculate air around us, potentially spreading the coronavirus.