Special Report-China's growing nuclear arsenal
HONG KONG (Reuters) -Alongside a massive build-up in conventional military firepower, China has embarked on a rapid and sustained increase in the size and capability of its nuclear forces, according to the U.S. military and arms control experts.
The commander of the U.S. Strategic Command, General Anthony Cotton, told Congress in March that the directive from Chinese leader Xi Jinping that China's military be ready to seize Taiwan by 2027 was driving a build-up of nuclear weapons that could be launched from land, air and sea.
In its 2023 national defense policy, China renewed its longstanding pledge that it would not be the first to use nuclear weapons under any circumstances. The so-called 'no first use' policy also includes a promise that China will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear armed state.
In response to questions, the defense ministry in Beijing said 'a nuclear war cannot be won and must not be waged.' China, it said, adhered to a 'nuclear strategy of self-defense and pursues a no-first-use policy.'
[Read the special report on Japan and South Korea's shifting nuclear policies.]
In its annual report on Chinese military power, the Pentagon said despite China's public stance, its strategy probably includes a possible first use in response to conventional attacks that threaten the viability of its nuclear forces, command and control or that approximates the effect of a nuclear strike. Beijing would also probably consider nuclear first use if a conventional military defeat in Taiwan 'gravely threatened' the Communist regime's survival, the Pentagon said in the report published late last year.
China's defense ministry said it opposed 'any attempt to hype up the so-called 'Chinese nuclear threat' in an effort to smear and defame China and deliberately mislead the international community.'
China is expanding and modernizing its weapons stockpile faster than any other nuclear-armed power and has accumulated about 600 warheads, according to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, a Chicago-based non-profit.
It said China is building about 350 new missile silos and several new bases for road mobile launchers. It estimated that China's military, the People's Liberation Army, had about 712 launchers for land-based missiles but not all were assigned for nuclear weapons. Of those launchers, 462 can be loaded with missiles 'that can reach the continental United States,' it said.
Many of the PLA's launchers are for shorter range missiles intended to attack regional targets but most of those were not assigned for a nuclear strike, the Bulletin's assessment said.
In its report, the Pentagon estimated that the PLA would have more than 1,000 operational nuclear warheads by 2030, as it seeks to build a bigger force ranging from low-yield precision strike missiles to intercontinental ballistic missiles with multi-megaton explosive impact.
Solve the daily Crossword
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Exclusive-Judge in US crosshairs warns Brazil banks not to apply sanctions locally
By Ricardo Brito and Brad Haynes BRASILIA (Reuters) -Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who recently had sanctions imposed on him by the U.S. government, told Reuters that courts could punish Brazilian financial institutions for seizing or blocking domestic assets in response to U.S. orders. Those remarks raise the stakes in a standoff that has hammered shares of Brazilian banks caught between U.S. sanctions and the orders of Brazil's highest court. In a late Tuesday interview from his office in Brasilia, Moraes granted that U.S. law enforcement regarding Brazilian banks that operate in the United States "falls under U.S. jurisdiction." "However, if those banks choose to apply that law domestically, they cannot do so — and may be penalized under Brazilian law," he added. His remarks underscore the potential consequences of a Monday ruling by fellow Supreme Court Justice Flavio Dino, who warned that foreign laws cannot be automatically applied in Brazil. That ruling was followed by a sharp rebuke from the U.S. State Department's Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, which warned on social media hours later that Moraes was "toxic" and that "non-U.S. persons must tread carefully: those providing material support to human rights abusers face sanctions risk themselves." The U.S. Treasury Department slapped the sanctions on Moraes last month under the Global Magnitsky Act, a law designed to impose economic penalties on foreigners deemed to have a record of corruption or human rights abuse. The order accused him of suppressing freedom of expression and leading politicized prosecutions, including against former President Jair Bolsonaro, a staunch Trump ally on trial before Brazil's Supreme Court on charges of plotting a coup to reverse his loss in the 2022 election. Bolsonaro has denied any wrongdoing and denounced the case as politically motivated. In his interview, Moraes said decisions by foreign courts and governments can only take effect in Brazil after validation through a domestic process. He said it is therefore not possible to seize assets, freeze funds or block the property of Brazilian citizens without following those legal steps. The global reach of the U.S. financial system means foreign banks often restrict a wider range of transactions to avoid secondary sanctions. Moraes said he was confident that the sanctions against him would be reversed via diplomatic channels or an eventual challenge in U.S. courts. But he acknowledged that for now they had put financial institutions in a bind. "This misuse of legal enforcement places financial institutions in a difficult position — not only Brazilian banks, but also their American partners," he said. "That is precisely why, I repeat, the diplomatic channel is important so this can be resolved quickly - to prevent misuse of a law that is important to fight terrorism, criminal organizations, international drug trafficking and human trafficking," he added. The U.S. State Department did not immediately respond to request for comment. Moraes had "engaged in serious human rights abuse," said a Treasury Department spokesperson. "Rather than concocting a fantasy fiction, de Moraes should stop carrying out arbitrary detentions and politicized prosecutions." NO CHOICE The clash could have serious consequences for Brazilian financial institutions, said two bankers in Brazil, who requested anonymity to discuss the matter candidly. Most large banks are supervised by the U.S. government in some way due to their international presence or exposure, either through a foreign branch or issuance of foreign securities, said the former director of an international bank in Brazil. The choice for these banks, under pressure from the U.S., may be to invite sanctioned clients to seek a different institution to keep their assets, the banker added. The director of a major Brazilian bank said that, in practice, Monday's court ruling means any action taken by Brazilian banks based on rules involving the U.S. Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control, which oversees U.S. sanctions, will need approval from Brazil's Supreme Court. At the same time, he added, failing to comply with an OFAC decision could cut a bank off from the international financial system. "Brazil doesn't really have a choice," said the banker. "Given how interconnected everything is, and the disparity in economic power between the U.S. and Brazil, we're left in a position of subordination. There's not much we can do." He stressed that the court would need to come up with a solution "that doesn't put the financial system at risk." Shares of state-run lender Banco do Brasil, where most federal officials including judges receive salaries, fell 6% on Tuesday, the largest drop among Brazil's three biggest banks. The bank said in a Tuesday statement it was prepared to deal with "complex, sensitive" issues involving global regulations. Sign in to access your portfolio
The Hill
15 minutes ago
- The Hill
Panama deserves sanctions, not the Security Council presidency
This month, Panama holds the rotating presidency of the U.N. Security Council — a position that confers moral authority, policy influence and global prestige as the representative 'face' of the Council. But given Panama's longstanding and conscious role in undermining sanctions on Iran, this honor is deeply wrong and misguided. In fact, Panama should not be elevated — it should be sanctioned. A country that enables Iran's sanctions evasion should not be rewarded with the symbolic leadership of the very body charged with upholding those sanctions. Despite its protestations, Panama is neither a champion of the rules-based international order nor a true ally to the U.S. Panama's acquiescence to Chinese 'Belt and Road Initiative' ambitions in controlling the Panama Canal is only the latest sign of Panamanian duplicity that place it squarely at odds with the values and objectives of the council. For years, Panama has allowed its flag — akin to a passport for ships — to be used by vessels transporting illicit Iranian oil, the key revenue stream for a regime that continues to defy international nuclear restrictions. Panama is not ignorant or unaware of this problem. In January 2024, a bipartisan group of 31 U.S. Senators led by Senators Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Bob Casey (D-Pa.) urged the Panama Maritime Authority to 'cooperate with the United States and conduct investigations into a significant number of ships registered in Panama which are alleged to transport Iranian oil in violation of U.S. sanctions…' They sought Panama's explicit commitment to investigate some '189 Panamanian-flagged vessels of concern,' constituting ' nearly half ' of all the vessels aiding Iran. Two months later, then-Special Envoy to Iran Abram Paley visited Panama 'to ensure that the vessel registry is not abused by entities seeking to evade our sanctions on Iran. … Iran and its affiliated groups are trying to evade sanctions here in Panama, they are trying to abuse the flag registration of ships.' According to analysis by our organization, United Against Nuclear Iran, of the 542 foreign-flagged vessels that have carried in excess of $200 billion worth of Iranian oil since 2020 (mainly to China), some 289 have at one stage or another flown the 100-year old Bandera de Panama. As of this week, we identify 116 vessels currently flying the Panamanian flag that are implicated in carrying Iranian oil. This has all occurred despite repeated warnings to Panama over the last five years about this behavior by our organization, which has been praised for producing ' the best public data we have.' This is more than an oversight — it is tantamount to complicity. At the same time, the Islamic Republic of Iran is a nemesis to the UN Security Council, repeatedly violating council resolutions stretching back to 2006, when Iran was instructed to suspend all enrichment-related activities. Since then, Tehran has violated resolutions relating to nuclear activities, arms embargos, ballistic missile testing, and a resolution endorsing the failed Iran nuclear deal. Most recently, a top Iranian advisor issued what sounded a lot like a personal threaten against the head of the UN's nuclear watchdog, Rafael Grossi, following years of stonewalling UN nuclear inspectors. Now, two decades and one moribund nuclear deal later, Iran is still insistent on enriching nuclear fuel to the threat of world security. Iran has never been interested in nuclear compliance. Today, with key nuclear sites severely degraded by Israel and the U.N. in last month's strikes, Iran has insisted it will never give up its 'inherent right' to enrichment. Efforts to reconstitute and to develop the missiles needed to carry nuclear warheads require money, which in Iran's case will come in large part from illicit oil sales moved by tankers — tankers that Panama helps shield from scrutiny. These 'Ghost Fleet' vessels engage in deceptive maritime practices designed to obscure the origin and destination of oil — actions that violate international norms and often amount to criminal conduct. They switch off transponders, manipulate automatic identification systems, and conduct dangerous ship-to-ship transfers in international waters. These actions form the backbone of Iran's sanctions-evasion playbook. And Panama plays along. The UN Security Council is the body tasked with upholding international peace and security, including through the enforcement of sanctions. It was the council that imposed multiple rounds of sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program. But the council's credibility suffers when one of its rotating presidents enables, with impunity, the very violations those sanctions were designed to deter. The world is entering a still-more-volatile phase in its dealings with Iran as it braces for renewed nuclear provocations. Now is the moment for the international community — embodied by the United Nations — to close ranks, not reward enablers of sanctions evasion. Thus, Panama's presidency at this critical juncture sends an unfortunate message to every regime looking to flout global norms. Panama has had ample time to reform its maritime registry. Yet Panama-flagged ghost tankers continue to offer the most critical economic lifeline for the Tehran regime. Until that changes, Panama should be sanctioned, not promoted to a leadership post at the United Nations.
San Francisco Chronicle
15 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
US sanctions more ICC judges, prosecutors for probes into alleged American, Israeli war crimes
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration is ramping up pressure on the International Criminal Court for pursuing investigations into U.S. and Israeli officials for alleged war crimes. The State Department on Wednesday announced new sanctions on four ICC officials, including two judges and two prosecutors, who it said had been instrumental in efforts to prosecute Americans and Israelis. As a result of the sanctions, any assets the targets hold in U.S. jurisdictions are frozen. The sanctions are just the latest in a series of steps the administration has taken against The Hague-based court, the world's first international war crimes tribunal. The U.S. has already imposed penalties on the ICC's former chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, who stepped aside in May pending an investigation into alleged sexual misconduct, and four other tribunal judges. In a statement, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said he had taken action against ICC judges Kimberly Proust of Canada and Nicolas Guillou of France and prosecutors Nazhat Shameem Khan of Fiji and Mame Mandiaye Niang of Senegal. 'These individuals are foreign persons who directly engaged in efforts by the International Criminal Court to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute nationals of the United States or Israel, without the consent of either nation,' Rubio said. He added that the administration would continue 'to take whatever actions we deem necessary to protect our troops, our sovereignty, and our allies from the ICC's illegitimate and baseless actions.' In a separate statement, the State Department said Prost was hit for ruling to authorize an ICC investigation into U.S. personnel in Afghanistan, which was later dropped. Guillou was sanctioned for ruling to authorize the ICC's issuance of arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant related to Israel's war against Hamas in Gaza. Khan and Niang were penalized for continuing Karim Khan's investigation into Israel's actions in Gaza, including upholding the ICC's arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant, according to the statement.
