In 2020 we are witnessing Russia & China embracing a forced union, One of “Allies of Necessity.” Both countries in the past viewed each other as potential rivals, yet to the west, they were the same enemy. That’s according to a declassified report from THE FEDERATION of AMERICAN SCIENTISTS & THE NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL.
The U.S. Nuclear War Plan Option Sought Destruction of China and the Soviet Union as “Viable” Societies.
Both Countries would be destroyed in case of a hot war against one.
According to the report: ”Meeting that goal for China was more complicated because so much of the population was agrarian. A requirement for 30 percent fatalities of the total Chinese population, amounting to 212 million people, “would necessitate an exorbitant weight of effort”; because 84 percent of the population was in rural areas“
U.S. nuclear war plans during the Johnson administration included the option to remove “from the category of a major industrial power” and destroying it as a “viable” society. [ending any competition.]
Currently, both countries are targets of economic and military containment by the U.S. As is part of current American foreign policy , there can only be one superpower.
Below we will see excerpts from a declassified report named “Chinese Nuclear Forces and U.S. Nuclear War Planning” depicting plans of Nuclear war on both countries.
Before they became allies.
Chinese Nuclear Forces and U.S. Nuclear War Planning
While the Soviet Union regarded the United States as its major competitor
in the world, CINCPAC said in 1980, it viewed China as its “most intractable
Pacific Command planners were keenly aware of the beneficial role that China
played in tying down Soviet forces in the Far East that would otherwise have to
be countered by U.S. and Japanese forces. By 1984, CINCPAC estimated,
approximately 90 percent of Soviet ground forces in the Far East were directed
against China and preoccupied with the “growing Chinese nuclear capability.”412
China on the other hand maintained about 50 percent of its ground forces along
the Soviet border.413 The Soviet-Chinese stand-off had resulted in “the largest
single concentration of forces along any binational border.”414
The report included various nuclear targeting options. These ranged from attacks on enemy nuclear and conventional to attacking cities as well as military forces on purpose. This latter option would have been “in order to destroy the will and ability of the Sino-Soviet Bloc to wage war, remove the enemy from the category of a major industrial power, and assure a post-war balance of power favorable to the United States.”
China’s reaction to U.S Containment of Russia
As of August 1974, Soviet and Chinese reactions to the new policy had been limited. In fact, Chinese reactions appeared to be “generally favorable,” the CIA concluded. “The Chinese interpret the U.S. policy as having little direct impact on their own nuclear posture or on overall Sino-American relations,” the CIA said. “Instead, they see the policy as designed to strengthen the U.S. military position against” the Soviet Union. “Because China sees the USSR as posing the principle threat to its security,” CIA predicted, “the Chinese leaders can be
expected to read the new U.S. strategy as indirectly furthering, or at least not
opposing, Chinese aims.”373
China Didn’t know they were also a target of U.S containment And targets of nuclear destruction.
What the Chinese leaders apparently did not realize was that although the Soviet
Union was the focus of the new policy, NUWEP 74 also required U.S. nuclear
planners to incorporate a very wide range of Chinese facilities into the nuclear
strike plans. Two of four Major Attack Options (MAOs) were directed entirely
against China (Table 15), and three of the 11 new Selected Attack Options
(SAOs) covered virtually all elements of Chinese military and industrial facilities
Another possible explanation for the low-key Chinese reaction to the new policy
may have been not to disturb the U.S.-Sino “front” against the Soviet Union.
Whatever the reason, CIA cautioned that over time “the Chinese are likely to
be concerned that the new concept and the military capabilities implicit in it
may make the U.S. more willing to employ nuclear weapons against China….”
Indeed, the new concept “will probably enhance … Chinese incentives to
consider similar policies,”374 CIA warned.
Targets of Destruction
Current Nuclear Planning Against China
Current U.S. nuclear planning against China builds on the experience and
assumptions from the history described above, but also introduces important new
elements. Unlike Russia, according to the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review, “China
is a country that could be involved in an immediate or potential contingency.”472
Day-to-day targeting against Chinese targets is mainly the responsibility of the
SSBNs on patrol in the Pacific. Bombers with cruise missiles and bombs also are
assigned targets in China
Russia and China Today
Today the U.S maintains a policy of containment of Emerging power against both countries, and Western hostilities towards both countries have been very public. Both countries have decided, for better or worse, the need to collaborate where possible.
Both countries have trade agreements in Energy, Economic and Military.
- Russia Eyes Another Massive Gas Pipeline To China:Gazprom has begun design and exploration work on Power of Siberia-2, a new mega-pipeline that would deliver up to 50 billion cu. meters of natural gas annually to China
- China & Russia are currently working on a Submarine Project: Combining the hull technology of one nation with the combat systems and weapons of the other is another possibility. For example, giving a Chinese submarine Russian sonar and weapons, or fitting a Russian submarine with Chinese battery and AIP technology. – forbes
- Russia sold around US$15 billion worth of weapons to the Chinese in 2017: SUKHOI SU-35, S-400 AIR DEFENCE MISSILE SYSTEM, KAMOV HELICOPTERS, AL-31F ENGINES
- Russia says joint war games with China will be routine – apnews.com