Loading Now

China and Pakistan, not India, triggered Asia nuclear arms race – Firstpost

China and Pakistan, not India, triggered Asia nuclear arms race – Firstpost



In one of the several riveting scenes in the 1995 Tony Scott-helmed submarine action thriller Crimson Tide, Commanding Officer (CO) Captain Franklin Ramsey asks his Executive Officer (XO) Lieutenant Commander Ronald Hunter, “Think it was a mistake, Mr Hunter? Using the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.”

Filmed inside the now-decommissioned France’s second Clemenceau-class aircraft carrier Foch, the movie’s set was made to resemble the USS Alabama (SSBN-731), the sixth Ohio-class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine, armed with the nuclear SLBM UGM-133 Trident II D5s.

Crimson Tide, a seismic confrontation between the CO (Gene Hackman) and the XO (Denzel Washington) over the firing of a nuclear missile at a Russian N-missile installation captured by ultranationalist rebels led by Vladimir Radchenko, is based on a near-nuclear Armageddon involving the Russian submarine B-59 and its Vasily Aleksandrovich Arkhipov (played by Washington) during the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.

CO Ramsey continues, “Somebody asked me if we should bomb Japan, a simple ‘Yes, by all means, sir, drop that f—-r. Twice.’”

The lines encapsulate the US nuclear hypocrisy—rules regarding the use of nukes apply only to other nations, not America.

The bigger aspect of the US doubletalk on nuclear weapons is its concerns about a nuclear arms race in Asia—India, Pakistan and China—while the American N-weapons advancement programme continues. Such concerns have been amplified by the Western media and reports and commentaries by nonpartisan institutes advocating nuclear arms control and non-proliferation.


recent article by the nonpartisan membership organisation US-based Arms Control Association (ACA) states that successive US administrations “have been frustratingly inconsistent in their non-proliferation goals” regarding India and Pakistan.

The article, titled ‘Pakistan and the Nuclear Danger in Asia,’ doesn’t mention India in the headline. However, the article, carried by Truthdig, “an independent source for original and provocative reporting and commentary from a progressive point of view”, has 
a different headline, “The Nuclear Danger in Asia” with the strap, “Simmering tensions among China, India and Pakistan are driving a triangular nuclear arms race”.

In the article, ACA executive director Daryl G Kimball mentions US deputy national security adviser Jon Finer’s recent comments about the ‘danger’ posed by Pakistan’s long-range missile development to America and the “insufficient” 
US sanctions on four Pakistani entities for its ballistic missile programme.

Kimball’s article unnecessarily drags India into the nuclear arms race while omitting how Washington turned a blind eye for decades to AQ Khan developing the Pakistani N-bomb and promoting proliferation and the Islamabad-Beijing missile cooperation.

“… simmering tensions between nuclear-armed China and India and between NPT outliers India and Pakistan also are driving a triangular nuclear arms race that has exacerbated the risks of nuclear escalation and missile proliferation”, he writes.

According to Kimball, India “continues steadily developing more advanced nuclear systems while Pakistan produces more fissile material and new missile capabilities in the name of full spectrum deterrence against India”.

Highlighting the “danger to international peace and security” caused by the “possession and build-up of nuclear weapons by any state, friend or foe”, Kimball calls global powers, especially the US, “to implement a more comprehensive and balanced strategy”.

Kimball wants the incoming Donald Trump administration to impose missile-related sanctions on the Pakistani long-range missile programme and also “press India to consider self-imposed limits on its ICBM capabilities, including a ban on multiple warhead missiles [Agni-V with MIRV tech], which Pakistan may view as a threat to its nuclear retaliatory potential”.

Such articles, painting a grim scenario by adding India’s name to the dangers posed by Pakistan and China to the subcontinent’s stability, aren’t new.

In a 
February 2023 article, the United States Institute of Peace (USIP), a “national, nonpartisan, independent institute founded by Congress”, stated that though India, Pakistan and China have kept their arsenals safe, the US has “an obligation not to accept these sorts of logical assurances passively or uncritically”.

Titled, “The Persistent Threat of Nuclear Crises Among China, India and Pakistan”, the article mentions a 
2022 USIP report which concluded that “Southern Asia’s strategic stability is becoming harder to manage because of geopolitical changes and evolving military technologies, including growing nuclear arsenals and more capable delivery systems”.

The writer argues that the backdrop of China’s increasing naval presence in the Indian Ocean region and its “growing nuclear, missile and surveillance capabilities” will alarm India, which 
could “seek to demonstrate that it has thermonuclear weapons capable of destroying Chinese cities in one blow as well as more nuclear submarines capable of evading China’s first strike”.

According to USIP, such Indian moves 
raise serious policy questions for the US. “When India arms itself to deter China, Pakistan perceives new threats from India and will likely pursue enhanced capabilities of its own.”

Therefore, American policymakers should be concerned about strategic stability in Southern Asia, the USIP concludes.

China, not India, fuelling N-arms race

America’s main adversary is China, not Russia. Successive Department of Defence (DoD) reports have red-flagged the increasing Chinese military superiority in the Indo-Pacific and the South China Sea, the rapidly rising nuclear stockpile and technological advancement and threat to the US.

Several US war games, including those conducted by the Pentagon, the RAND Corporation and the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), have concluded that the US would face a decisive defeat in a war with China in the Indo-Pacific.

According to the 2022 National Security Strategy, China is the only competitor to the US with the intent and capacity to reshape the international order. Therefore, the US identifies China as the “pacing challenge” for DoD.

Chinese missiles can easily hit US bases—Diego Garcia and Guam—and aircraft carriers in the region.

The CSIS estimates that China has a minimum of 425 missile launchers capable of hitting US bases. China’s DF-16 SRBM, DF-21 MRBM and land-based cruise missile CJ-10 can hit the US bases. Besides, the H-6K bomber can target Guam with the Changjian-20 cruise missile. The DF-21 MRBM’s ‘carrier killer’ version DF-21D and the DF-26B version can destroy American aircraft carriers.

The US is more worried about Chinese ICBMs, such as DF-41, DF-31 and DF-5, striking its mainland. The DF-41, which can carry 10 independently targeted nuclear warheads, could theoretically hit the US in 30 minutes, according to the CSIS.

The 
2024 DoD report on China’s military and security developments highlights this danger. Such missiles would enable China “to threaten conventional strikes against targets in the continental United States, Hawaii and Alaska”.

China has several nuclear-capable missiles: DF-5, DF-11 and DF-15 SRBMs, DF-17 (HGV MRBM), DF-21E, DF-26, DF-31, DF-41 and JL-2 submarine-launched ICBM.

The DoD report red-flags the JL-2 and JL-3, which can be fired from China’s Type 094 JIN-class SSBNs in the western half of the continental US, Hawaii and Alaska.

China’s “expanding nuclear force will enable it to target more US cities, military facilities and leadership sites than ever before in a potential nuclear conflict”, per the report.

China intends to have a larger, diverse nuclear force comprising low-yield precision strike missiles and ICBMs with multi-megaton yields.

According to DoD estimates, China has more than 600 operational nukes and will have 1,000-plus by 2030 and 1,500 by 2035.

The Chinese claim, according to its 
2019 Defence White Paper, that Beijing advocates the “ultimate complete prohibition and thorough destruction of nuclear weapons”, doesn’t “engage in any nuclear arms race with any other country and keeps its nuclear capabilities at the minimum level required for national security” is false.

China is in a nuclear arms race with the US. Beijing’s claim that it developed nuclear weapons “in a special historical period to cope with nuclear blackmail, break nuclear monopoly and prevent nuclear war” clearly refers to the US.

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), China’s nuclear stockpile is “projected to continue growing over the coming decade” and the number of ICBMs “is likely to reach or even exceed the numbers held” by either Russia or the US.

The increase in India’s nuclear warheads as against China’s stockpile in the last decade pales in comparison.

India’s nuclear warheads increased from  90-110 in 2014 to 172 in 2024 while China’s stockpile massively increased from 250 to 500 nukes in the same period, around 90 more than the estimate for the previous year, according to SIPRI data.

SIPRI notes “a small increase” in India’s stockpile from the previous year. “India slightly expanded its nuclear arsenal in 2023.” The institute observes that while Pakistan “remains the main focus of India’s nuclear deterrent”, New Delhi appears to be focused on developing longer-range ballistic missiles that can strike throughout China.

India’s emphasis on long-range ballistic missiles is logical considering the Chinese aggression along the LAC, especially eastern Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh, and the risk of an all-out war.

Pakistan increased its stockpile from 110-120 to 170 in the last decade. SIPRI observes that Pakistan’s “nuclear weapon arsenal and fissile material stockpile are likely to continue to expand over the next decade” as it develops several new delivery systems and accumulates more fissile material.

American nuclear hypocrisy

The US and its media often mention the so-called triangular arms race in Asia while ignoring the massive American nuclear arsenal and advancement and the nuclear doctrine.

According to the 
SIPRI Yearbook 2024, Russia and the US together possess almost 90 per cent of all nuclear weapons.

Of its total arsenal of around 3,708 warheads, the US has deployed 1,770 on ballistic missiles and at bomber bases. However, the total increases to 5,044 if about 1,938 warheads in reserve and around 1,336 retired warheads awaiting dismantlement are included.

Russia has deployed 1,710 of its total stockpile of 4,380 nukes on land- and sea-based ballistic missiles and at bomber bases. The total Russian stockpile also increases, to 5,580, if the 1,200 retired warheads awaiting dismantlement are included.

The actual nuclear arms race is between the US on one side and China, Russia and North Korea on the other.

America, like its competitors, is ramping up its N-deterrent while highlighting the nuclear arms race in Asia.

The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) will spend $540 billion on modernising the strategic nuclear forces in the next 10 years, $430 billion on maintenance and operation of delivery vehicles and $650 billion on weapons activities in the next 25 years. 
Around $1.5 trillion in total will be spent on ICBMs, SSBNs, SLBMs, strategic bombers, cruise missiles, gravity bombs and warheads.

The LGM-30G Minuteman III ICBM is the only land-based component of the US nuclear triad. The US Air Force is replacing it with the LGM-35A Sentinel.

The US Navy plans to replace its 22 Ohio-class ballistic SSBNs with the Columbia-class, which will cost more than $130 billion in procurement and R&D. The new SSBNs, like the Ohio-class, will be armed with M-133 Trident II D5s, which can carry eight warheads. The US will spend about $33.7 billion on extending the life of the missiles to up to another 60 years.

The US will spend $12 billion on upgrading the B-52H bombers—AESA radar, new satellite communications systems and modern engines. The B-52Hs, of which 46 are nuclear-capable and carry 20 cruise missiles, will be redesignated as B-52Js.

More than $100 million will be spent on communications and avionics upgrades of the B-2 bombers, which carry up to 16 nuclear gravity bombs.

The US will spend $203 billion on the acquisition and operation of 100 B-21 bombers, which will replace the B-52Hs and B-2s.

The 500 nuclear-capable AGM-86 air-launched cruise missiles will be replaced with 1,000 AGM-181s, which will need around $28 billion.

The US is also improving its nuclear deterrence in NATO nations.

The US deploys around 480 nukes  at eight bases in six European countries, including non-nuclear nations. These gravity bombs are deployed in Germany (150), the UK (110) and Italy and Turkey (90 each).

On December 18, 2024, the NNSA completed the modification of the B61-12 gravity bombs, deployed by the US on its soil and NATO bases, for $10 billion. The life of the oldest and most versatile weapon in the US nuclear stockpile has been extended by 20 years. The NNSA plans to produce a more advanced variant called the B61-13.

The US also plans to spend billions on meeting a nuclear bomb production target of 80 plutonium pits per year. The NNSA is seeking a 12 per cent increase, $716 billion in FY-25-49, to its projected 25-year budget plan for nuclear warheads relative to the last reported projection.

The US, China and Russia are involved in the nuclear arms race despite being signatories to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (
NPT), which came into force on March 5, 1970.

Besides stopping nuclear proliferation, the NPT’s 191 members declared “their intention to achieve at the earliest possible date the cessation of the nuclear arms race and to undertake effective measures in the direction of nuclear disarmament”.

The NPT also aimed to cease the manufacture of nukes, liquidate existing stockpiles and eliminate the means of their delivery, leading to complete disarmament.

According to ARTICLE VI: “Each of the parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.”

In the latest sign of US hypocrisy on NPT and nuclear disarmament, Bruce Turner, US permanent representative to the Conference on Disarmament, 
said in May 2024 that the “current prospects for further nuclear disarmament would appear to be dimming rather than increasing” despite the US being “a strong supporter” of the NPT and Article VI.

The Russian “nuclear sabre-rattling” in the ongoing war with Ukraine, China’s “massive and rapid build-up of its nuclear arsenal”, North Korea’s “nuclear and ballistic build-up” and Iran’s “continued production of uranium enriched up to 60 per cent” have slowed down the process of nuclear disarmament, Turner said.

If the US is worried about China’s nuke stockpile reaching 1,500 and its production of fissile material for use in nuclear weapons, as stated by Turner, India should be equally concerned and increase its N-deterrence.

India has only one ICBM in its inventory, the Agni-V, and every right to build more N-capable ICBMs to ensure minimum nuclear deterrence both against China and Pakistan.

The US should be more concerned about China and Pakistan’s nuclear ambitions, which are a constant threat to India’s security.

Moreover, compared to India, China and Pakistan, America’s nuclear doctrine is the most dangerous regarding the no-first-use (NFU) policy and use of nukes.

According to the 
2022 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), US nuclear weapons are meant to deter aggression, assure allies and partners and achieve US objectives if deterrence fails.

Regarding NFU, the NPR says the policy “would result in an unacceptable level of risk in light of adversaries’ non-nuclear capabilities which could inflict strategic level damage to the US and its allies and partners.

Though the US will not use or threaten to use nukes against non-nuclear weapons states that are party to and in compliance with NPT, “there remains a narrow range of contingencies [regarding other nations] in which US nuclear weapons may still play a role in deterring attacks that have a strategic effect.”

In the same scene in Crimson Tide, when another officer says Radchenko is a “dangerous lunatic and is threatening nuclear and he means it”, Weapons Officer Lieutenant Peter Ince (Viggo Mortensen) asks, “So, what does that make us since…we’re the only nation that’s ever dropped a nuclear bomb on anybody?”

The writer is a freelance journalist with more than two decades of experience and comments primarily on foreign affairs. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the writer. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.



Source link

Post Comment