China accuses US of 'Cold War mentality' over nuclear policy

[Teh One Who Knocks]

By Christopher Carbone | Fox News



The Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine USS Tennessee returns to Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay. A critical element of U.S. nuclear deterrence, it is reaching the
end of it's useful life after 33 years in service. (Reuters)

China decried the U.S. for its “Cold War mentality” on Sunday after Washington announced last week that it plans to diversify its nuclear arsenal with smaller bombs.

The U.S. military believes its nukes are seen as too large to be used and wants to develop low-yield bombs—a move that has prompted condemnation from China, Iran and Russia.

“The country that owns the world's largest nuclear arsenal, should take the initiative to follow the trend instead of going against it," China's defense ministry said on Sunday, reports BBC.

China said it “firmly” opposed the Pentagon’s nuclear policy review.

On Twitter, Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif also lashed out.

“The US Nuclear Posture Review reflects greater reliance on nukes in violation of the #NPT, bringing humankind closer to annihilation,” Zarif said on the social network.

Russia's foreign minister called the move "confrontational" and expressed "deep disappointment."

However, America is concerned that its arsenal won’t remain an effective deterrent without being modernized. The U.S. has named China, Russia, Iran and North Korea as potential threats.

The document released on Friday by the Pentagon, known as the Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), argues that developing smaller nuclear weapons would challenge that assumption. Low-yield weapons with a strength of under 20 kilotons are less powerful but are still devastating.

The policy also recommends: Land-based ballistic missiles, submarine-launched missiles, and air-delivered weapons—to be extensively modernized, as begun under ex-President Obama. Bringing back sea-based nuclear missiles. Modifying some submarine-launched nuclear warheads to give a lower-yield detonation.

The defense ministry in Beijing said Washington had played up the threat of China's nuclear threat, adding that its own policy was defensive in nature.

“We hope that the United States will abandon its Cold War mentality, earnestly assume its special disarmament responsibilities, correctly understand China's strategic intentions and objectively view China's national defence and military build-up,” its statement said.

This isn’t the first time that China has used the Cold War label to denounce U.S. policy. Last year it said that Washington’s defense strategy tied to “outdated notions.”

In the NPR document, the U.S. accused China of "expanding its already considerable nuclear forces" but China defended its policy on Sunday saying it would "resolutely stick to peaceful development and pursue a national defence policy that is defensive in nature."

[lost in melb.]

The U.S. military believes its nukes are seen as too large to be used and wants to develop low-yield bombs—a move that has prompted condemnation from China, Iran and Russia.

[Teh One Who Knocks]

My guess would be that, the nukes still mounted on US ICBM's are large yield weapons designed back in the Cold War days for an all out war with the Soviets (and possibly the Chinese) and meant as a deterrent for MAD (mutually assured destruction). The military wants smaller yield weapons to be used tactically in localized conflicts in places like North Korea and/or Iran if necessary. Not that a smaller yield weapon will be any less dangerous, but it would keep the effects of a nuclear blast more localized.

[lost in melb.]

My guess would be that, the nukes still mounted on US ICBM's are large yield weapons designed back in the Cold War days for an all out war with the Soviets (and possibly the Chinese) and meant as a deterrent for MAD (mutually assured destruction). The military wants smaller yield weapons to be used tactically in localized conflicts in places like North Korea and/or Iran if necessary. Not that a smaller yield weapon will be any less dangerous, but it would keep the effects of a nuclear blast more localized.

I get it. It's just odd that scaling down would be seen as a threat. I imagine beefing up the kilotons would be met with resistance too. OR any 'improvement'

[DemonGeminiX]

They just don't want us acting like the head-shit-in-charge world power that we really are. They want that "market share" in the world that Obama's policies were giving them the opportunity to take.

[Muddy]

I get it. It's just odd that scaling down would be seen as a threat. I imagine beefing up the kilotons would be met with resistance too. OR any 'improvement'

Scaled down there is more chance of being used.. You cant hit the Norks without having residuals ending up in China.. Which then brings them into a conflict.

[Hal-9000]

Touching on a discussion about trying to hit asteroids with missiles, I've read that if the scenario is a bunch of nukes flying to potential targets in the US for example, that actually hitting those missiles in the air is not guaranteed, even with heat seeking and laser guidance technology. One scientist said the best we can hope for is eliminating the sites that launched the missiles and possibly hitting a few that are close to the targets.

I'm not sure how accurate this was. Maybe 20 nukes can be en route and all of them can be taken out mid-flight?