The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics.
An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency. HEMP weapons fit both criteria. In nanoseconds, a single HEMP detonation at an altitude between 20km and 50km can disable electronic infrastructure across large swathes of Taiwan. There would be little warning, as the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) fields DF-17 hypersonic missiles, capable of delivering a HEMP warhead above Taiwan in a matter of minutes.
HEMPs strike at the foundation of modern society, its electronic systems. Every critical infrastructure uses electronics, from telecommunications, hospitals, energy production and distribution facilities, and even water purification systems. In the defense sector, modern weapon systems rely on automated targeting equipment, early warning systems and digital communications as a part of an integrated kill chain, all of which are reliant on electronic components vulnerable to electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attacks. The threat HEMPs presents to society and the military prompted the late Peter Vincent Pry, once the leading US expert on the electromagnetic threat, to describe HEMPs as “civilization killers.”
This heavy reliance on electronics makes threats to power generation and distribution systems particularly acute. Pull the plug from all these systems simultaneously, and what would have been isolated disruptions become cascading failures across the nation. Taiwan’s power grid is highly centralized and therefore particularly vulnerable to such systemic disruptions. A stark warning came in March 2022, when a single human error at the Hsinta Power Plant triggered a nationwide blackout, plunging more than 5 million households into darkness. Although it was accidental, the event exposed the risks posed by single points of failure in the grid. Based on this description of HEMPs and their effects, they are an ideal weapon for the PLA informatized warfare strategy. Under this doctrine, the PLA aims to target its adversaries’ technological nodes with sudden coordinated cyber and electromagnetic attacks “to cause the enemy to be too surprised to defend,” according to a series of lectures by the PLA National Defense University. Rather than attempting to target Taiwan’s hundreds of military facilities individually, a single well-placed HEMP strike could disable most of them in one stroke.
Some China watchers might shrug off the HEMP threat as highly unlikely, pointing to China’s nuclear no-first-use policy. However, China does not view HEMPs as a nuclear weapon, despite its use of a nuclear warhead. Instead, China integrates EMP capabilities into its cyber and space warfare. The PLA’s Science of Military Strategy, one of its guiding strategic documents, dedicates an entire chapter to the “cyber-electromagnetic-space” domain. This is significant not only because it further indicates that HEMPs are viewed outside of China’s nuclear policy, but also that it is seen as a cyberweapon with space implications. Cyberweapons could be the spearhead for any major PLA operation under its informatized warfare doctrine, with the Science of Military Strategy stating that “the victory of the war begins with the victory of cyberspace.”
In coordination with other cyberoperations, HEMPs could be used by the PLA as a first strike attack option to paralyze Taiwan’s defenses, paving the way for uncontested missile strikes and amphibious assaults.
Addressing the HEMP threat would be difficult, as it lacks much attention from the public and the government. This is primarily due to a naive belief that China would not break from its no-first-use policy, which is not as strongly held as is professed. Moreover, there is an intense normalcy bias regarding EMP weapons, as there is little precedent for their use. The times that we saw these weapons in action, mainly in the Ukraine-Russia war, were limited to drone jamming devices, which are not nearly as destructive as HEMPs and other high-powered EMP weapons. Therefore, following this line of logic, due to the uncertainty over the deployment of a HEMP weapon, it only makes sense for defense planners to focus on more urgent threats from China in the form of missile strikes and amphibious assaults.
We would strongly caution against ignoring the HEMP threat, as the risk it presents to Taiwan’s society and military is so devastating that it outweighs the presumed unlikelihood of its use. As US Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Elbridge Colby said in his book The Strategy of Denial, “the perception that something is unlikely can lead to actions presuming its implausibility, which in turn can strain the rationale for its being unlikely in the first place.”
Tin Pak is a visiting academic at the National Defense University and a researcher at the Institute for National Defense and Security Research in Taipei. Chen Yu-cheng is an associate professor at the National Defense University.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
RSS