Asia is sliding into a dangerous arms race as smaller nations that once stayed on the sidelines build arsenals of advanced long-range missiles, following in the footsteps of powerhouses China and the US, analysts say.
China is mass producing its DF-26, a multipurpose weapon with a range of up to 4,000km — while the US is developing new weapons aimed at countering Beijing in the Pacific.
Other countries in the region are buying or developing their own new missiles, driven by security concerns over China and a desire to reduce their reliance on the US.
Photo: Reuters
Before the decade is out, Asia will be bristling with conventional missiles that fly farther and faster, hit harder and are more sophisticated than ever before — a stark and dangerous change from recent years, analysts, diplomats and military officials say.
“The missile landscape is changing in Asia, and it’s changing fast,” said David Santoro, president of the Pacific Forum.
Such weapons are increasingly affordable and accurate, and as some countries acquire them, their neighbors don’t want to be left behind, analysts said. Missiles provide strategic benefits such as deterring enemies and boosting leverage with allies, and can be a lucrative export.
Photo: Reuters
The long-term implications are uncertain, and there is a slim chance that the new weapons could balance tensions and help maintain peace, Santoro said.
“More likely is that missile proliferation will fuel suspicions, trigger arms races, increase tensions, and ultimately cause crises and even wars,” he said.
HOMEGROWN MISSILES
Photo: Reuters
According to unreleased 2021 military briefing documents, US Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) plans to deploy its new long-range weapons in “highly survivable, precision-strike networks along the First Island Chain,” which includes Japan, Taiwan and other Pacific islands ringing the east coasts of China and Russia.
The new weapons include the Long-range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW), a missile that can deliver a highly maneuverable warhead at more than five times the speed of sound to targets more than 2,775km away.
An INDOPACOM spokesman said that no decisions had been made as to where to deploy these weapons. So far, most American allies in the region have been hesitant to commit to hosting them. If based in Guam, a US territory, the LRHW would be unable to hit mainland China.
Photo: Reuters
Japan, home to more than 54,000 US troops, could host some of the new missile batteries on its Okinawan islands, but the US would probably have to withdraw other forces, a source familiar with Japanese government thinking said, speaking anonymously because of the sensitivity of the issue.
Allowing in American missiles — which the US military will control — will also most likely bring an angry response from China, analysts said.
Some of America’s allies are developing their own arsenals. Australia recently announced it would spend US$100 billion over 20 years developing advanced missiles.
“COVID and China have shown that depending on such extended global supply chains in times of crisis for key items — and in war, that includes advanced missiles — is a mistake, so it is sensible strategic thinking to have production capacity in Australia,” said Michael Shoebridge of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute.
Japan has spent millions on long range air-launched weapons, and is developing a new version of a truck-mounted anti-ship missile, the Type 12, with an expected range of 1,000km.
Among US allies, South Korea fields the most robust domestic ballistic missile program, which got a boost from a recent agreement with Washington to drop bilateral limits on its capabilities. Its Hyunmoo-4 has an 800km range, giving it a reach well inside China.
“When the US allies’ conventional long-range-strike capabilities grow, the chances of their employment in the event of a regional conflict also increase,” Zhao Tong, a strategic security expert in Beijing, wrote in a recent report.
Despite the concerns, Washington “will continue to encourage its allies and partners to invest in defense capabilities that are compatible with coordinated operations,” US Representative Mike Rogers, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, said.
BLURRED LINES
Taiwan has not publicly announced a ballistic missile program, but in December the US State Department approved its request to buy dozens of American short-range ballistic missiles. Officials say Taipei is mass producing weapons and developing cruise missiles such as the Yun Feng, which could strike as far as Beijing.
All this is aimed at “making the spines of [Taiwan’s] porcupine longer as the abilities of China’s military improve,” Wang Ting-yu (王定宇), a senior lawmaker from the ruling Democratic Progressive Party, said, while insisting that the island’s missiles were not meant to strike deep in China.
One diplomatic source in Taipei said Taiwan’s armed forces, traditionally focused on defending the island and warding off a Chinese invasion, are beginning to look more offensive.
“The line between defensive and offensive nature of the weapons is getting thinner and thinner,” the diplomat added.
South Korea has been in a heated missile race with North Korea. The North recently tested what appeared to be an improved version of its proven KN-23 missile with a 2.5-ton warhead that analysts say is aimed at besting the 2-ton warhead on the Hyunmoo-4.
“While North Korea still appears to be the primary driver behind South Korea’s missile expansion, Seoul is pursuing systems with ranges beyond what is necessary to counter North Korea,” said Kelsey Davenport, director for nonproliferation policy at the Arms Control Association in Washington.
As proliferation accelerates, analysts say the most worrisome missiles are those that can carry either conventional or nuclear warheads. China, North Korea and the US all field such weapons.
“It is difficult, if not impossible, to determine if a ballistic missile is armed with a conventional or nuclear warhead until it reaches the target,” Davenport said. As the number of such weapons increases, “there is an increased risk of inadvertent escalation to a nuclear strike.”
June 2 to June 8 Taiwan’s woodcutters believe that if they see even one speck of red in their cooked rice, no matter how small, an accident is going to happen. Peng Chin-tian (彭錦田) swears that this has proven to be true at every stop during his decades-long career in the logging industry. Along with mining, timber harvesting was once considered the most dangerous profession in Taiwan. Not only were mishaps common during all stages of processing, it was difficult to transport the injured to get medical treatment. Many died during the arduous journey. Peng recounts some of his accidents in
A short walk beneath the dense Amazon canopy, the forest abruptly opens up. Fallen logs are rotting, the trees grow sparser and the temperature rises in places sunlight hits the ground. This is what 24 years of severe drought looks like in the world’s largest rainforest. But this patch of degraded forest, about the size of a soccer field, is a scientific experiment. Launched in 2000 by Brazilian and British scientists, Esecaflor — short for “Forest Drought Study Project” in Portuguese — set out to simulate a future in which the changing climate could deplete the Amazon of rainfall. It is
“Why does Taiwan identity decline?”a group of researchers lead by University of Nevada political scientist Austin Wang (王宏恩) asked in a recent paper. After all, it is not difficult to explain the rise in Taiwanese identity after the early 1990s. But no model predicted its decline during the 2016-2018 period, they say. After testing various alternative explanations, Wang et al argue that the fall-off in Taiwanese identity during that period is related to voter hedging based on the performance of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). Since the DPP is perceived as the guardian of Taiwan identity, when it performs well,
What does the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) in the Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) era stand for? What sets it apart from their allies, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)? With some shifts in tone and emphasis, the KMT’s stances have not changed significantly since the late 2000s and the era of former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九). The Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) current platform formed in the mid-2010s under the guidance of Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), and current President William Lai (賴清德) campaigned on continuity. Though their ideological stances may be a bit stale, they have the advantage of being broadly understood by the voters.
RSS