One Chinese ICBM submarine in North Atlantic able to destroy Eastren Americans cities
The real 094 Chinese submarine threat
Afrocentric view
As the world and black communities remained emotionally transfixed in the after math of the daily reports of the cleanup of the New Orleans disaster, a year old underwater nuclear submarine cold war battle is raging over the United States military build up on Guam between the Chinese and American nuclear submarines that would make the film the “Hunt for Red October” look all to real and immediate.
There is a major change in the balance of power in the Pacific and a political paradigm shift caused by the long awaited emergence of the U.S. lead Asia missile defense shield and China’s new nuclear force. The Communist government of China is quietly increasing the total numbers of ICBMs and other nuclear missiles in order to try and maintain a nuclear retaliatory capability and credible minimal deterrent to Russia and the growing U.S. build up in Asia.
No one knows the planned number of new Chinese ICBMs and other nuclear missiles necessary to penetrate the shield. This strategic uncertainty is very dangerous. This is a clinical case of nuclear chicken, once played by the U.S. and Russia.
Calculus at ground zero
To overwhelm the ABM system; China is using a number of ICBM launch options, land (fixed and mobile) air and sea (surface and submarines). The sea platform option offer the best potential force survival and is the primary focus of this brief. As of this writing, China has two sea launch platforms, with the potential to launch three ICBM. There is a lot of disinformation about the Xia nuclear submarine being used as a cruise-armed attack submarine, but it was built to fire 12 ICBMs.
The scenario simulations are endless, but the calculus for the 094 missile submarine just launch at ground zero is very terrifying. Each Chinese 094-missile boat carries 16 ICBMs, which break up into six or more micro nuclear missiles. One launch can target 96 targets(16 x 6). One launch from a new Chinese 094 nuclear submarine is over three time the total amount ICBM missiles officially listed active in China today. Every major city on the Eastern United States and Europe could be destroyed by one launch, from one Chinese 094 missile boat on station in the North Atlantic. Western civilization as we now it could be reduced to the Stone Age.
The economic problem for producing the 094 is the fact that in order to leverage China’s massive economic of scale, the most aggressive Chinese 094-missile boat option would have to construct of 10-12 boats. In reality, only three boats would optional be on active station at any time to launch 38 missiles targeting 152 cities. This logic establishes the new paradigm and base line for Chinese nuclear planners are trying to create. The 094 has being on paper and in trails for years. So why the worry now. The 094 Chinese team added a French/German element.
Last summer the Financial Times of London in a major editorial said of the massing of seven U.S. carrier groups off eastern China, there is an increase possibility of a military miss-step over Taiwan. The strategic uncertainty is very much like the 1962 Cuban missile crisis. According to many accounts, Washington is not creating the necessary formal channels to communicate its missile defense interest to the Chinese. In my own opinion, the post Powell era, Bush Eurocentric ICBM policy team with super power arrogance refuses to respect the Chinese right to be a serious ICBM threat and as such are not taking the Chinese serious as a nuclear power. This is the same type of channel thinking that led Soviets super power mentality to miss read President John F. Kennedy’s will on the ICBM issue. Every Chinese submarine, particularly the missile boats that hit the water increases American uncertainty and challenges this misplaced arrogance. Every component added to the missile defense system adds to the Chinese uncertainty.
The findings of the President’s Independent Task Force on Chinese Military Power report and the established U.S. China threat doctrine has been shattered by the new Bush confrontational ICBM policy and new Chinese naval deployments. On October 13, 2004, a refitted Han class Chinese nuclear submarine, armed possibility with nuclear head cruise missiles, sailed some times undetected well westward of the forward U.S. nuclear submariner and air force military fortress on the island of Guam. The Han mission followed the July 2004 launch of the first of an unknown number of Chinese 094 nuclear ICBM submariner able to reach every city in North America and Western Europe.
The Han’s mission established a new Pear harbor forward operational range for Chinese attack submarines. The new multi billion ABM system appears to have failed to keep a lock on the Han submarine. Also, the mission appears to mark an aggressive change in China strategic use of nuclear-armed attack submarines. A total of 16-20 nuclear-armed Chinese submarines are planned to be deployed in the next few years, separate and part from the 094 missile boats. These additional Chinese attack submariners will overwhelm the U.S. navy’s logistical infrastructure.
American arrogance and short sightlessness.
The primary concern in Washington is not the hundreds of Asian cities already within the Chinese nuclear footprints of both nuclear-armed cruise missiles and ICBMs. U.S. concerns are said to over focus on the fact China 094 ICBM program potentially goes way beyond what the Bush planning group psychologically feels China’s needs for a credible deterrent. This American arrogant is viewed as being very dangerous and short sighted. While Russia deterrent is 2,000 ICBM missiles, down from 6,000, China only has is old and aging at 23 ICBM’s. The bankrupt rouge state of the Ukraine, with a real GNP of less than one mouth of China/US trade, has twice as many ICBM delivery vehicles as the Chinese.
The new U.S. Chinese missile projected paper numbers are 75-100 land –based ICBM’s. Using multiple warheads (MIRVs) and a factor of 6, 100 Chinese ICBMs could target 600 western cities and military infrastructure. Right now, China can target less 92 cities. Nothing is being said in Washington about a workable sea-based Chinese ICBM number, but 32 missiles or two 094-missile boats appear to be negotiable starting point with the Washington military think tanks.
There are growing concerns in North America that if China believes that a missile defense system gives the U.S. a large military advantage China may escalation to the point of a preemptively 1967 Israeli like attack on Taiwan or other targets before the missile defense system is in place.
If China feels significantly threatened, China may move to a “limited nuclear deterrence strategic doctrine”, much like Israeli, in which its missile deterrence would give China options to respond to any kind of attack.
As stated above, 10 boats and 160 launches and 960 cities. According to some reports from the Stimson Center, the Chinese are wary of not being drawn into a arm race with the U.S., but if necessary their military industrial economy could easy manufacture a 1,000 ICBMs. The strategic problem for the Chinese is not manufacturing ICBMs, but it how to best protect them.
The 094 submarine platform are China’s best option. While nuclear submariners are much more expensive, they are almost undetectable and would offer a total number of missiles eight time the total existing ICBM fleet. Using modular construction and mission critical European components and plus and play sub-assemblies, the 094 program cost would cost 7-10 billion over the construction of 12 boats. The first political pause in China’s 094 deployments maybe be after the first three boats, but may not come until the after the second full production cycle of six boats. The 2008 ABM system should be in place by the second cycle of 094 starts. The role of Europe arms and sub-assemblies will impact most on the early phase of 094 boat constructions.
China new strategic intention
The Han’s submarines events and the planned launch of more ICBM submariners this year, has fuel a new national debate in Washington on Chinese naval power and strategic intention. There is a major new national debate and disinformation campaign in Washington centering on the strategic intention and political consequences of the Chinese 094 sea-based ICBM program and its effects on the emerging ABM (Anti Ballistic Missile) system under construction. With the planned launches of two more 094 submarines between 2005 and three more by 2010 China will be able to maintain a permanent on station threat of 128 multiple warheads (MIRVs) in two locations some where first in the Pacific, India and final Atlantic Oceans. Given the ocean’s topography, detection and destruction of the Chinese missile boast will be difficult.
The critical questions being debated by military analysts around the world is how many missile boats will China actually build and deploy, in what time frame and for what reasons.
The other critical question under debate is whether China is moving to a first strike potential and posture. Using a manufacturing application of the Deng Xiaoping’s strategy, China is trying to hid its industrial capacity to build and assemble 094 missile boats and other submarines.
Better understanding the French and German participation is key to this question. Ending the European Arms embargo will shorten the time to sea of many Chinese naval projects. Finally, there are growing concerns about proliferation of the 094.
Missing from the U.S. national debate is the roles played by dual-use U.S. multinationals operating in China.
It’s a open secret that 80 per cent of China advanced manufacturing is controlled by foreign multinationals.
Many of the weapon system threading the 7th fleet are U.S. components and sub-assemblies exported to Chinese arms manufactures for final assemble.
As stated above, On October 13, 2004, a refitted Han class Chinese nuclear submarine, armed possibility with nuclear head cruise missiles, sailed well westward of the forward U.S. nuclear submariner and air force military fortress on the island of Guam. The Han followed the July 2004 launch of the first Chinese 094 nuclear ICBM submariner able to reach every city in North America and Western Europe. Reportedly, a first there were problems tracking the submarine movements. This marks a major secondary weakness in the ABM system. The concern in Washington was so great; a map showing the Han mission was leaked to the press. The French engineers to reduce detectability and add stealth to the Han submarines reportedly put in a French nuclear reactor.
While Russia deterrent is 2,000 ICBM missiles, China is increasing from 23 ICBM’s.
The number talked about most are 75-100 land –based ICBM’s. Nothing is being said about a sea-based number, but 32 missiles appear to be negotiable with the U.S. There are growing concerns that if China believes that a missile defense system gives the U.S. a large military advantage China may escalation to the point of a preemptively 1967 Israeli like attack on Taiwan before the missile defense system is in place. If China feel significantly threatened, China may move to a “limited nuclear deterrence strategic doctrine, much like Israeli, in which its missile deterrence would give China options to respond to any kind of attack.
The first pause in China’s 094 deployments maybe be after the first three boats, but may not come until the after the second full production or refitting cycle of six boats. The Chinese would then see what the actual ABM system looks like and configure their next cycle of deployment of ICBM and missile boats. The role of Europe arms exporters and sub-assemblies will impact on the early phase of 094 constructions. I personally think Chinese will not stop construction until they have a station present in the northern Atlantic Ocean near Venezuela. That allows China the maximization of thinning out of the U.S. submarine fleets. Also all of Europe comes in range of Chinese ICBMs
China new strategic intention
The Han’s submarine events and the planned launch of more ICBM submariners this year, has fuel a new national debate on Chinese naval power. There is a major new national debate and disinformation campaign in Washington centering on the strategic intention and political consequences of the Chinese 094 sea-based ICBM program and its effects on the emerging ABM (Anti Ballistic Missile) system under construction. So far Washington-based Chinese lobby has been able to focus the debate away from it interests. With the planned launches of two more 094 submarines between 2005 and three more by 2010 China will be able to maintain a permanent on station threat of 128 multiple warheads (MIRVs) in two locations.
The critical question being debated by military analysts around the world is how many missile boats will China actually deploy, in what time frame and for what reasons.
The other critical question under debate is whether China is moving to a first strike potential and posture. Using a manufacturing application of the Deng Xiaoping’s strategy, China is trying to hid its industrial capacity to build 094 submarines. Ending the European Arms embargo will shorten the time to sea of many Chinese projects. Finally, there are growing concerns about proliferation and export of the 094 missile boats.
The hard facts
What is known today, is that one 094 submarine is in the water and two more are almost ready to be pushed in the water. And three to six more are in the pipeline. The scenario simulations are endless, but the calculus at ground zero is the same. The bottom line is every 094-missile submarine launched can hit 64 multiple warheads (MIRVs) more targets in North America or Europe. This reduces the effectiveness of the planned ABM system. There is a window of opportunity of three to four years in which the Chinese are trying to build massive numbers submarines. As stated above, the scenario simulations are endless. The U.S. led ABM systems is under construction and will to be completed in 2008.
The saturation point is a secret, but will have to change based on Chinese ICBM deployments.
The ABM system has system integration gaps and the U.S. led political alliance appears to be weak and leaking, particularly in central Asia.
Targeted future ABM countries like the Ukraine are still allowing China to buy submarines and missiles.
The ABM alliance needs political dollars, to buy time for the ABM construction. The downsized 7th fleet alone cannot hope to contain the 094 programs or Chinese submarine threat. As stated above, the European participation is a determinable factor in the rapid development Chinese submarine program and also the ABM system. The U.S. is pushing Taiwan freedom as a political diversion from the far more important Chinese deployment of 094 nuclear missile submarines. Beyond psychological warfare on the American people, the 094 missile submarines have nothing to do with Taiwan.
Before Secretary Powell left office, there was a lot of public aired debate about allowing (giving) Japan and South Korea the nuclear option, in one scenario, independent of the U.S. The other scenario logic was cost-based, using the NATO model. These options are only effective for near-term Chinese containment and do not address the central issue of the ABM system. The first three 094 submarine allow ICBM launches near China directed at the U.S. homeland. The second three 094 submarines allow station launches east of Pearl Harbor would not be effected by ABM system. The third group of 094 allows for station launches in the Atlantic Ocean reaching into east central Europe and Russia. Chinese forward submarine stations in Iran, Sudan, Cuba and Venezuela would become the Chinese equivalent to the U.S. base Guam. It’s a hard political sale, but President Bush may be forced to do a thing for a thing with Venezuela or Cuba exchange for oil rich Iran. China projection of naval power in the Indian and Atlantic Oceans will render the multi billion dollar ABM affords useless.
Massive show of impotence
NATO and the U.S. made a massive show of naval force off the coastline of China, reportedly to warn Beijing against using force toward Taiwan, flowing the July 2004 launch of the first Chinese submariner able to reach every city in North America and Western Europe. In fact the show of naval force was really to minimize the political shock wavers caused by the launch of the new Chinese 094 ICBM nuclear submariner in Asia. Then Secretary of State Powell was very clear to the Taiwan government that the U.S. remains committed to the one China policy. But, Taiwan should try to break away from China. The seven U.S. aircraft carrier strike groups, or CSG’s was brought to intimidate the 400 million people of the eastern industrial heartland cities of China. This act of aggression was the U.S. 'Hunt for Red October’ simulated war games against the 094 ICBM submarine and its ASCM (submariner launched cruise missile) support submarine force. This was the first time in U.S. naval history that seven of the navy’s 12 CSGs were sent to the coast of one nation. A secondary aspect of the war games was to try and shore up the weak Asia ABM alliance.
ICBM Survivability
More ominous is the fact that the missile submariner (type 094) is already launched and in sea trails. The 094 program has been reportedly overhauled with French and German assistance, and is designed to rapidly build a functional SSBN submariner force five to six stealth boats. This is the most critical aspect of the new Chinese submarine threat, because they will be undetectable to U.S. navy. The multiple deployments of 094 boats will necessitate massive deployment of submarine led anti-submarine hurter wolf packs to monitor the 094 threat.
Given the size of the Pacific Ocean and its mountain ranges, this will not be an easy task.
This will force the U.S. navy to redeployment major Atlantic Ocean assets to this defection and tacking task. The sea-based ICBM gives China a better survivability option, against an U.S. first strike.
The other ASCM and non-nuclear submariners coming on line will surround and protect this SSBN core. This nuclear submarine shell game of finding the 094 ICBM missile submarines is the nightmare scenario the U.S. and Japan are working against.
The speed of the deployment is throwing the Asian ABM afford off balance. The ASCM nuclear threat is a coercive instrument used to intimidate, the SSBN is strategic terror.
Afrocentric view
As the world and black communities remained emotionally transfixed in the after math of the daily reports of the cleanup of the New Orleans disaster, a year old underwater nuclear submarine cold war battle is raging over the United States military build up on Guam between the Chinese and American nuclear submarines that would make the film the “Hunt for Red October” look all to real and immediate.
There is a major change in the balance of power in the Pacific and a political paradigm shift caused by the long awaited emergence of the U.S. lead Asia missile defense shield and China’s new nuclear force. The Communist government of China is quietly increasing the total numbers of ICBMs and other nuclear missiles in order to try and maintain a nuclear retaliatory capability and credible minimal deterrent to Russia and the growing U.S. build up in Asia.
No one knows the planned number of new Chinese ICBMs and other nuclear missiles necessary to penetrate the shield. This strategic uncertainty is very dangerous. This is a clinical case of nuclear chicken, once played by the U.S. and Russia.
Calculus at ground zero
To overwhelm the ABM system; China is using a number of ICBM launch options, land (fixed and mobile) air and sea (surface and submarines). The sea platform option offer the best potential force survival and is the primary focus of this brief. As of this writing, China has two sea launch platforms, with the potential to launch three ICBM. There is a lot of disinformation about the Xia nuclear submarine being used as a cruise-armed attack submarine, but it was built to fire 12 ICBMs.
The scenario simulations are endless, but the calculus for the 094 missile submarine just launch at ground zero is very terrifying. Each Chinese 094-missile boat carries 16 ICBMs, which break up into six or more micro nuclear missiles. One launch can target 96 targets(16 x 6). One launch from a new Chinese 094 nuclear submarine is over three time the total amount ICBM missiles officially listed active in China today. Every major city on the Eastern United States and Europe could be destroyed by one launch, from one Chinese 094 missile boat on station in the North Atlantic. Western civilization as we now it could be reduced to the Stone Age.
The economic problem for producing the 094 is the fact that in order to leverage China’s massive economic of scale, the most aggressive Chinese 094-missile boat option would have to construct of 10-12 boats. In reality, only three boats would optional be on active station at any time to launch 38 missiles targeting 152 cities. This logic establishes the new paradigm and base line for Chinese nuclear planners are trying to create. The 094 has being on paper and in trails for years. So why the worry now. The 094 Chinese team added a French/German element.
Last summer the Financial Times of London in a major editorial said of the massing of seven U.S. carrier groups off eastern China, there is an increase possibility of a military miss-step over Taiwan. The strategic uncertainty is very much like the 1962 Cuban missile crisis. According to many accounts, Washington is not creating the necessary formal channels to communicate its missile defense interest to the Chinese. In my own opinion, the post Powell era, Bush Eurocentric ICBM policy team with super power arrogance refuses to respect the Chinese right to be a serious ICBM threat and as such are not taking the Chinese serious as a nuclear power. This is the same type of channel thinking that led Soviets super power mentality to miss read President John F. Kennedy’s will on the ICBM issue. Every Chinese submarine, particularly the missile boats that hit the water increases American uncertainty and challenges this misplaced arrogance. Every component added to the missile defense system adds to the Chinese uncertainty.
The findings of the President’s Independent Task Force on Chinese Military Power report and the established U.S. China threat doctrine has been shattered by the new Bush confrontational ICBM policy and new Chinese naval deployments. On October 13, 2004, a refitted Han class Chinese nuclear submarine, armed possibility with nuclear head cruise missiles, sailed some times undetected well westward of the forward U.S. nuclear submariner and air force military fortress on the island of Guam. The Han mission followed the July 2004 launch of the first of an unknown number of Chinese 094 nuclear ICBM submariner able to reach every city in North America and Western Europe.
The Han’s mission established a new Pear harbor forward operational range for Chinese attack submarines. The new multi billion ABM system appears to have failed to keep a lock on the Han submarine. Also, the mission appears to mark an aggressive change in China strategic use of nuclear-armed attack submarines. A total of 16-20 nuclear-armed Chinese submarines are planned to be deployed in the next few years, separate and part from the 094 missile boats. These additional Chinese attack submariners will overwhelm the U.S. navy’s logistical infrastructure.
American arrogance and short sightlessness.
The primary concern in Washington is not the hundreds of Asian cities already within the Chinese nuclear footprints of both nuclear-armed cruise missiles and ICBMs. U.S. concerns are said to over focus on the fact China 094 ICBM program potentially goes way beyond what the Bush planning group psychologically feels China’s needs for a credible deterrent. This American arrogant is viewed as being very dangerous and short sighted. While Russia deterrent is 2,000 ICBM missiles, down from 6,000, China only has is old and aging at 23 ICBM’s. The bankrupt rouge state of the Ukraine, with a real GNP of less than one mouth of China/US trade, has twice as many ICBM delivery vehicles as the Chinese.
The new U.S. Chinese missile projected paper numbers are 75-100 land –based ICBM’s. Using multiple warheads (MIRVs) and a factor of 6, 100 Chinese ICBMs could target 600 western cities and military infrastructure. Right now, China can target less 92 cities. Nothing is being said in Washington about a workable sea-based Chinese ICBM number, but 32 missiles or two 094-missile boats appear to be negotiable starting point with the Washington military think tanks.
There are growing concerns in North America that if China believes that a missile defense system gives the U.S. a large military advantage China may escalation to the point of a preemptively 1967 Israeli like attack on Taiwan or other targets before the missile defense system is in place.
If China feels significantly threatened, China may move to a “limited nuclear deterrence strategic doctrine”, much like Israeli, in which its missile deterrence would give China options to respond to any kind of attack.
As stated above, 10 boats and 160 launches and 960 cities. According to some reports from the Stimson Center, the Chinese are wary of not being drawn into a arm race with the U.S., but if necessary their military industrial economy could easy manufacture a 1,000 ICBMs. The strategic problem for the Chinese is not manufacturing ICBMs, but it how to best protect them.
The 094 submarine platform are China’s best option. While nuclear submariners are much more expensive, they are almost undetectable and would offer a total number of missiles eight time the total existing ICBM fleet. Using modular construction and mission critical European components and plus and play sub-assemblies, the 094 program cost would cost 7-10 billion over the construction of 12 boats. The first political pause in China’s 094 deployments maybe be after the first three boats, but may not come until the after the second full production cycle of six boats. The 2008 ABM system should be in place by the second cycle of 094 starts. The role of Europe arms and sub-assemblies will impact most on the early phase of 094 boat constructions.
China new strategic intention
The Han’s submarines events and the planned launch of more ICBM submariners this year, has fuel a new national debate in Washington on Chinese naval power and strategic intention. There is a major new national debate and disinformation campaign in Washington centering on the strategic intention and political consequences of the Chinese 094 sea-based ICBM program and its effects on the emerging ABM (Anti Ballistic Missile) system under construction. With the planned launches of two more 094 submarines between 2005 and three more by 2010 China will be able to maintain a permanent on station threat of 128 multiple warheads (MIRVs) in two locations some where first in the Pacific, India and final Atlantic Oceans. Given the ocean’s topography, detection and destruction of the Chinese missile boast will be difficult.
The critical questions being debated by military analysts around the world is how many missile boats will China actually build and deploy, in what time frame and for what reasons.
The other critical question under debate is whether China is moving to a first strike potential and posture. Using a manufacturing application of the Deng Xiaoping’s strategy, China is trying to hid its industrial capacity to build and assemble 094 missile boats and other submarines.
Better understanding the French and German participation is key to this question. Ending the European Arms embargo will shorten the time to sea of many Chinese naval projects. Finally, there are growing concerns about proliferation of the 094.
Missing from the U.S. national debate is the roles played by dual-use U.S. multinationals operating in China.
It’s a open secret that 80 per cent of China advanced manufacturing is controlled by foreign multinationals.
Many of the weapon system threading the 7th fleet are U.S. components and sub-assemblies exported to Chinese arms manufactures for final assemble.
As stated above, On October 13, 2004, a refitted Han class Chinese nuclear submarine, armed possibility with nuclear head cruise missiles, sailed well westward of the forward U.S. nuclear submariner and air force military fortress on the island of Guam. The Han followed the July 2004 launch of the first Chinese 094 nuclear ICBM submariner able to reach every city in North America and Western Europe. Reportedly, a first there were problems tracking the submarine movements. This marks a major secondary weakness in the ABM system. The concern in Washington was so great; a map showing the Han mission was leaked to the press. The French engineers to reduce detectability and add stealth to the Han submarines reportedly put in a French nuclear reactor.
While Russia deterrent is 2,000 ICBM missiles, China is increasing from 23 ICBM’s.
The number talked about most are 75-100 land –based ICBM’s. Nothing is being said about a sea-based number, but 32 missiles appear to be negotiable with the U.S. There are growing concerns that if China believes that a missile defense system gives the U.S. a large military advantage China may escalation to the point of a preemptively 1967 Israeli like attack on Taiwan before the missile defense system is in place. If China feel significantly threatened, China may move to a “limited nuclear deterrence strategic doctrine, much like Israeli, in which its missile deterrence would give China options to respond to any kind of attack.
The first pause in China’s 094 deployments maybe be after the first three boats, but may not come until the after the second full production or refitting cycle of six boats. The Chinese would then see what the actual ABM system looks like and configure their next cycle of deployment of ICBM and missile boats. The role of Europe arms exporters and sub-assemblies will impact on the early phase of 094 constructions. I personally think Chinese will not stop construction until they have a station present in the northern Atlantic Ocean near Venezuela. That allows China the maximization of thinning out of the U.S. submarine fleets. Also all of Europe comes in range of Chinese ICBMs
China new strategic intention
The Han’s submarine events and the planned launch of more ICBM submariners this year, has fuel a new national debate on Chinese naval power. There is a major new national debate and disinformation campaign in Washington centering on the strategic intention and political consequences of the Chinese 094 sea-based ICBM program and its effects on the emerging ABM (Anti Ballistic Missile) system under construction. So far Washington-based Chinese lobby has been able to focus the debate away from it interests. With the planned launches of two more 094 submarines between 2005 and three more by 2010 China will be able to maintain a permanent on station threat of 128 multiple warheads (MIRVs) in two locations.
The critical question being debated by military analysts around the world is how many missile boats will China actually deploy, in what time frame and for what reasons.
The other critical question under debate is whether China is moving to a first strike potential and posture. Using a manufacturing application of the Deng Xiaoping’s strategy, China is trying to hid its industrial capacity to build 094 submarines. Ending the European Arms embargo will shorten the time to sea of many Chinese projects. Finally, there are growing concerns about proliferation and export of the 094 missile boats.
The hard facts
What is known today, is that one 094 submarine is in the water and two more are almost ready to be pushed in the water. And three to six more are in the pipeline. The scenario simulations are endless, but the calculus at ground zero is the same. The bottom line is every 094-missile submarine launched can hit 64 multiple warheads (MIRVs) more targets in North America or Europe. This reduces the effectiveness of the planned ABM system. There is a window of opportunity of three to four years in which the Chinese are trying to build massive numbers submarines. As stated above, the scenario simulations are endless. The U.S. led ABM systems is under construction and will to be completed in 2008.
The saturation point is a secret, but will have to change based on Chinese ICBM deployments.
The ABM system has system integration gaps and the U.S. led political alliance appears to be weak and leaking, particularly in central Asia.
Targeted future ABM countries like the Ukraine are still allowing China to buy submarines and missiles.
The ABM alliance needs political dollars, to buy time for the ABM construction. The downsized 7th fleet alone cannot hope to contain the 094 programs or Chinese submarine threat. As stated above, the European participation is a determinable factor in the rapid development Chinese submarine program and also the ABM system. The U.S. is pushing Taiwan freedom as a political diversion from the far more important Chinese deployment of 094 nuclear missile submarines. Beyond psychological warfare on the American people, the 094 missile submarines have nothing to do with Taiwan.
Before Secretary Powell left office, there was a lot of public aired debate about allowing (giving) Japan and South Korea the nuclear option, in one scenario, independent of the U.S. The other scenario logic was cost-based, using the NATO model. These options are only effective for near-term Chinese containment and do not address the central issue of the ABM system. The first three 094 submarine allow ICBM launches near China directed at the U.S. homeland. The second three 094 submarines allow station launches east of Pearl Harbor would not be effected by ABM system. The third group of 094 allows for station launches in the Atlantic Ocean reaching into east central Europe and Russia. Chinese forward submarine stations in Iran, Sudan, Cuba and Venezuela would become the Chinese equivalent to the U.S. base Guam. It’s a hard political sale, but President Bush may be forced to do a thing for a thing with Venezuela or Cuba exchange for oil rich Iran. China projection of naval power in the Indian and Atlantic Oceans will render the multi billion dollar ABM affords useless.
Massive show of impotence
NATO and the U.S. made a massive show of naval force off the coastline of China, reportedly to warn Beijing against using force toward Taiwan, flowing the July 2004 launch of the first Chinese submariner able to reach every city in North America and Western Europe. In fact the show of naval force was really to minimize the political shock wavers caused by the launch of the new Chinese 094 ICBM nuclear submariner in Asia. Then Secretary of State Powell was very clear to the Taiwan government that the U.S. remains committed to the one China policy. But, Taiwan should try to break away from China. The seven U.S. aircraft carrier strike groups, or CSG’s was brought to intimidate the 400 million people of the eastern industrial heartland cities of China. This act of aggression was the U.S. 'Hunt for Red October’ simulated war games against the 094 ICBM submarine and its ASCM (submariner launched cruise missile) support submarine force. This was the first time in U.S. naval history that seven of the navy’s 12 CSGs were sent to the coast of one nation. A secondary aspect of the war games was to try and shore up the weak Asia ABM alliance.
ICBM Survivability
More ominous is the fact that the missile submariner (type 094) is already launched and in sea trails. The 094 program has been reportedly overhauled with French and German assistance, and is designed to rapidly build a functional SSBN submariner force five to six stealth boats. This is the most critical aspect of the new Chinese submarine threat, because they will be undetectable to U.S. navy. The multiple deployments of 094 boats will necessitate massive deployment of submarine led anti-submarine hurter wolf packs to monitor the 094 threat.
Given the size of the Pacific Ocean and its mountain ranges, this will not be an easy task.
This will force the U.S. navy to redeployment major Atlantic Ocean assets to this defection and tacking task. The sea-based ICBM gives China a better survivability option, against an U.S. first strike.
The other ASCM and non-nuclear submariners coming on line will surround and protect this SSBN core. This nuclear submarine shell game of finding the 094 ICBM missile submarines is the nightmare scenario the U.S. and Japan are working against.
The speed of the deployment is throwing the Asian ABM afford off balance. The ASCM nuclear threat is a coercive instrument used to intimidate, the SSBN is strategic terror.
posted by Nubianobserver at 4:11 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home