Georgetown students shed light on China’s tunnel system for nuclear weapons

Washington Post ^ | Nov 29, 2011 | William Wan

[posterchild]

The Chinese have called it their “Underground Great Wall” — a vast network of tunnels designed to hide their country’s increasingly sophisticated missile and nuclear arsenal.

For the past three years, a small band of obsessively dedicated students at Georgetown University has called it something else: homework.

Led by their hard-charging professor, a former top Pentagon official, they have translated hundreds of documents, combed through satellite imagery, obtained restricted Chinese military documents and waded through hundreds of gigabytes of online data.

[Thunder90]

Whats even more scary is that Russia also possesses thousands of miles of these tunnels for its own nuclear arsenal.

China likely has about 4,000 nukes
Russia/CIS likely has about 12,000 nukes (nukes in other CIS countries would be controlled by Russia).

[E. Pluribus Unum]

But the strongest condemnation has come from nonproliferation experts who worry that the study could fuel arguments for maintaining nuclear weapons in an era when efforts are being made to reduce the world’s post-Cold War stockpiles.

That's the best recommendation it could get.

[Jack Hydrazine]

But China is our fwiend and our best twading pawtner. Plus, they finance a bunch of ouw debt!

[Truth29]

The professor and his students will probably be investigated by the Obama Administration to try and discredit their work.

[Never on my watch]

Wow! College students, INSIDE THE BELTWAY, actually doing academic work that exposes Communists!

But of course there are critics:

But the strongest condemnation has come from nonproliferation experts who worry that the study could fuel arguments for maintaining nuclear weapons in an era when efforts are being made to reduce the world’s post-Cold War stockpiles.

These folks are probably eager to pull Georgetown's accreditation over this.

[Meet the New Boss]

In case this activity somehow missed the attention of the Chinese authorities, the Washington Post wanted to be sure they knew what these students were up to.

[posterchild]

Exactly:) We mustn’t notice things that will make us respond...

[Never on my watch]

Our debt is rolling around in those underground tubes, along with the technology BJ Clinton allowed to leak to them.

[battlecry]

I was thinking the same thing.

[sten]

don’t worry. our stockpile of 1500 will be brought down to under 150 before 0bama leaves office

and the weapons grade uranium... it’ll find its way into reactors to be burned

we’re screwed and the vast majority of the US has no idea how bad. with our military getting more and more pc, it’d be a wonder if a massive majority of them also miss the obvious

[molson209]

Have you seen Red Dawn ?

[G Larry]

The U.S. has further restricted our deterrents with each successive treaty. Our leftists ensure over compliance.

Meanwhile, our enemies cheat and nobody cares.

[sten]

the 1984 movie? yes. tho that was cubans with russian support

for an updated version, check out:
Tomorrow, When the War Began (2010)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1456941/

australians invaded by the chinese (tho the red star is blackened)

Red Dawn was better produced ... but i wouldn’t knock TWTWB for that (there also might be a few in the works for 2012 and 2013 release)

[frogjerk]

There is still hope for America’s colleges yet.

[jimpick]

“”””“But you ask people what they did in college, most just say I took this class, I was in this club. I can say I spent it reading Chinese nuclear strategy and Second Artillery manuals. For a nerd like me, that really means something.””””

At least not all college students are pinko commie scum that protest with OWS. These are the guys who will offer some sane advice when they grow up.

[DBrow]

“the Washington Post wanted to be sure they knew”

Yup, showed three faces, outed two names, revealed some techniques.

Normally this sort of data mining would be classified, or at least FOUO.

[DTogo]

Our debt is rolling around in those underground tubes

Yep, partially financed by the billion$ in annual interest payments to China, partially financed by the billion$ in goods purchased from China each year.

[sunny48]

That’s what I thought.
The only hiding tunnels we have here are the ones coming in from Mexico.

[redgolum]

Which is why arms control treaties are very stupid.

The other guy won’t play by the same rules.

[wrench]

This kinda sheds new light on that “unknown” missile launch off California last year............

[Kenny Bunk]

Until a CHICOM tunnel accidentally comes up in the courtyard of the Pentagon, our military will probably continue to turn a rather blind eye to this sort of underground threat, just as they did for the Tunnels of Cu Chi in Vietnam, where the NVA and Viet Cong had a veritable IRT line, complete with massive underground bases, from Hanoi to Saigon!

Another example, Chernobyl, which was a plant dedicated to producing weapons-grade fissionable products, with electricity as sort of a sideline, was connected to weapons factories by many miles of tunnels.

I would not doubt for an instant that the Iranians are tunneling away like moles to protect their nuke capabilities.

[Joya]

Thanks. Another piece to the puzzle.

= = =
Only in their wishful thinking is China less terrifying than the one their parents (grandparents) faced in 1961.

[Tulsa Ramjet]

What’s a thousand or two,...?
North Korea obtains these and proliferates,...we do nothing.
Iran is obtaining these and will probably proliferate,...we do nothing.
We have become the United States of Do Nothings, where policy actions are dictated by election cycles.

[Psycho_Bunny]

“But the strongest condemnation has come from nonproliferation experts who worry that the study could fuel arguments for maintaining nuclear weapons in an era when efforts are being made to reduce the world’s post-Cold War stockpiles.”

Lol.......what? “Experts”. Lol

[alancarp]

Let’s see... who’s gonna get a better job after graduation: these kids or the ones enrolled at the “Georgetown State-Federal Climate Resource Center”?

These guys, for sure.

[alancarp]

Actually, I can answer my own question - I missed this paragraph:

"Beyond its impact in the policy world, the project has made a profound mark on the students — including some who have since graduated and taken research jobs with the Defense Department and Congress."

[null and void]

What’s the big deal? Morlocks need a place to live too...

[mkjessup]

But China is our fwiend and our best twading pawtner. Plus, they finance a bunch of ouw debt!

Which awwows us to purchase all those mansions and yawts!

[newnhdad]

so now we crowd source intel work, great.

After reading this comparison, I though Obama convinced the Soviets to eliminate their stockpile? Why should we worry, we are surrendering, errr, “disarming unilaterally” just to show the world we won’t defend ourselves anymore.

What is wrong with those people, Obama is president now, everyone loves us.

[American in Israel]

Doing the work the Government should be doing while the government is doing the work schools used to do. The new “free” society has its head in the wrong place.

[sam_paine]

This kinda sheds new light on that “unknown” missile launch off California last year............

Yeah. The way Caddyshack sheds light on the Roswell incident.

[xkaydet65]

You hit either with even 1500 nukes do you really think their tunnels,or the fact that we have none will matter? The image of 3000 nuclear explosions in say a 48 hour span in the Northern hemisphere will insure that the only winners would be the very undeveloped world.The Chinese no more believe in surviving a nuclear exchange with the US than the Soviets did, MAD actually works and history proved it.

[xkaydet65]

You hit either with even 1500 nukes do you really think their tunnels,or the fact that we have none will matter? The image of 3000 nuclear explosions in say a 48 hour span in the Northern hemisphere will insure that the only winners would be the very undeveloped world.The Chinese no more believe in surviving a nuclear exchange with the US than the Soviets did, MAD actually works and history proved it.

[xkaydet65]

You hit either with even 1500 nukes do you really think their tunnels,or the fact that we have none will matter? The image of 3000 nuclear explosions in say a 48 hour span in the Northern hemisphere will insure that the only winners would be the very undeveloped world.The Chinese no more believe in surviving a nuclear exchange with the US than the Soviets did, MAD actually works and history proved it.

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

We won’t launch. Why should everybody die? An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Better it go on with one eye. Chinese people are just as good as we are, so what difference is it if they take over the world? The important thing is that life goes on. (Not necessarily human life - We’re not morally superior to microbes.) Nuking China might make pandas extinct in the wild.

[familyop]

"The image of 3000 nuclear explosions in say a 48 hour span in the Northern hemisphere will insure that the only winners would be the very undeveloped world."

We derived quite a few benefits from the many nuke shots at the Nevada test site alone, and we're still here after those and many other shots outside of Nevada (see Russian shots, all).







"The Chinese no more believe in surviving a nuclear exchange with the US than the Soviets did, MAD actually works and history proved it."

Tell that to the Islamists. The Iranians alone want over a million casualties in the first nuke exchange in order to light up Islamist nations against us (statement a few years ago from Ayatollah puppet, Ahmadinejad). Russia has been hard at work in preparing them to do so, and China's looking for the opportunity to take more real estate.

[xkaydet65]

The article was about the Chinese not the Islamists. I told a Muslim co worker after 9/11 when he glibly told me we couldn’t fight Islam because there were a billion muslims. I reminded him that tomorrow there could be 600million, and we’d start from there.So we do not have to care,as this time, if the muzzies don’t believe in MAD.For them there is no MAD only AD.

[familyop]

It's relevant.

Lawmaker: Iran's Revolutionary Guard Practicing for An EMP Attack on the United States
13 Nov 2011
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2806848/posts

Iran Placing Medium-Range Missiles in Venezuela; Can Reach the U.S. (12/09/10)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2640111/posts

‘Die Welt’: Iran building rocket bases in Venezuela (17 May 2011)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2721122/posts

Iran readies launch of new satellite
(Iran's second satellite launch, 11/09/2009
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2382720/posts

Russia, N.Korea, China give Iran missile aid -CIA
09/08/01
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/519198/posts

Iran military engineers on hand for N. Korea missile launch
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1664760/posts
(7/12/06)

10 Iranian Missile Engineers Visited N. Korea:Sankei reports(check on NK’s Chinese equipments)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1658850/posts
(07/01/06)

S. Korea, U.S. verifying reports on test of new N.K. missile in Iran: source
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1834307/posts
(4,000 kilometer range—will reach the Vatican—May 16th, 2007)

US confirms Iran launch of first home-built satellite
afp ^ | 2-03-09 | staff
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2177582/posts

Iran Satellite Launch Heightens Missile Development Concerns
By Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Feb. 3, 2009
http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=52939

Iran hails successful launch of satellite rocket
Posted on Wed 03 Feb 2010 02:51:50 AM MST
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2443266/posts

Iran's Nukes: Apocalypse Soon?
IBD Editorials ^ | June 8, 2011 | Staff

"Terror: Iran is speeding up its nuclear materials production and moving it underground amid reports that the regime is eight weeks from atomic bomb capability. Doomsday, anyone?"

[xkaydet65]

My response to a placement of missiles in Chavezland would be to declare a state of war with both nations.This need not involve real military action but would all us the total pnaply of actions that are allowed belligerents. Blockade land,sea,air, asset seizure,trade interdiction anywhere outside territory of neutrals, aid to opposition movements in and out of country, transfer of assets to govts in exile . Insurance rates would skyrocket, trade would decrease to a trickle,the regimes would be destabilized and not many shots fired.

[xkaydet65]

My response to a placement of missiles in Chavezland would be to declare a state of war with both nations.This need not involve real military action but would all us the total pnaply of actions that are allowed belligerents. Blockade land,sea,air, asset seizure,trade interdiction anywhere outside territory of neutrals, aid to opposition movements in and out of country, transfer of assets to govts in exile . Insurance rates would skyrocket, trade would decrease to a trickle,the regimes would be destabilized and not many shots fired.

[spetznaz]

Whats even more scary is that Russia also possesses thousands of miles of these tunnels for its own nuclear arsenal. China likely has about 4,000 nukes Russia/CIS likely has about 12,000 nukes (nukes in other CIS countries would be controlled by Russia).

No, that is not nearly as scary. Not even in the same order of magnitude. Why? Because the Soviets have had those for years - actually, make that decades - and was there any thermonuclear war between the West and the Soviets? No. They have had thousands upon thousands of nuclear warheads, many hundreds of delivery systems of every sort and type ranging from boomers prowling under the arctic, ICBMs on railways, even nuclear landmines. Soviet military doctrine was to quickly move to the nuclear option the moment their conventional forces started to get overwhelmed. At the time when the USSR was at its most powerful and could (at least theoretically) be considered a superpower, when the Warsaw Pact faced off against NATO, when the world came very close to nuclear warfare a couple of times (ranging from the Cuban missile crisis when things got a tad bit dicey, to even more closer calls when the Soviets thought they were under attack due to glitches in their early warning system - and still did not launch). Yet, no nuclear war. Why? Because MAD existed, and no matter how crazy the Russians are they are not stupid.

Comparing the nuclear arsenal of the Russians to the new and increasing nuclear arsenal of the Chinese, and saying that it is 'scarier,' is like someone commenting that some lion in Africa is 'scarier' than the mass-murderer-pedophile-arsonist who just moved in next door! Logically plausible (yes, the lion is 'scarier' in technical terms), but functionally stupid (yes, stupid - the lion is thousands of miles away, yet the perp is bl@@dy next door!).

The Russian nuclear stockpile is indeed larger than the Chinese stockpile, but it has been large for decades without anyone lighting off, and even when the Soviets had some semblance of power, and during periods when things were looking hairy, nothing atomic happened. The Chinese stockpile is growing quickly, and while this doesn't mean there will be nuclear war (like the Russians, the Chinese are not stupid), what it does mean is that the Chinese will have growing influence and the ability to do things without anyone having much to do about it. For instance, if I was a Taiwanese legislator or Vietnamese general or any number of countries that have a political (e.g. the Taiwanese 'breakaway province' per China) and/or economic (e.g. the oil rich reserves in the South China sea that are claimed by several nations, including China) I would be ensuring that I build up my defensive options (preferably something survivable but cheap enough to get in sizeable numbers - maybe a dozen plus advanced AIP-DE submarines armed with anti-ship cruise missiles). Why? Because when China is able to move about at will in a couple of years, there is nothing that the US will do about it.

By the way, continuing down the spectrum. In the same way I rank the Russian nuclear stockpile MUCH lower (in terms of threat) than the fast-growing Chinese nuclear stockpile, I also rank the Chinese nuclear stockpile MUCH MUCH lower than ONE NUCLEAR BOMB in the hands of Al Queda.

Same logic as before. A murderer-arsonist-pedophile next door is not as bad as a murderer-arsonist-pedophile in your bedroom, standing over you sleeping, holding a knife and having visions of smearing your bloody viscera over his face.

[Thunder90]

But, the Russians have been working diligently to keep their arsenal up to date. They have an effective nuclear triad, and are the only country to have an effective road ICBM. And, yes, they can put these into other CIS countries without violating any treaties as long as they remain under Russian control.

[Thunder90]

And the same thing goes for Russia and the CIS going into Georgia or Eastern Europe (Poland, Czech Republic, ect). NATO won’t go to their aid because it will be too weak to do so.

[spetznaz]

But, the Russians have been working diligently to keep their arsenal up to date. They have an effective nuclear triad, and are the only country to have an effective road ICBM. And, yes, they can put these into other CIS countries without violating any treaties as long as they remain under Russian control.

I agree with you on that. They have been spending a lot of money to keep their arsenal upgraded (and even during the 90s when their economy was dead and their military was rusting, the only service that kept receiving money was the rocket forces). My point is that they have had a large arsenal (and larger than the US) for decades. Nothing has happened. The fast-growing Chinese arsenal is a new factor being added to the mix. Not as powerful (yet!), but something that was not in existence before at such a level. Thus, the mix goes from the US and Russia (when it comes to nations with large nuclear stockpiles) to the US and Russia and China.

My point wasn't that Russia is not a potential threat, or that they don't have weapons - it was that they have been that for many decades (and at a time when they were vastly more powerful and had far more sway as part of the USSR which was then a superpower, with the Warsaw Pact bristling at NATO, and basically the Soviet Bear having global influence) ...and yet ...no nuclear war. MAD worked perfectly.

China on the other hand has also had nuclear weapons for quite some time now, but never at this level. Why is this important (and far more dangerous than Russia's 'effective nuclear triad' and 'road ICBMs')?

Well, that simple!

Because it means that those weapons are no longer solely for self-defense/deter purposes. If you needed nuclear weapons as a deterrence then you would not need more than a dozen (or a couple dozen at most). For the longest time China was said to have a couple hundred (around 2-3 hundred). For it to start having a couple of thousand warheads means a change in doctrine, or at least in the potential strategies available for it.

It is like (to use another example) the Mexican cartels suddenly investing in thousands of Kalashnikovs, grenades, drug hauling trucks, tunneling equipment, and mini-submarines for furtive drug transportation. Now, that can mean a couple of things - it can mean they have a lot of money and just decided to spend it on equipment and weapons, or it could mean that they are about to embark on a massive drug transportation initiative.

Sure, the Russians could move in and do a lot in their area of influence without the US doing much about it. For example a couple of years ago they whooped Georgia, and all Shakasvisli (or however one spells his name) could do is hide and wonder why no one came to his assistance.

Now, compare that with the number of countries that are concerned with China. The list is interesting and includes Japan, India, Australia, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Viet Nam, South Korea. That is a list of nations that have undertaken significant military purchases because of one country. A country that has had a tremendous increase in its conventional forces (especially in terms of their quality), as well as in its nuclear capabilities. A country that, to use one example, has stated that the whole of the South China sea 'belongs' to it. A country that has taken its nuclear capability several magnitudes beyond what is necessary for deterrence. Again, with 300 warheads you have more than enough to deter ANY country from doing something silly - the moment you start going into the thousands basically it is to ensure something else, and the only two nations you would be targeting are the US or Russia ...no other country would require that many warheads. Now, if you put two and two together, if China made a move to grab the oil in the South China sea, which country would try to stop it that may require those warhead numbers to serve as not just a deterrent but also a real and present threat?

Thunder90 - there is something that Pervez Musharraf once said that I agree with (probably the only thing I agree with him on). He said that when analyzing a threat he considers two things - intent and capability. However, of the two he considers capability the most important since intent can change at any given moment. For the longest time Russia (as the Soviets) had ill intent and true capability. Nothing happened. China has had all forms of various intent, but never had capability ...now it has capability. The number of possible foe nations with capability have gone from one (Russia/USSR) to two (Russia and China).

Yet you think that is not an issue and Russia is still the biggest problem? Because it has an 'effective nuclear triad' and 'road ICBMs?' It has had those for decades. A new country has come into the mix with effective capability to directly engage the US, and that is a lesser issue. I am sorry, but it is a big issue, especially when that nation has a strong economy, is rapidly developing, has a vast military that is getting more technologically advanced, is working on measures and strategies directly geared at opposing or mitigating against United States capabilities, and has made statements about geographic and economic territories that other nations claim sovereignity over. Yet that is a lesser threat against a shadow of a former superpower that, even at the height of its power, never lit a nuclear furnace?

I don't know, but that seems very much like showing statistics that state an African lion is more dangerous (in terms of strength, speed, power) than a human being who is an ax murderer, and forgetting to consider that that ax murderer just bought the house you share the same fence with.

[Thunder90]

But the Russians also have a dangerous history of expansionism. They recently invaded Georgia, and would love to have Eastern Europe back (Not the “Near Abroad”, but Poland, ect.

[raygun]

No it doesn’t; there’s no such thing as “unknown” missile launches near either left-coast of the USA.

Anybody that believes otherwise should put the crank pipe down - get their teeth extracted - and take up smoking crack as their next hobby.

“unknown” misslile launches off of either left-coast of the USA is absolute nonsense.

[spetznaz]

But the Russians also have a dangerous history of expansionism. They recently invaded Georgia, and would love to have Eastern Europe back (Not the “Near Abroad”, but Poland, ect.

I am not disagreeing with that. I am not saying they are not a danger. All I am saying is they have been a danger for the last half century, and nothing nuclear has happened.

They have also been the only real existential danger to the United States for half a century, and nothing nuclear has happened. Over half a century.

Now, the US is getting a SECOND existential danger (by which I mean not only having nuclear weapons, but having them in a quantity that directly poses an existential danger - sure Pakistan and North Korea have nuclear weapons, but it is at a different level than Russia - and now China - have). When you go from one existential threat that you have managed to have a over 50-year 'nuclear relationship' with (due to MAD) that has been maintained even in the face of intense bricksmanship (e.g. what the Soviets were doing in Cuba) to erroneous but critical information (when Soviet early warning systems mistook a weather condition for a massive early attack by the US, and the person in charge of the Soviet response refused an order to retaliate until he was sure) ...and nothing happening for over a century.

Going from having one threat to TWO is a big change! A dangerous change.

A change that raises a lot of questions on why a country would need to go from a deterrence nuclear arsenal to one number in thousands!

You may not consider that a threat, and you may rank China's push in the Asia and Oceanic region (that has caused significant issues among the Australians, Indians, South Koreans, Japanese, Vietnamese, Indonesians, Taiwanese and Malaysians) a non-issue. That is ok - you have every right to believe as you will.

However, the move from having one possible existential threat to two, especially in such a relatively short term, and by a nation that has taken measures specifically targeted against the US ...in my book, that is a greater danger. By far.

Not only in my book though - it would appear the US military heads are taking the same view considering the attention they are placing towards China's rise compared to Russia (whether it is investment in capabilities that can handle China's developments in anti-ship ballistic missile technology, all the way to increased measures to get closer to India - even to the point of offering the F-35 - as a means of having a stronger bastion in the region). So, you may think what I am saying is crap, but it seems that the US military (as well as the militaries and governments of the nations I named above) seem to take my view and not yours.

[spetznaz]

But the Russians also have a dangerous history of expansionism. They recently invaded Georgia, and would love to have Eastern Europe back (Not the “Near Abroad”, but Poland, ect.

Oh, and by the way - China claims certain parts of India as its own territory, claims large tracts of Siberia as its own territory (that were allegedly taken while it was too wrapped up in the Opium Wars, and these are territories that are extremely rich in resources), has claimed the entire South China sea as its own, claims the whole of Taiwan as a renegade province, has issues with Japan and Vietnam. I guess it is ok to ignore all of that, right? Also, I'd say that the huge surge in arms spending (especially certain attack capabilities) is simply so they can parade that equipment in military parades, right? Deep investment in area-denial capabilities such as the anti-ship ballistic missile geared against US carriers, advanced integrated air-defense systems that can actually cover part of Taiwan from China, and active hacking of US defense systems and blinding of satellites was all for the fun of it, right? Finally, China's nuclear arsenal going from 300-400 to around 3,000 was just for the fun of it, right?

As I said, you are allowed to have your opinion. It doesn't mean it is right though.