China - United States: A new bone of contention
From China's point of view, the new US disarmament strategy presented by National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan on June 2, 2023, denounces the substantial expansion of China's nuclear capabilities to justify the overhaul of US deterrence forces and further strengthen the nuclear superpower's arsenal. Further on, the summons to Beijing to take part in the new Start negotiations, a necessary condition for the USA to disarm, is an artifice that allows the Pentagon to keep its triad, while blaming China for the status quo.
On June 2, 2023, U.S. National Security Advisor Jacke Sullivan presented the new U.S. disarmament strategy at the annual meeting of The Arms Control Association. In his remarks, he urged China to come to the negotiating table, as Beijing holds the key to disarmament.
It was with great solemnity that Jacke Sullivan, presented the contents of the U.S. nuclear disarmament policy to the world. "A new two-stage strategy to prevent an arms race, reduce the risk of escalation and, above all, ensure the safety and security of the American people and people around the world in the face of nuclear threats".
- Complete modernization of the components of the nuclear triad: ICBMs, ballistic missile submarines and bombers, as well as the IC3 nuclear architecture. Better, but not more. The United States does not need to increase its nuclear forces to outstrip and deter its competitors. They are thus assured of their strengths.
- The opening, without preconditions, of bilateral discussions with Russia and China on disarmament and risk reduction. Unconditional, but not unmonitored, with a commitment to accountability. Our adversaries and competitors must respect the agreements signed1 .
The content of the agreement, and what the USA will be able to accept, will obviously depend on the scale of China's ongoing nuclear program, which finds itself placed at the center of the nuclear game. Any future US commitment to nuclear disarmament will depend on China. "We would be ready for a disarmament regime after 2026, but a key variable will be the nature of our relationship with China between now and then [...] We hope that in diplomatic discussions, (understand in the context of negotiating a new Start treaty), Beijing will be willing to engage substantially on strategic issues, which would be beneficial to the security of both our countries and that of the world as a whole."2
For Washington, much remains to be done. For years, the PRC has refused to sit down at the negotiating table and engage in a substantive arms control dialogue. It refuses to disclose the size and scope of its nuclear forces, or to provide launch notifications. Worse still, a study has shown that by 2035, the PRC will be on track to possess up to 1,500 nuclear warheads, representing one of the largest peacetime nuclear build-ups in history. When will we see transparency and forces open to inspection?
According to American columnists, it won't happen tomorrow. China has never been part of a nuclear arms agreement and has shown no sign of reducing its weapons programs. How could it be otherwise? And how could Beijing agree to open itself up to negotiations, when the White House, with the security advisor's speech, ignores - or rather wants to ignore - everything about nuclear China?
As stated by Ambassador Li Song, China's representative on the UN Committee on Disarmament, two-party or three-party negotiations are not desirable. "It is necessary to firmly maintain and make full use of existing multilateral mechanisms. Minimizing the role of the Conference on Disarmament, undermining the principle of consensus, or even trying to create other forums outside the current body and imposing certain rules on certain countries, will inevitably lead to the division of camps, the fragmentation of security governance, and the regression of international order to the law of the jungle3 ." No Start, then.
And what might China's reaction be to the White House's announcement of the deployment of 1,500 nuclear warheads by 2035? This is simply nonsense. Such a program, with all its industrial constraints and the time required to go from initial design to operational deployment, would imply the surreptitious abandonment of a nuclear doctrine that has remained unchanged for fifty years. But this is not the case. Before the Disarmament Commission in 2023, China reiterated that it is "firmly committed to a defensive nuclear strategy, and is the only nuclear-weapon state to pledge not to be the first to use nuclear weapons. It has always maintained its nuclear capabilities at the minimum, reliable level required for national security, and has never rivalled other countries in terms of investment in nuclear weapons, either in quantity or scale.
For Beijing, going back to the two components of US nuclear strategy mentioned at the start of this article:
- The clamor against China's "substantial expansion" of its nuclear capabilities is merely a pretext for further strengthening the nuclear superpower's arsenal;
- The summons to meet Washington's demands, on pain of renouncing disarmament, is an artifice that enables the Pentagon to keep its triad, while passing the buck to China.
In fact, no issues, disarmament postponed indefinitely. The international community and Europe, passive witnesses, will find that disarmament is shaping up to be a new confrontation between the United States and China, which already had no shortage of them.
(1) Remarks by National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan for the Arms Control Association ; White House ; 02/06/2023
(2) Any future US commitment to nuclear disarmament will depend on China. Le Figaro 02/06/2023
(3) Remarks by H.E. Amb. LI Song at the First Plenary Meeting of the 2023 Conference on Disarmamen ; 25/01/2023
