China’s powerful military is considered to be a master at concealing its intentions, but there is no secret about how it plans to destroy US aircraft carriers if rivalry becomes war.
At the biennial air show in Zhuhai in November last year, the biggest state-owned missile maker, China Aerospace Science and Industry Corp, screened an animation showing a hostile “blue force,” comprising an aircraft carrier, escort ships and strike aircraft, approaching “red force” territory.
On a giant screen, the animation showed a barrage of the Chinese company’s missiles launched from “red force” warships, submarines, shore batteries and aircraft wreaking havoc on the escort vessels around the carrier.
Illustration: Yusha
In a final salvo, two missiles plunge onto the flight deck of the carrier and a third slams into the side of the hull near the bow.
The fate of the ship is an unmistakable message to a US that has long dominated the globe from its mighty aircraft carriers and sprawling network of hundreds of bases
China’s military is now making giant strides toward replacing the US as the supreme power in Asia.
With the Pentagon distracted by almost two decades of costly war in the Middle East and Afghanistan, China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has exploited a period of sustained budget increases and rapid technical improvement to build and deploy an arsenal of advanced missiles.
Many of these missiles are specifically designed to attack the aircraft carriers and bases that form the backbone of US military dominance in the region and which for decades have protected allies, including Japan, South Korea and Taiwan.
Across almost all categories of these weapons, based on land, loaded on strike aircraft or deployed on warships and submarines, China’s missiles rival or outperform their counterparts in the armories of the US and its allies, according to current and former US military officers with knowledge of PLA test launches, Taiwanese and Chinese military analysts, and technical specifications published in China’s state-controlled media.
China has also seized a virtual monopoly in one class of conventional missiles — land-based, intermediate-range ballistic and cruise missiles.
Under the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, a Cold War-era agreement aimed at reducing the threat of nuclear conflict, the US and Russia are banned from deploying this class of missiles, with a range between 500km and 5,500km, but Beijing, unrestrained by the INF Treaty, is deploying them in massive numbers.
This includes so-called carrier killer missiles like the DF-21D, which can target aircraft carriers and other warships underway at sea at a range of up to 1,500km, according to Chinese and Western military analysts.
If effective, these missiles would give China a destructive capability no other military can boast.
China’s advantage in this class of missiles is likely to remain for the foreseeable future, despite US President Donald Trump’s decision in February to withdraw from the treaty in six months.
China is also making rapid strides in developing so-called hypersonic missiles, which can maneuver sharply and travel at five times the speed of sound (or even faster).
Currently, the US has no defenses against a missile like this, Pentagon officials said.
The Chinese Ministry of National Defense and China Aerospace Science and Industry Corp did not respond to questions from reporters about Beijing’s missile capabilities.
The US Indo-Pacific Command and the Pentagon had no comment.
China’s growing missile arsenal has not yet been proven in a real-world clash, and some Chinese officials play down their advances.
However, under the Trump administration, Washington has come to view China as a rival determined to displace the US in Asia.
THE MISSILE GAP
This modern-day missile gap, the administration believes, is emerging as one of the biggest dangers to US military supremacy in Asia since the end of the Cold War.
The Pentagon is now scrambling for new weapons and strategies to counter the PLA’s rocket arsenal.
“We know that China has the most advanced ballistic missile force in the world,” said James Fanell, a retired US Navy captain and former senior intelligence officer with the US Pacific Fleet. “They have the capacity to overwhelm the defensive systems we are pursuing.”
Fanell was sidelined by the Pentagon ahead of his 2015 retirement, after warning about the Chinese buildup at a time when then-US president Barack Obama was seeking cooperation with Beijing.
Today, Pentagon policy hews more closely to his views that China intends to displace the US as Asia’s dominant power.
Chinese military brass agree they can now keep US carriers at bay.
Six people in China interviewed by Reuters, including retired PLA officers and a person with ties to the Beijing leadership, said China’s enhanced missile capability was a great leveler and would serve to deter the US from getting too close to Chinese shores.
“We cannot defeat the United States at sea,” a retired PLA colonel said in an interview. “The United States has 11 aircraft carriers and China has just two.”
“But we have missiles that specifically target aircraft carriers to stop them from approaching our territorial waters if there were conflict,” he said.
A person with ties to the Chinese leadership who once served in the military had a similar message: “If ... aircraft carriers come too close to our coastlines in a conflict, our missiles can destroy them.”
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), who has seized direct control of the world’s largest fighting force, has played a pivotal role in the ascendancy of Chinese missile forces.
He has delivered a powerful boost to the prestige and influence of the elite unit responsible for China’s nuclear and conventional missiles, the PLA Rocket Force.
The Chinese leader has described the missile forces as a “core of strategic deterrence, a strategic buttress to the country’s position as a major power and a cornerstone on which to build national security.”
Xi has brought senior missile force veterans into his closest circle of military aides as he has consolidated his grip on the PLA with a sweeping purge of senior officers accused of corruption or disloyalty.
The Rocket Force has always enjoyed strong support from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), but under Xi, the once secretive unit, formerly known as the Second Artillery Corps, has been thrust into the limelight.
Since he took power in 2012 with a pledge to rejuvenate China as a great power, the Rocket Force’s latest nuclear and conventional missiles have played a starring role at some of the biggest military parades held in the communist era.
In one of these displays, in 2015, the designations of new missiles, including the “carrier killer” DF-21D, were painted on the sides of the projectiles in big white letters.
The bold labels were aimed directly at foreign audiences, according to Western military analysts monitoring the parade in Beijing.
At a parade in 2017 that Xi presided over to mark the 90th anniversary of the PLA, missiles were also prominently displayed.
SENDING A MESSAGE
This elaborate, choreographed showcasing of the newest and most powerful missiles has provided a backdrop for Xi as he burnishes his credentials as China’s supreme military leader.
Coverage of test launches, new warheads and technical breakthroughs dominate the state-controlled military media.
However, it is not mere theater. This concerted advertising of China’s ability to deliver long-range conventional strikes without risking aircraft, ships or casualties is a key element of PLA strategy under Xi.
Foreign military analysts say it sends a signal that China has the capacity to resist interference as it expands control over vast swathes of the South China Sea, intensifies naval and air sorties around Taiwan, and extends operations into territory it disputes with Japan in the East China Sea.
To be sure, while China’s missile fleet has indisputably grown more formidable, the reliability, accuracy and payloads of its weapons have yet to be tested in battle.
China has not fought a war since invading Vietnam in 1979.
The US arsenal of air and sea-launched missiles, by contrast, has been tried and proven repeatedly in wars over the past two decades.
It is also unknown if the PLA missile systems could survive electronic, cyber and physical attacks on launch facilities, guidance systems and command-and-control centers.
Military analysts point out that there is still some doubt about whether China has mastered the know-how that would allow a “carrier killer” ballistic missile to detect, track and hit a moving target far from the Chinese coast.
US military commanders and PLA watchers also acknowledge that there could be elements of subterfuge involved in the publicity about Chinese missiles.
Deception is traditionally a key element of Chinese military strategy.
The PLA is well aware that the US and other potential rivals would be closely monitoring their test sites, according to satellite imagery specialists.
Some retired PLA officers who spoke to Reuters played down the capability of China’s missiles.
“US missiles are superior to ours in terms of quality and quantity,” the former PLA colonel said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive topic with the foreign media.
“If we were truly more advanced than the United States,” said a Chinese military analyst, “we would have liberated Taiwan.”
Still, current and former US military officials say they are convinced from close monitoring of China’s numerous test firings that PLA missiles are a genuine threat.
THE RANGE WAR
What makes Chinese missiles so dangerous for the US and its Asian allies is that the PLA is winning the “range war,” according to Robert Haddick, a former US Marine Corps officer and now a visiting senior fellow at the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies based in Arlington, Virginia.
While the US was taking what Haddick describes as a “long holiday” from missile development in the aftermath of the Cold War, China was shooting for distance, developing missiles that can fly further than those in the armories of the US and its Asian allies.
The Pentagon has begun to publicly acknowledge that in missiles, at least, China has the upper hand.
“We are at a disadvantage with regard to China today in the sense that China has ground-based ballistic missiles that threaten our basing in the Western Pacific and our ships,” retired admiral Harry Harris, the former commander of US forces in the Pacific, said in testimony before the US Senate Armed Services Committee in March last year.
At the time, Harris explained that the US was unable to counter with similar missiles because of the 1987 INF Treaty with Russia, which banned these weapons.
The treaty constraints have left the US with no equivalent to weapons like China’s DF-26 ballistic missile, which has a range of up to 4,000km and can strike the key US base at Guam.
China says the missile has a carrier-killer variant that can hit a moving target at sea.
US bases in South Korea and Japan are within range of another PLA projectile, the CJ-10 land attack cruise missile, which has a range of about 1,500km, according to Pentagon estimates.
However, the Trump administration appears to be clearing the way for the US to compete.
On Feb. 1, Trump announced Washington would withdraw from the treaty, accusing Moscow of breaching the agreement.
He said in a statement that the US would quit in six months unless Russia returned to compliance.
Trump also said that China had more than 1,000 missiles of the range covered by the INF Treaty.
He added that the US would now develop a ground-launched conventional missile that would have been banned under the treaty.
This could help offset China’s advantage, military experts say, but it will take time, probably years, for the US to develop and deploy these weapons.
China criticized Trump’s announcement, with Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Geng Shuang (耿爽) saying the treaty was important in “safeguarding global strategic balance and stability.”
However, Geng did not mention the PLA’s own arsenal of these weapons or that China itself is not party to the pact.
He said that China opposed negotiating a new treaty that would cover other nations as well as Russia and the US.
This missile gap portends a military upheaval. Some powerful PLA anti-ship missiles now far outrange the strike aircraft deployed on US carriers.
That means US military planners are grappling with a scenario that until recently did not exist: US carriers could be obsolete in a conflict near the Chinese mainland.
If forced to operate outside the range of their aircraft when approaching China, the nuclear-powered leviathans would be far less effective.
Sail too close and they would be vulnerable.
Since the end of the Cold War, the US Navy has been able to use its carriers to bludgeon weaker enemies, approaching close enough to launch air strikes, confident that the giant warships are untouchable.
Today, in the event of conflict with China in East Asia, Pentagon planners and other regional militaries say they are wrestling with how to respond to something they have not seen since World War II: a return to highly contested warfare at sea.
For the US military, one fear is that swarms of cheap, expendable Chinese missiles have the potential to neutralize the most expensive warships ever built.
China does not publish the cost of its missiles.
A modern version of the subsonic, Cold-war vintage Harpoon, the mainstay anti-ship missile of the US and its allies, costs US$1.2 million, according to the US Navy.
Western military officials assume China’s lower manufacturing costs would mean it could build similar missiles for less.
The latest US carrier, the USS Gerald R. Ford, cost about US$13 billion to build — about 10,000 times the price of the Harpoon.
A HESITANT US
For more than half a century since the CCP took power in 1949, a vast, but technologically backward PLA was largely confined to the Asian mainland and coastal waters.
A small force of nuclear warheads aimed at deterring a first strike comprised the only serious long-range weapons in the PLA arsenal.
For most of that period, the US and other foreign navies exercised, patrolled, snooped and routinely sailed in the waters off the Chinese coast, much as they did throughout the colonial period when China was powerless to stop foreign encroachment on its territory.
The threat from China’s new missiles, along with rapidly increasing numbers of PLA Navy submarines, means warships from the US and other foreign navies now patrol hesitantly and infrequently in some key waterways close to the Chinese mainland and Taiwan, according to serving US officials and veterans of US Navy operations in Asia.
China’s rulers have never made public the number of missiles the PLA possesses, but the Communist Youth League, the youth arm of the CCP, disclosed some figures on its official Sina Weibo account in October 2016.
China’s Rocket Force boasts 100,000 men and possesses about 200 intercontinental ballistic missiles, about 300 medium-range ballistic missiles, 1,150 short-range ballistic missiles and 3,000 cruise missiles, the Youth League said.
According to US and other Western estimates, China has about 2,000 conventional missiles that would fall within the terms of the INF Treaty — enough to launch saturation attacks on air bases, ports or critical infrastructure in Japan, South Korea or Taiwan.
This is part I of a two-part story. Part II will appear in tomorrow’s edition. It is part of a continuing Reuters series “The China Challenge,” on the growing power of the Chinese military.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry