4 ms·

High-altitude EMP over the Pacific is often cited as the first step in a Chinese response to open conflict with the United States, followed by cyber-strikes aga

by s_q_b 13y ago

High-altitude EMP over the Pacific is often cited as the first step in a Chinese response to open conflict with the United States, followed by cyber-strikes against US infrastructure. It's a very good asymmetrical warfare weapon for weaker states. Regardless of what course I'd prefer an adversary to take, it certainly makes a great deal of sense from their perspective. By no means are the creators of this strategy of "low intelligence."

rdl 13y ago
I'd probably start with the cyber-strikes, before the EMP :)
- s_q_b 13y ago
  EMP over the Pacific primarily targets military communications, preventing an organized conventional response. Cyberstrikes are used to pressure the civilian population into demanding peace. Theoretically you could just blanket the North American continent with a few EMPs, but you'd likely provoke a nuclear response or an all-out war, hardly the desired resolution for China in such a scenario.
  - rdl 13y ago
    I'm still amazed that until maybe 2002, the Chinese nuclear arsenal was most likely smaller than the (unconfirmed) Israeli arsenal, at around 50 weapons -- a genuine deterrent, but certainly not enough to wage a first strike, and probably not survivable vs. a counterforce first strike from US or Russia (probably enough vs. India/UK/France, though). Apparently they've stepped up to surpass the Europeans, though.
    - caf 13y ago
      This strategy is known as "Minimum Deterrence". Jeffrey Lewis has written a book on the PRC's strategic nuclear force posture that explores this: http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/minimum-means-reprisal http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/minimum-means-reprisal ...and a short essay on the broader concept of Minimum Deterrence: http://newamerica.net/node/8908 http://newamerica.net/node/8908 China's force is intended to be survivable despite its small size. Their ICBM force is road-mobile, launched from TELs rather than fixed silos.

by s_q_b 13y ago

rdl 13y ago

I'd probably start with the cyber-strikes, before the EMP :)

s_q_b 13y ago
EMP over the Pacific primarily targets military communications, preventing an organized conventional response. Cyberstrikes are used to pressure the civilian population into demanding peace. Theoretically you could just blanket the North American continent with a few EMPs, but you'd likely provoke a nuclear response or an all-out war, hardly the desired resolution for China in such a scenario.
- rdl 13y ago
  I'm still amazed that until maybe 2002, the Chinese nuclear arsenal was most likely smaller than the (unconfirmed) Israeli arsenal, at around 50 weapons -- a genuine deterrent, but certainly not enough to wage a first strike, and probably not survivable vs. a counterforce first strike from US or Russia (probably enough vs. India/UK/France, though). Apparently they've stepped up to surpass the Europeans, though.
  - caf 13y ago
    This strategy is known as "Minimum Deterrence". Jeffrey Lewis has written a book on the PRC's strategic nuclear force posture that explores this: http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/minimum-means-reprisal http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/minimum-means-reprisal ...and a short essay on the broader concept of Minimum Deterrence: http://newamerica.net/node/8908 http://newamerica.net/node/8908 China's force is intended to be survivable despite its small size. Their ICBM force is road-mobile, launched from TELs rather than fixed silos.