Chinese made Z-9 helicopter. (photo : K.L. Yim)

 24.12.2012 Defense Studies

December 19, 2012: Strategy Page

On December 7th China conducted another test of its truck mounted DF-31A ICBM (Intercontinental Ballistic Missile). This was the second such test in the last four months and indicates that the DF-31A has matured after two decades of being questionable. Seventeen years ago China put the DF-31 into service, sort of. This was China's first solid fuel ICBM (and had a range of over 8,000 kilometers) and was roughly equivalent to the U.S. 30 ton Minuteman I (which entered service in 1962 with a range of 9,900 kilometers). The DF-31 weighs about 41 tons, 20 meters (62 feet) long, and 2.25 meters (7 feet) in diameter. It was designed for use on submarines, land silos, and mobile launchers. The truck mounted ones halt at those "parking lots in the middle of nowhere," visible in satellite pictures of Qinghai province, and fire from positions the missile guidance system has already been programmed with. The DF-31 has been shown stored in a TEL (transporter, erector, launcher) vehicle. Driving these vehicles along special highways in remote areas provides more protection from counterattacks rather than using a reinforced silo. The improved DF-31A has multiple (up to 5) warheads and more range (up to 12,000 kilometers, which could cover most of the United States).

The DF-31 has been in development for over twenty years and only had its first successful launch twelve years ago. It's now believed to have a reliable and accurate guidance system, as well as a third stage that carries multiple 50 kiloton nuclear warheads. Only about a dozen DF-31s are in service, plus about a dozen DF-31As. Many of these appear to be aimed at European Russia.

Last July the new DF-41 ICBM with multiple warheads was tested. China can apparently put 3-10 warheads in the DF-41 final stage. The DF-41 has not been displayed publicly but thanks to most Chinese having cell phones, and many knowing how to send photos to foreign web sites without getting arrested, there are photos of the DF-41 available. The DF-41 appears to have had a lot of development problems because few have been built and fewer (less than a dozen) put into service. The DF-41 is the only Chinese ICBM that can reach all of the United States.

Three years ago China announced that its nuclear armed ballistic missiles were not aimed at anyone. Like most countries, China has long refused to say who its nuclear armed missiles are aimed at. Most of those missiles only have enough range to hit Russia or India, or other nearby nations. For a long time most were very definitely aimed at Russia, which had rocky relations with China from the 1960s to the 1990s. But after the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991, the new and much smaller Russia became friendlier with the wealthier (more capitalist but still run by communists) China. Relations between China and India also warmed up and then went into a deep freeze during the past decade.

China is believed to have over 400 nuclear warheads, most of them installed on ballistic missiles. Only a few dozen of these missiles can reach the United States. These include the older (and about to be retired) DF-5, plus the newer DF-31A and DF-41. For the last two decades China has had about two dozen DF-5 ICBMs, their only missiles that can reach the United States. Few of these are believed to be operational because of reliability and maintenance problems. The U.S. has since installed 18 ICBM interceptor missile systems in Alaska. These are to deal with North Korean missiles but could also destroy most Chinese missiles headed for the United States. Thus it makes sense for China to simply say that it is not aiming any of its missiles at anyone. Modern guidance systems can be quickly (in less than an hour) programmed for a new target, so it doesn't really matter that, normally, the missiles have no target information in them. The DF-5s, moreover, are liquid fueled and the considerable activity required to ready them for launch can be detected by spy satellites.

The DF-5s are to be replaced by solid fuel DF-41s. These missiles can be moved, erected, and launched from a special truck. With a 15,000 kilometer range they can reach all of the United States. The third stage contains 3-10 warheads, each with an explosive yield of at least 100 KT. The DF-41s appear similar to the American 36 ton Minuteman III (a 1960s design that has been much upgraded since then).

India is of growing concern to China but there are shorter range ballistic missiles, like the DF-21, to deal with that threat. The Chinese introduced the DF-21 in 1999, and now has over a hundred in service. Many have non-nuclear warheads. This missile has a range of over 1,800 kilometers and can haul a 300 kiloton nuclear warhead. It's a two stage, 15 ton, solid fuel rocket. Launched from Tibet, the DF-21 can reach most major targets in India.

Then there is a submarine launched missile the JL (Julang) 2 SLBM (Sea Launched Ballistic Missile). This missile has had a lot of problems as have the SSBNs (ballistic missile carrying nuclear subs) that carried them. The 42 ton JL-2 has a range of 8,000 kilometers and would enable China to aim missiles at any target in the United States from a 094 class SSBN cruising off Hawaii or Alaska. Each 094 boat can carry twelve of these missiles, which are naval versions of the existing land based 42 ton DF-31 ICBM. The JL-2 was supposed to have entered service three years ago but kept failing test launches. No Chinese SSBN has ever gone on a combat cruise because these boats have been very unreliable.

About two thirds of Chinese nuclear warheads are believed to be in missile warheads, most of them DF-21s. Normally, these warheads are stored separately and mated to the missiles only for actual use or the occasional training exercise.

December 5, 2012: Strategy Page

On November 24th India held more tests of its ABM (Anti-Ballistic Missile) system. This one involved intercepting multiple incoming ballistic missiles and was declared a success. As a result of this, and several other successful tests earlier this year, Indian missile development officials believe their anti-missile system is ready for mass production and deployment. This would provide some Indian cities protection from Pakistani or Chinese ballistic missiles.

The Indian system uses two types of interceptors. The Prithvi Air Defense (PAD) missile is the larger of the two and is used for high altitude (50-80 kilometers up) interception. The short range Advanced Air Defense (AAD) missile is used for low altitude (up to 30 kilometers) intercepts. The two missiles, in conjunction with a radar system based on the Israeli Green Pine (used with the Arrow anti-missile missile), provide defense from ballistic missiles fired as far as 5,000 kilometers away. A third interceptor, the PDV, is a hypersonic missile that can take down missiles as high as 150 kilometers and is still in development. India is the fifth nation to develop such anti-missile technology.

The Indian system has been in development for over a decade. Ten years ago India ordered two Israeli Green Pine anti-ballistic missile radars. That equipment was used six years ago in a successful Indian test, where one ballistic missile was fired at another "incoming" one. The Israeli Green Pine radar was originally developed for Israel's Arrow anti-ballistic missile system. Arrow was built, in cooperation with the United States, to defend Israel from Iranian and Syrian ballistic missiles. India has since developed, with Israel, the Swordfish radar, which has similar capabilities to the Green Pine and has been operational for two years. Swordfish is part of a system that integrates data from satellites and other sources in order to detect and track incoming missiles.

The interceptor missiles and the fire control systems were designed and built in India, although more Israeli technology may have been purchased to speed things along. India wanted to buy the entire Israeli Arrow system but the United States refused to allow the sale (which involved a lot of American technology). The Indian ABM system wasn’t supposed to become operational for another two years. But the developers believe it is ready now and are asking parliament for money to start building systems to defend places like New Delhi (where parliament is). Even so, it’s doubtful that the ABM system would be operational, even if just around New Delhi, by 2014. Then there is the question of just how effective the India ABM system really is. India has a shabby reputation with developing weapons. Projects go on for decades without ever producing operational weapons. But joint-ventures with other countries (like Russia, France, and Israel) have been more successful. Israel is believed to be more heavily involved in this ABM than official pronouncements indicate. If so, this would be a good thing, even if the Indians don’t like to publicize it.

China and Pakistan could only defeat the Indian ABM defenses by firing more missiles at the same time than the Indians could handle. It's also possible to equip warheads with decoys in an attempt to get the interceptor missile to miss. Israel has technology designed to deal with these decoys and India can probably purchase that. But against an overwhelming number of incoming missiles, some are going to get through.

27 November 2012 By Sarosh Bana-  Pacific Ssentinel.

US President Obama was hard pressed to play the pacifist at a rather fractious ASEAN summit in Cambodia, where discussions on the maritime disputes of some of the grouping’s 10 members with China boiled over. The three-day annual summit of the Association of South-East Asian Nations concluded on 20 November without resolving the dispute between these countries and a by far militarily superior China. The impasse thwarted the 45-year-old grouping’s efforts towards deepening cohesion within this economically vibrant region and its aspirations of transforming itself into an EU-like community by the end of 2015.

 

Beijing’s claims of sovereignty over almost the entire South China and East China seas have sparked disputes with its neighbours such as Japan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Taiwan, Malaysia and Brunei Darussalam. Apart from Japan and Taiwan, the rest are ASEAN member countries, as also Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar, Singapore and Thailand. The bone of contention has been the various island enclaves, not of much value in themselves, but the possession of which would provide strategic, resource-rich continental shelves and Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) that extend 200 nautical miles from the low-water shoreline.

 

Neither the United States nor China is a member of ASEAN, but each has votaries in the group. The flashpoint at the summit was the draft statement of the chairman – Cambodia, a staunch ally of Beijing – that pointed to a consensus against internationalising the South China Sea issue. This agitated the representatives of the Philippines, Vietnam, Brunei, Indonesia and Singapore. Philippine President Benigno Aquino III, in particular, rose to challenge what he said was Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen’s attempt to preclude any debate on the territorial disputes and divert the focus onto economic issues instead.

 

Cautioning against allowing such disputes to escalate, Obama urged the gathering to take steps to ease tensions. He, however, avoided any talk on this issue in his meeting with outgoing Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao on the last day of the summit. Washington has nevertheless advocated a “code of conduct” that would avert any clashes in the disputed territories.

 

China has long held the position that whatever disputes that may arise should be resolved through consultations and negotiations by the concerned sovereign states. In Phnom Penh it, however, said it was open to debating the issue within ASEAN, though without the involvement of any other parties, an oblique reference to the United States.

 

Coincidentally or not, China’s maritime disputes with its neighbours in the littoral have been gaining global attention ever since Obama’s announcement in January 2012 of his country’s “pivot” strategy in the Asia-Pacific. These developments are posing a threat to this fastest growing economic region in the world and its vital waterways, confounding diplomatic efforts, rousing hostilities and heralding a geopolitical power struggle between the world’s two leading economies – the United States and China.

 

Further, anti-Japan street protests swept across China in September as the two largest economies in Asia sparred over a disputed island territory in the East China Sea which each claimed as its own. Potentially vast gas and oil fields have been estimated off the shores of the island, called Diaoyu by China and Senkaku by Japan. The two neighbours strove to keep the naval conflict from spiralling, mindful of their entrenched commercial ties that have resulted in two-way trade reaching a record $345 billion last year, China being the biggest trading partner of Japan.

 

While the Asia-Pacific has hitherto been driven by commercial interests, the widening unrest in the sea lanes that are the lifeline of this region may eventually compel the validity of a military front on the lines of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO). Much in the manner in which China’s growing might is being perceived today, the 28-member NATO had been founded in 1949 in response to the threat posed by the Soviet Union, with its prioritised purpose having been to deter Soviet expansionism. NATO had codified cooperation in military preparedness among the allied signatories by stipulating that “an armed attack against one or more of them… shall be considered an attack against them all”.

 

Though Asia-Pacific countries are keen on safeguarding their territorial interests, they are at the same time anxious not to let regional conflicts flare into Asia’s next war. However, to lay the foundations of overall peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific, a NATO-like security structure would need to be inclusive, having China within its ambit.

 

The return of Asia-Pacific to the centre of world affairs is the great power shift of the 21st century. This economically integrated region is traversed by half the world’s commercial shipping worth $5 trillion of trade a year. More than 4.2 billion people live there, constituting 61 per cent of the world’s population. And apart from straddling vital supply chains, it holds dense fishing grounds and potentially enormous oil and natural gas reserves, though at present it is a net importer of fossil fuels. Energy-hungry export-driven economies in the region, heavily dependent on raw material and fuel imports, are keen on exercising their suzerainty over the regional Sea Lanes of Communication (SLOC) that are critical to the survival of the entire Asia-Pacific community.

 

Washington’s “pivot” strategy is juxtapositioning its desire to be neutral with the imperative to raise its already formidable profile in the Asia-Pacific. Its numerous military bases in the region include 17 in Japan and 12 in South Korea, while it also has a presence in Australia, Thailand, the Philippines, Guam and Singapore. Obama’s “rebalance” to the Asia-Pacific entails the relocation of 60 per cent of America’s naval assets – up from 50 per cent today – to the region by 2020. The drawdown in Afghanistan, according to US deputy Defence Secretary Ashton Carter, will release naval surface combatants as well as naval intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, and processing, exploitation, and dissemination capabilities, as also more Army and Marine Corps. EP-3 signals reconnaissance aircraft have already moved from CENTCOM (Central Command) to PACOM (Pacific Command). There will be a net increase of one aircraft carrier, seven destroyers, 10 Littoral Combat Ships and two submarines in the Pacific in the coming years. America’s military outpost of Guam is being readied as a strategic hub for the Western Pacific and Marines are being forward-stationed there. A full US Marine task force will also be established by 2016 in Australia, a key Asia-Pacific partner of the United States. The US Air Force will shift unmanned and manned reconnaissance aircraft from Afghanistan to the Asia-Pacific, apart from space, cyber and bomber forces.

 

The question remains whether this “rebalance” is aimed at containing China’s growing economic and military might or bolstering the American presence in the region. Beijing views Washington’s proposal as an attempt to curb Chinese influence across the region and to embolden countries to brazen out Beijing on the maritime disputes.

 

America’s concerted force multiplication in the region betrays the intent to forge some sort of a military front like NATO. “There is no multilateral organisation like NATO in the region,” notes Ashton Carter. “And in the absence of an overarching security structure, the US military presence has played a pivotal role over those last past 60 years, providing nations with the space and the security necessary to make their own principled choices.”

 

A NATO-like platform may not evolve soon, but appears inevitable in light of the rising volatility in the region. The similarities between now and at the time of NATO’s creation cannot be lost, notwithstanding the fact that the United States and China have very high stakes in their relationship, unlike the Cold War that had riven Washington and Moscow. Be that as it may, while announcing America’s renewed engagement in the Pacific, Secretary Clinton told the Pacific Islands Forum that “the Pacific is big enough for all of us”. There’s a lot of merit in keeping it that way.

 

Originally published by Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (www.idsa.in) and can be found HERE.

November 21, 2012 china-defense-mashup.com

2012-11-21 — China’s locally made early-warning aircraft have proven their operational capabilities in drills and can now direct different forces to respond more effectively to aerial threats, the People’s Liberation Army Daily reported yesterday.

Analysts said the report could be seen as a response to Western reports that downplay the effectiveness of China’s military modernisation effort.

The PLA Daily report, which appeared in an inside page, did not identify the aircraft that took part in the drills, but it was accompanied by an illustration of a KJ-2000 early waring aircraft in flight. It said the plane had become an air operational centre to command land, air and naval forces in several drills this year.

The aircraft is larger than ordinary fighter jets and can detect threats such as enemy airplanes.

“It is a historic leap for our army’s combat ability on the modern battlefield … as the combat information transport system successfully connected with our advanced fighter jets during the drills,” the report said, adding that China had spent more than five decades developing its early-warning aircraft systems.

“The new achievement also indicates our army has overcome some critical bottlenecks in multi-unit command.”

In June, a report by Japan’s Kyodo news agency quoted American and Taiwanese sources as saying the PLA had only nine such aircraft, including five small KJ-200s and four large KJ-2000s, and that they were at least 20 years behind the planes operated by the United States and Japan in terms of operational capability.

Andrei Chang, editor-in-chief of the Canada-based Kanwa Asian Defence Monthly, said China’s options were limited because it “doesn’t have enough advanced, big aircraft” suitable for the installation of early-warning systems.

“But it’s difficult to estimate how many years the PLA’s early-warning operation lags behind the Western countries because Beijing is trying to narrow the gap,” Chang said.

Lin Chong-pin, a former deputy defence minister in Taiwan, said the PLA Daily report was not propaganda, but further evidence of Beijing’s breakthroughs in the field.

“[The mainland] faced a developing bottleneck of military technologies in the 1990s, but it has made many breakthroughs in the 21st century, including the debuts of the J-21 and J-31 [stealth fighters] and the batch production of 052-D guided missile destroyers early this year,” Lin said.

He credited the rapid development to former president Jiang Zemin’s efforts to accelerate the army’s modernisation, including a funding boost and the unprecedented promotion of many officers with engineering backgrounds to decision-making positions.

The KJ series of early-warning aircraft debuted in the 2009 National Day parade, but the PLA Daily said the army had set up its first early-warning force five years earlier.

November 16, 2012 China Military News

2012-11-16 — China is flexing its muscles as an arms exporter with a growing array of indigenous weaponry, offering something for most budgets in the global arms bazaar and revealing its wider ambitions to strategic rivals and watchful neighbours.

As a new leadership was anointed in Beijing and the world looked on to see what direction it might take over the next decade, military officials from Africa to Southeast Asia were shopping for Chinese weapons in the country’s south.

Change has come fast in China, now the world’s second-largest economy, and with its rise has come a new sense of military assertiveness with a growing budget to develop modern warfare equipment including aircraft carriers and drones.

All the signs point to newly named Communist Party chief Xi Jinping, who is slated to become president next March, continuing China’s aggressive military modernisation.

Now the world’s fourth-largest arms exporter, China laid out its wares this week at an air show in Zhuhai, a palm-lined port between Macau and Hong Kong that becomes a heavily armed industry showcase every other November.

In the 10 years to 2011, China’s foreign military sales have increased 95 percent, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).

Among dozens of items shown publicly for the first time this week were Chinese attack helicopters, missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles and air defences. As usual, the exhibit halls contained everything from shoulder-fired weapons to cruise missiles.

“China is getting more aggressive in the export market as its own industrial base develops,” said Doug Barrie, senior fellow for Military Aerospace at the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies.

“It looks at Russia and the U.S. as examples of how you can use the export arena to help develop your own industries.”

Between them, Washington and Moscow account for more than half of the world’s $410 billion in arms sales, but opportunities abound for China as the United States looks to cut its military spending to manage its mounting debt.

Still, U.S. spending dwarfs that of China. In its annual report on the Chinese military, the Pentagon in May estimated Beijing’s total 2012 spending would be between $120 billion and $180 billion. Washington will spend $614 billion on its military this year.

Most of Beijing’s trade is done with small states outside of the European Union, which like the United States, put China under an arms embargo after the crackdown on Tiananmen Square protests in 1989.

Pakistan, Bangladesh, Iran and Myanmar are among China’s biggest clients, with aircraft at the top of their shopping lists, SIPRI data shows.

Beijing does not release official figures for arms sales. Foreign estimates put the figure at about $2 billion in 2011.

STAR OF SHOW: STEALTH FIGHTER

The undisputed star of the show this week was a sleek, quarter-sized model of China’s second stealth fighter, dubbed the J-31 by most Western analysts.

Although officially a concept plane, it bore what industry bible Aviation Week called a “striking resemblance” to a mystery jet that flew briefly at the end of October.

Photographs of the jet leaked, or orchestrated to look like a leak, and emerged on the Internet days before this week’s Communist Party Congress and leadership handover, and confirmed China’s place in a select club of stealth-capable nations.

“China has stood up,” said John Pike, director of Virginia-based GlobalSecurity.org, an expert on industry strategy.

Only the United States has successfully produced more than one stealth jet and the challenges facing China’s less experienced developers are undoubtedly immense.

The unveiling also served as a reminder to its neighbours of China’s growing clout as tensions rise over rival claims for territory in the East China Sea and South China Sea.

“China is doing this as part of a political equation,” said Robert Hewson, editor of IHS Jane’s Air-Launched Weapons. “It has had a rapidly staged coming out but I am surprised to see it here so soon.”

By mixing domestic and international messages, the model also filled a void left by the absence of top Chinese government officials distracted by the transition in Beijing.

BASIC BUT RELIABLE

The business end of the show is about present-day realities.

After relying heavily on Russian and to a lesser extent Israeli technology in the 1990s, China is pushing exports of home-grown equipment to expand its influence in areas like Africa where it is busy buying land and forging new allies.

“The Chinese used to simply produce cheap knockoffs of their basic Russian equipment. They have made very considerable advances, but still have problems, particularly with engines,” said Simon Wezeman, senior researcher at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.

“On some technology, they are now competitive on technology with European arms exports and very competitive on price.”

China has sold defence systems and co-developed a derivative of a Russian fighter with Pakistan and done smaller deals with African countries. There is also interest from Latin America.

Western analysts say China has a reputation for selling basic but reliable equipment with relatively few questions asked about its use, a key selling point.

But the range of products on display in Zhuhai is both increasing and gradually moving up in value, while remaining a decade or two behind the most advanced U.S. equipment.

COPYCAT APPROACH

For the first time at Zhuhai, China showed an export version of a long-range surface-to-air missile, the truck-mounted FD-2000, and a Predator-style UAV called the Wing Loong.

There was also a focus on systems that build relationships such as the L-15 trainer, which won its first export deal to an unidentified country at the show.

Admittedly, China’s other reputation for copying what it cannot make is unlikely to disappear any time soon.

A parlour game among delegates is to tick off the similarities between Chinese systems and foreign platforms.

“When you come and see these aircraft you relate them to what you have seen before. The K-8 is a Hawk, the J-10 a Eurofighter, the L-15 an Aermacchi M-346,” said an officer with an African air force delegation, asking not to be identified.

“That is why some people don’t want to send their planes here. You come back in five years and it’s called a J-something.”

Organisers said a record 650 companies from 38 countries showed up to present exhibits at the ninth Zhuhai show.

A few yards and a Chinese wall separate the military part of the show and Western aerospace suppliers striking deals with China’s fledgling civil aerospace industry.

This week’s flying displays included a surprise debut of the Z-10 months after U.S. company United Technologies admitted selling software that helped Beijing develop its first modern military attack helicopter.

“China’s aviation industry is turning out reasonably decent products,” said Pike in a telephone interview. “They are not there yet and they have a long way to go. But they are open for business.”

15.11.2012 Pacific Sentinel

October 16, 2012 China Military News

2012-10-16 — (by Bill Gertz) China’s military is set to conduct a test of a new and more capable anti-satellite missile that United States intelligence agencies say can knock out strategic satellites in high-earth orbit, according to U.S. officials.

However, a recent intelligence assessment said the test of the Dong Neng-2 direct ascent anti-satellite (ASAT) weapon is being delayed in an apparent effort to avoid upsetting President Barack Obama’s reelection bid, said officials who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Intelligence reports from September and this month revealed China will test fire the new DN-2 missile from a ground base sometime in early to mid November.

The missile is described by intelligence agencies as a high-earth orbit interceptor designed to destroy satellites by ramming them at high speeds. The intelligence reports called the new missile a strategically significant counterspace weapon, said the officials familiar with the reports.

Testing a high-earth orbit anti-satellite missile would represent a major advance in China’s satellite-killing capability, which has been underway for more than a decade. High-earth orbit, also known as geosynchronous orbit, is the location of major communications and navigation satellites, which orbit at a distance of between 12,000 miles and 22,236 miles from earth.

China’s last ASAT test in 2007 destroyed a low-earth orbit weather satellite about 558 miles in space, causing an orbiting debris field of tens of thousands of pieces of metal that U.S. officials say will threaten orbiting satellites and human space travelers for 100 years.

U.S. officials said it is unlikely China will conduct an impact test of a kinetic kill vehicle against an aging weather satellite as occurred in 2007, although the possibility of a second, major debris-causing test cannot be ruled out.

Instead, officials said the test most likely will be a demonstration of a precision-guided direct ascent missile flying out tens of thousands of miles.

“If the United States loses the strategic high ground of high-earth orbit [from a Chinese  high-altitude ASAT missile], we are in real trouble,” said one U.S. official.

U.S. Global Positioning System satellites, used for both navigation and precision missile guidance, are located in medium-earth orbit, or about 12,000 miles, and thus would be vulnerable to the new DN-2.

Whether or not the test is successful, development of the new high-altitude DN-2 ASAT reveals that China’s military is planning for future high-orbit space warfare despite seeking international agreements banning weapons in space.

China’s January 2007 ASAT test drew protests from the United States and other spacefaring nations, who saw it as a major threat to satellites used for both military and civilian purposes. That test also produced tens of thousands of pieces of space debris which threaten satellites.

A second possibility is the DN-2 missile test will be fired against a target missile, as occurred in 2010 as part of a joint Chinese ASAT-missile defense test.

Pentagon spokesmen declined to comment on the DN-2 ASAT program.

Michael Pillsbury, a former Reagan administration defense policymaker, stated in a 2007 report to Congress that Chinese military writers advocated covert deployment of sophisticated anti-satellite weapons system like the kind now being developed by the People’s Liberation Army for use against the United States “in a surprise manner without warning.”

“Even a small scale anti-satellite attack in a crisis against 50 U.S. satellites—assuming a mix of targeted military reconnaissance, navigation satellites, and communication satellites—could have a catastrophic effect not only on U.S. military forces, but on the U.S. civilian economy,” said Pillsbury, currently with the Hudson Institute. Chinese military writings also have discussed attacks on GPS satellites that are located in high-earth orbit, he stated.

ASAT a top-secret program

China’s anti-satellite missile system is a key element of the communist state’s growing arsenal of asymmetric warfare weapons, and remains one of Beijing’s most closely guarded military secrets.

Defense officials have said that with as few as 24 ASAT missiles, China could severely weaken U.S. military operations by disrupting global communications and military logistics, as well as by limiting celestial navigation systems used by high-technology weapons. Such an attack also would severely degrade U.S. intelligence gathering efforts against global targets, a key strategic military advantage.

A U.S. official familiar with reports of the ASAT test said China’s delay in conducting the test until after the Nov. 6 election is a sign Beijing wants to help President Obama’s reelection campaign. “It implies they’d rather have him reelected,” said the official.

The Obama administration has adopted conciliatory policies toward China’s military buildup and its large-scale human rights abuses. Critics say the administration also failed to hold Beijing accountable for its unfair trade practices and currency manipulation.

The administration’s questionable policies were revealed by a 2009 State Department cable that quoted Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as saying, “How do you deal toughly with your banker?”—a reference to China’s potentially coercive leverage over the United States through its large holdings of U.S. debt securities.

Richard Fisher, a Chinese military affairs specialist, said little is known publicly of the DN-2 missile. However, the DN-2 may be China’s designation for an ASAT missile and kill vehicle combination mounted on launchers dubbed KT-2, or KT-2A. This ASAT weapon is based on DF-31 or DF-31A road-mobile intercontinental ballistic missiles, respectively.

“ASATs derived from the KT-2 and KT-2A space launch vehicles have the potential to reach high earth orbits used by many strategic U.S. surveillance, communication, and navigation satellites,” said Fisher, with the International Assessment and Strategy Center.

Fisher said in 2002, during a military show in China, the KT-2A was touted by Chinese officials as having a 2,000-kilogram payload that could reach high-earth orbits.

“Since its appearance a decade ago, the KT series of space launch vehicles presaged what we now know, that a key Chinese strategic goal has been to deny outer space as a sanctuary to support American military operations,” Fisher said.

A KT-1 microsatellite launcher was displayed at the Zhuhai air show in 2000, and “it was fairly obvious that this could become the basis for an ASAT, and it was used as the basis for the SC-19 ASAT demonstrated successfully in January 2007,” Fisher said.

Because China will not join a verifiable space control agreement, “Washington has little choice, if it is to continue to deter China militarily, but to build far greater redundancy, passive and active defenses for outer space,” he said.

China ASAT caused space debris

U.S. officials estimate that China’s 2007 ASAT test that destroyed an aging weather satellite in low-earth orbit now accounts for 45 percent of all space debris in low-earth orbit.

After a year of stonewalling by China on the test, an official U.S. demarche, or protest note, was sent to Beijing in January 2008. According to a copy of the note made public by Wikileaks, the protest warned the Chinese government, “Any purposeful interference with U.S. space systems will be interpreted by the United States as an infringement of its rights and considered an escalation in a crisis or conflict.”

“The United States reserves the right, consistent with the [United Nations] Charter and international law, to defend and protect its space systems with a wide range of options, from diplomatic to military,” stated the protest, made by then-U.S. Ambassador to China Clark Randt.

A joint State Department-Pentagon report to Congress on export controls made public in April states that China is “developing space-based methods to counter ballistic missile defenses of the United States and our allies, including anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons.”

“As China advances in operational space capabilities, it is actively focusing on how to destroy, disrupt, or deny U.S. access to our own space assets,” the report said.

China is developing and refining its ASAT weapons as part of a “multi-dimensional program to limit or prevent the use of space-based assets by potential adversaries during times of conflict,” the report said.

“In addition to the direct-ascent [missile] ASAT program, China is developing other technologies and concepts for kinetic and directed energy for ASAT missions,” including electronic jamming of satellite communications and lasers that disrupt satellites, the report said.

ASAT weapons “have significant implications for anti-access/area-denial efforts against the United States in Taiwan Strait contingencies,” the report said. Those weapons and capabilities are being developed by China as a means to force the U.S. military out of Asian waters and territory and make it more difficult for U.S. forces to get into the region during a conflict, such as a defense of Taiwan. Other anti-access area denial weapons include anti-ship ballistic missiles, cyber warfare capabilities, and submarines.

Defense Intelligence Agency director Lt. Gen. Ronald L. Burgess told Congress in February that “China successfully tested a direct ascent anti-satellite weapon (ASAT) missile and is developing jammers and directed-energy weapons for ASAT missions.”

Burgess said that as “a prerequisite for ASAT attacks, China’s ability to track and identify satellites is enhanced by technologies from China’s manned and lunar programs as well as technologies and methods developed to detect and track space debris.”

Another ASAT test by China will likely undermine the Obama administration’s controversial space arms control proposal, introduced in January. Many in the Pentagon oppose the International Code of Conduct for Outer Space Activities over concerns it would place limits on U.S. space capabilities.

U.S. lagging in counterspace

Despite China’s continuing development of space weapons, the administration has done no research or development into so-called counterspace weapons and other capabilities that could deter China from its ASAT and anti-satellite laser and jammer arms, according to military officials. The opposition is based on the administration’s preference for arms control negotiations and agreements as a major element of its U.S. national security policies, the officials said.

Frank Rose, deputy assistant secretary of state for arms control, said in a speech in April that the space code of conduct would include legally nonbinding “transparency and confidence-building measures.”

However, a Pentagon Joint Staff assessment of the space code of conduct concluded that U.S. adherence to the code’s provisions would hurt U.S. space operations in several areas.

The Pentagon’s National Security Space Strategy from 2011 makes little mention of counterspace weapons. It states that U.S. policy is “to dissuade and deter” others from developing space weapons, without providing specifics.

The Pentagon indirectly demonstrated an ASAT capability in 2008 when it used a modified ship-based SM-3 anti-missile interceptor to shoot down a falling, low-earth orbit spy satellite that was considered a danger because its fuel tank might have passed through the atmosphere and landed on earth.

Cables detail PRC’s first ASAT test

According to a classified Jan. 12, 2010, State Department cable made public by Wikileaks, China conducted its most recent ASAT test on Jan. 11 of that year.

According to the cable, an ASAT missile designated SC-19 was fired from China’s Korla Missile Test Complex and successfully intercepted a CSS-X-11 medium-range ballistic missile launched from the Shuangchengzi Space and Missile Center.

The two missiles were tracked by U.S. missile warning satellites to an intercept point at an altitude of about 155 miles in space.

Until then, the SC-19 had been used previously to boost China’s first successful direct-ascent anti-satellite intercept on Jan. 11, 2007, when a missile rammed into China’s FY-1C weather satellite.

“Previous SC-19 DA-ASAT flight-tests were conducted in 2005 and 2006,” the 2010 cable said. “This test is assessed to have furthered both Chinese ASAT and ballistic missile defense [BMD] technologies.”

The cable contained a U.S. protest note to China on the 2010 test seeking an explanation for Chinese officials about the purpose of the test and “what steps were taken to minimize the creation of orbital debris.”

The cable said that since the 2007 ASAT test, the United States had urged China not to conduct further space weapons tests.

An earlier cable revealed that U.S. intelligence agencies had advance word of the 2010 space weapons test, and noted that China was not expected to provide notification in advance of the test, which proved accurate.

Other State Department cables revealed conflicting statements from Chinese officials on whether China planned to conduct future ASAT tests. Chinese Foreign Ministry official He Yafei unequivocally stated to U.S. officials in June 2008 that China would not conduct future ASAT tests. In July, China Lt. Gen. Zhang Qinsheng said there were no plans for an ASAT test in the near future.

October 15, 2012 China Military News

2012-10-15 — On the afternoon of Oct. 4, 2012, seven Chinese naval warships passed through the international waters between Okinawa and Miyako and headed for the Pacific for an ocean-going exercise, which caused vigilance of Japanese side. Hong Kong media outlets speculated that the activity of Chinese submarines on the First Island Chain and even Pacific Ocean is about to open to the public. In this regard, Rear Admiral Yin Zhuo, director with the Chinese Navy Advisory Committee for Informatization, said in an interview with the People’s Daily online that it is very common that Chinese submarines departed from the First Island Chain to carry out exercises and the ocean-going exercise was determined by the depth of water. Meanwhile, Yin warned Japanese side to treat the routine training of Chinese navy rationally.

Depth of water determined the training of Chinese navy in ocean-going regions

According to news released by Japanese Defense Ministry, seven Chinese warships passed through the water channel between Okinawa and Miyako on Oct. 4, which include guided missile destroyers, frigates, submarine rescue ships and depot ships. The foreign media paid close attention to the participation of submarine rescue ships in the training, speculating that there might be submarines in Chinese naval warships. “The Sun,” a Hong Kong-based newspaper, also said on Oct. 8 that the public debut of Chinese submarine rescue ships might imply Chinese submarines’ coming out into the open on the First Island Chain and even Pacific Ocean.

To these speculations, Yin said that the water in the continental shelf of the East China Sea is shallow, which is about 100 meters deep in average, and it is unable to meet the training needs of nuclear submarines and large conventional submarines, therefore the Chinese submarines must head for the First Island Chain for exercises in recent years.

The best anti-submarine training place is the sea area in the east of the First Island Chain and behind the Miyako Strait, in which the depth of water reaches 2 to 3 kilometers. It is common that the navy of a country goes to such waters to carry out combat drills and anti-submarine drills on water surface. Yin stressed, “I think any country having naval forces will understand it.”

Japan should treat regular blue water training of China rationally

For a long time, Japan has been tracking and monitoring China’s military exercises on the Pacific Ocean and more than once dispatched surface ships to close to Chinese naval vessels during regular blue water trainings, which seriously interfered with China’s normal exercises.

Japan’s P-3C anti-submarine patrol aircraft almost scouts about Chinese naval vessels’ sailing on the open seas for one to two times every day. In addition, Japan also monitors and supervises the guided missile tests and target practices of guided missiles, recording the emission frequency of guided missiles and other data. All of these acts show unfriendly attitude. Therefore, Chinese side hopes that Japan can take into consideration the overall situation of China-Japan relations and treat China’s blue water trainings rationally and friendly.

October 02, 2012 China Defense Blog

Judging from the recent PLA Daily articles and internet photo "releases", the 8th LH brigade of the 38th Group Army, Beijing MR has become the 2nd LH unit armed with the latest Z-10 attach choppers (6th squadron).   It is interesting to note that the 8th is also home to the Z-19 light attack helicopter (5th squadron).

After two years of service with the 5th LH brigade, it is clear that the CMC is now ready to expand its Z-10 footprint

This Z-10 is obviously at Baoding (8 Army Avn Bde), where 12 large hangars (for MI-17) and 9 small hangars (for Z-10), all camouflage and with round roofs, have been built by 2011. They seem to be also constructing 8 large hangars (for Z-8?).

There are also round hangars at Sanshui-Daliao (6 Army Avn Bde), but they are not camouflaged and are in two consecutive rows of 10, not separated like those at Baoding.

Since Z-8 and Z-10 appear to go together, perhaps we should expect the next Z-10 squadron to be formed in 26 GA 7 Army Avn Regt (Bde?).

Sep. 29, 2012 - By WENDELL MINNICK  Defense News

TAIPEI — As China celebrated the launch of its first aircraft carrier last week, images and video posted on the Internet raise new questions as to how far along the country has come in the development of its carrier capability.

Soon after the carrier, named Liaoning, was commissioned Sept. 25 at Dalian Naval Base, Western analysts began dissecting photos and videos posted by the country’s state-controlled media. Some believe the images raise the possibility that Liaoning might be closer to fielding a carrier-based fighter jet capability than previously thought, while others are unconvinced.

In the past, photos of what appeared to be the Shenyang J-15 Sea Shark fighter, a variant of the Russian Sukhoi Su-33, on the deck of the carrier were dismissed by analysts as mock-ups. No photos or videos have been seen of a fighter landing on or taking off from the carrier, but images and video from the induction ceremony show skid marks on the flight deck. A video also shows what appear to be the tail wings of two J-15s in the hangar deck.

Chinese media have consistently reported that the new carrier would be used primarily as a training platform and “to practice how to integrate with a combined task force,” said Gary Li, an analyst at U.K.-based Executive Analysis. Whether real aircraft or mock-ups, the presence of the planes on the ship indicates the Chinese are likely already — at the very minimum — practicing plane-handling techniques on the first-of-its-kind carrier.

According to Chinese state-controlled media, Liaoning is outfitted with state-of-the-art weapons, including a 150-kilometer-range active phased array radar capable of tracking 200 air targets; a 250-kilometer-range Sea Eagle surface-search radar; a 10-kilometer-range Red Flag 10 (FL-3000N) anti-missile system; and a two-kilometer-range 30mm 1030 automatic cannon for anti-ship missiles.

Besides the J-15, other aircraft could include the Zhi-8 transport helicopter and Kamov Ka-28 anti-submarine warfare (ASW) helicopter.

Some analysts said the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) might use the carrier initially as a helicopter carrier, akin to Japan’s Hyuga-class helicopter destroyers or the U.S. Navy’s Wasp-class amphibious assault ships.

“It is clear from certain pictures taken by the Chinese press in and around the carrier during the induction ceremony that there has been testing of the J-15 on the Liaoning,” Li said. “Tire marks on the runway suggest taking off and landing during sea trials, and one cameraman even managed to capture a J-15 test plane in the below deck hangar.”

But not everyone is convinced.

“I’m having trouble believing they’ve actually landed J-15s on this thing,” said Roger Cliff, a China military specialist at the Project 2049 Institute. Skid marks on the deck could be “touch-and-go” landings.

“The skid marks are well forward of where the arresting gear is,” he said. There is the possibility that they are also practicing takeoffs at sea.

“They could put J-15 prototypes, or even J-11s [Su-27], on the ship with a crane, take the ship out to sea, and practice taking off, landing back on dry land,” he said.

China would need a fighter that can handle a 3-degree angle of drop and a pilot would need to make several land-based arrested landings before trials can begin at sea, where the deck is pitching, Cliff said.

“When practicing on land, the consequence of touching down a foot behind where the deck starts is a poor landing score. If you do that on a carrier, you’re looking at a new aircraft, a new pilot, and repairs to the stern of the carrier,” he said.

Li said the J-15 is just one piece of the puzzle China needs to figure out.

“The lack of an early warning aircraft like the E-2 Hawkeye, even though a prototype has been spotted recently, and not enough dedicated ASW assets to go around in the form of Ka-28s [ASW helicopters], will mean that the Liaoning is not going to be conducting carrier operations in the true sense of the word for some time,” Li said.

Regional Jitters

The carrier could have a future combat role. Though analysts disagree about its capabilities, especially against the U.S. or Japanese navies, neighbors with territorial disputes with China in the South China Sea, such as the Philippines and Vietnam, are taking the threat seriously.

“China operating a large carrier is no doubt raising concern among the other Asian nations,” said Bernard “Bud” Cole, author of “The Great Wall at Sea.” The addition of a carrier provides the PLAN “for the first time with a classic means of effectively projecting naval power at significant distances.”

“My sense is that the Chinese carrier has already served China well as a powerful information warfare tool, despite having not operated as a carrier yet,” said Bob Nugent, vice president of naval advisory services at AMI International, based in Seattle. From a strategic point of view, he said, the ship “sends the same message that much of the rest of its naval development over the past 20 years has — China will be a global naval power.”

What specific mission Liaoning and its successors will carry out remains to be seen, Nugent said, but the “inherent flexibility of the carrier flight deck, perhaps the ultimate ‘reconfigurable mission module,’ means that whatever the mission — from defensive sea denial to offensive power projection — the ship and its follow-ons can be quickly adjusted and moved to be ready.

“While she is clearly a test platform first, it is worth keeping in mind that other navies have pressed their test carriers into wartime service when needed,” Nugent said.

In a broader sense, the Chinese carrier program could spark an arms race in the region.

“The carrier will provide additional motivation for the other Asian nations to continue and perhaps accelerate their ongoing naval modernization programs,” Cole said.

Cole points to Japan’s acquisition of small carriers and new submarines; Australia’s plan to acquire a new class of submarines and its efforts to modernize its Navy in general; acquisition of submarines by Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore; and a stated desire to acquire submarines by Thailand and the Philippines.

“Further, the Indian Navy has very ambitious modernization plans, to include nuclear-powered submarines and three aircraft carriers: Those plans will likely receive a significant boost the first time a Chinese carrier steams west of [the Strait of] Malacca,” Cole said.

September 6th, 2012 by mike.hoffman - defensetech.org

Japan and the U.S. are considering plans to use Guam as a hub for spy drones to monitor Chinese naval activities in the Pacific, according to a report in the Japan Times.

The U.S. already has Global Hawks stationed at Andersen Air Force Base, Guam. The U.S. Air Force plans to expand the number of spy drones at Andersen and welcome Japan drones over the next decade as the Japanese military plans to buy its own drone fleet.

Japan’s Self-Defense Force had planned to buy Global Hawks of its own before the deal was scuttled due to price concerns. The Japanese have remained confident in their plans to buy their own drones, especially as the Chinese naval fleet has stepped up their patrols throughout the Pacific.

Japanese military leaders currently fly the P-3C patrol aircraft to monitor Chinese naval movements. The investment in a Global Hawk or the U.S. Navy’s version of the RG-4, the Triton, would be a considerable step up in Japan’s intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capability.

U.S. and Japan air forces would share hangars and maintenance facilities for their drone fleets, according to the Japan Times report.

The U.S. Air Force’s Global Hawk arrived at Andersen in 2010. It’s the Air Force’s largest drone, although it does not carry weapons like the Predator or the Reaper.

U.S. Global Hawks from Guam flew missions over Japan after the massive tsunami obliterated the country. The Global Hawks provided intelligence and imagery for humanitarian clean up.

Northrop Grumman unveiled the MQ-4C Triton in June as part of the U.S. Navy’s Broad Area Maritime Surveillance program. It’s expected to fly a considerable chunk of it’s missions over the Pacific monitoring the Chinese and North Koreans.

June 24, 2012: Strategy Page

As China has increased the training flights for its pilots, it has also abandoned the old Soviet style rigid tactics. Pilots are now expected to show initiative and innovative flying tactics. To take advantage of this, last year the Chinese Air Force instituted a fighter pilot competition that culminates in an annual exercise that determines which ten fighter pilots would be able to wear a "Golden Helmet" for the next year. This is a regular flight helmet decorated with a special blue, red and gold pattern that marks the wearer as one of the elite combat pilots in the Chinese Air Force.

More cynical members of the Chinese Air Force are wondering how long it will take before paying a bribe will help you "earn" one of the Golden Helmets. While the program is seen as a smart move to encourage competition and improve skills, many air force officers have seen too many programs corrupted by greed and a military culture that is more tolerant of corruption than it is in achieving combat skills.