‘P5’ nuclear powers including China, US pledge to keep such weapons only for defence
- Nuclear weapons ‘should serve defensive purposes, deter aggression and prevent war’, joint statement says
- Proclamation comes amid rising tension over advances in China’s military technology and friction between Washington and Moscow
The
United States, China and three other nuclear-armed countries
collectively known as the “P5” released a joint statement on Monday
pledging to use nuclear weapons only for defensive purposes.
The move
comes amid rising concerns over the growth of China’s military presence
in the Pacific and advances in weapons technology.
Along with
Britain, France and Russia, Washington and Beijing affirmed that “a
nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought”. The five countries
are the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and
signatories to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
(NPT).
“As nuclear use would have far-reaching consequences, we also
affirm that nuclear weapons – for as long as they continue to exist –
should serve defensive purposes, deter aggression and prevent war,” the
group said. “We believe strongly that the further spread of such weapons
must be prevented.”
The statement follows a series of warnings
by US defence officials in recent months that say China’s advances in
military technology, including the size and scope of its nuclear missile
arsenal, are becoming a serious challenge for America’s military.
A
report released by the Pentagon in November said China had expanded its
nuclear capacity on land, sea and air and estimated that it could have
up to 700 deliverable nuclear warheads by 2027 and at least 1,000 by
2030.
General Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
warned just ahead of the publication of the report that China’s recent
advances in hypersonic missile technology represented a “fundamental
change” in the military balance of power – one that compels the US to
pull off a similar leap in technological preparedness.
Other
assessments, including a report in The Washington Postin July about work
on more than 100 construction sites that resembled existing launch
facilities for nuclear-armed ballistic missiles in central China, added
to these concerns. That report was based on a study of commercial
satellite images by the California-based James Martin Centre for
Nonproliferation Studies.
US State Department spokesman Ned Price
described the report as “concerning” and said that “it raises questions
about [China’s] intent”.
Nato Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg
has also expressed concern about China’s nuclear capability. In
September, he referred to the construction of new missile silos that
could significantly strengthen its nuclear capabilities.
Speaking
at a Nato conference on arms control issues organised in Copenhagen in
September, Stoltenberg said: “As a global power, China has global
responsibilities in arms control.”
Some analysts have said
Washington’s harder line against the Chinese government, under US
President Joe Biden and his predecessor Donald Trump, and technological
advances by Western countries have prompted Beijing to prioritise the
development of its military.
During his 2020 election campaign,
Biden vowed to reduce the role of nuclear weapons and seemingly
committed to what the Rome-based Nato Defence College called “a
significant change in US declaratory nuclear policy towards ‘sole
purpose’”, meaning that the lone function of nuclear weapons should be
to deter nuclear attacks.
However, Biden has since turned to
forging new alliances and measures aimed at curbing China’s ability to
access advanced technologies that could be used by its military, drawing
rebukes from Beijing, amid reports about the country’s advances in
military technology.
For example, China has condemned Australia’s
new defence agreement with the United States and Britain as an
“extremely irresponsible” move that risks triggering an arms race in the
Asia-Pacific region. Biden’s efforts to deepen military cooperation
with Japan, India and Australia, a partnership called “the Quad” has
also drawn Beijing’s fire.
Since November, the Biden
administration has placed dozens of Chinese firms – including quantum
computing and semiconductor companies; the world’s top commercial drone
maker, DJI Technology; and China’s Academy of Military Medical Sciences –
on trade and investment blacklists.
Monday’s P5 statement also comes amid heightened tensions between Washington and Moscow.
During
a phone call on Thursday, Biden urged Russian leader Vladimir Putin to
de-escalate the country’s aggression against Ukraine or else face
“serious costs”, as the US and allies seek to coordinate their response
to Moscow’s military build-up on the border with its western neighbour.
Despite
concern that the US and its allies Britain and France face growing
military threats from China and Russia, the P5 said on Monday that their
nuclear arms “are not targeted at each other or at any other state”.
The
group also said it was committed to “a security environment more
conducive to progress on disarmament with the ultimate goal of a world
without nuclear weapons”.
However, Monday’s statement is unlikely
to eliminate the threats that have been building in recent years, said
Bonny Lin, a senior fellow for Asian security and director of the China
Power Project at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, a
Washington-based think tank.
“If China views its involvement in any
potential conflict on its periphery as ‘defensive’ in nature, this
statement does not necessarily limit China’s use of nuclear weapons for
contingencies in the Asia-Pacific,” she said.
For example,
Beijing has warned the Biden administration against any further attempts
to bolster relations with Taiwan, which the mainland Chinese government
considers a renegade province. It has conducted military exercises near
the self-governing island after several visits to Taipei by US
lawmakers, who arrived aboard American military aircraft.
“It is
also not clear that this statement signals any Chinese desire to slow
down its nuclear modernisation pace,” Lin said. “The statement
highlights the importance of creating ‘a security environment more
conducive to progress on disarmament’ and does not actually say anything
about reductions in nuclear capabilities.”
Washington’s
accusations of genocide by the Chinese government in the country’s
far-western region of Xinjiangand resulting sanctions against officials,
as well as Beijing’s implementation of a national security law in Hong
Kong, have kept tensions between China and the West high.
“China’s
continued rise is coupled with growing disputes with Western countries
over issues like human rights, democratic values, rule of law and
international norms,” Tong Zhao, a senior fellow in the nuclear policy
programme at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, wrote in an
opinion piece in August.
“These developments have led Chinese
leadership to conclude that China faces a new geopolitical reality in
which Western countries are deliberately creating trouble and making up
excuses to demonise and contain China,” Zhao said.
He added that
China “has become more willing to invest in quantity, in addition to its
traditional focus on quality”, in terms of its nuclear arsenal.
It
remains to be seen whether Biden will follow through with is “sole
purpose” nuclear pledge in a formal nuclear posture review (NPR) – a
strategy document that has been issued four times since its first
edition in 1994 – that he is expected to issue as soon as this month.
In
interim national security guidance released by the White House in
March, Biden said China and Russia had changed “the distribution of
power across the world”.
The most recent review, issued by
Trump’s defence secretary James Mattis in 2018, declared that “deterring
nuclear attack is not the sole purpose of nuclear weapons”, and
reaffirmed the so-called nuclear triad, or the ability to fire nuclear
weapons from the land, sea and air.
“This review confirms the
findings of previous NPRs that the nuclear triad – supported by [Nato’s]
dual-capable aircraft and a robust nuclear command, control and
communications system – is the most cost-effective and strategically
sound means of ensuring nuclear deterrence,” Mattis’ edition said.
The
four pretexts for the use of nuclear weapons noted in the 2018 NPR
were: “deterrence of nuclear and non-nuclear attack; assurance of allies
and partners; achievement of US objectives if deterrence fails; and
capacity to hedge against an uncertain future”.