Reply to comment

So
far this year the United States has succeeded in inflaming tensions
with China and indefinitely holding up a new strategic arms reduction
treaty with Russia through its relentless pursuit of global interceptor
missile deployments.

On
January 29 the White House confirmed the completion of a nearly $6.5
billion weapons transfer to Taiwan which includes 200 advanced Patriot
anti-ballistic missiles. Earlier in the same month it was reported that
Washington is also to provide Taiwan with eight frigates which Taipei
intends to equip with the Aegis Combat System that includes the
capacity for ship-based Standard Missile-3 interceptors.

The
Aegis sea-based component of the expanding U.S. interceptor missile
system already includes Japan, South Korea and Australia, and with
Taiwan added China would be justified in being apprehensive.

On
February 28 the U.S. House and Senate foreign affairs committees
permitted the “sale to Taiwan of missiles, helicopters and ships valued
at about $6.4 billion” despite weeks of protests from China. “The U.S.
Defense Department wants to sell Taiwan the most advanced Patriot
anti-missile system….The system, valued at $2.8 billion, would add to
Taiwan’s network of 22 missile sites around the country….” [1]

Chinese
Foreign Ministry Spokesman Qin Gang recently stated “The responsibility
for the current difficulties in China-U.S. relations [belongs]
completely to the U.S. side” for failing to recognize and respect
China’s “core interests.” [2]

If
the proposed placement of U.S. missile shield components in Poland, the
Czech Republic, Japan, Australia, South Korea, Alaska and elsewhere
were explained by alleged missile threats emanating from Iran and North
Korea, the transfer of U.S. Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3)
missiles to Taiwan – and, as was revealed in January, 35 miles from
Russian territory in Poland – represents the crossing of a new
threshold. The Patriots in Taiwan and Poland and the land- and
sea-based missiles that will follow them are intended not against
putative “rogue states” but against two major nuclear powers, China and
Russia.

The
PAC-3, “one of the most comprehensive upgrade programs ever undertaken
on an American weapon system,” [3] is in theory a strictly defensive
anti-ballistic missile system, targeting cruise and tactical ballistic
missiles. However, it has seven times the range of its PAC-2
predecessor and with plans for a yet further major upgrade, the Missile
Segment Enhancement, its operational capability will be doubled again.
With a future range of some 300 kilometers, the PAC-3 would be able to
intercept and destroy missiles over Chinese and Russian territory.

The
English-language government newspaper China Daily published an article
on February 22 called “China circled by chain of US anti-missile
systems,” which observed that “Quite a few military experts have noted
that Washington’s latest proposed weapon deal with Taiwan is the key
part of a US strategic encirclement of China in the East Asian region,
and that the missiles could soon have a footprint that extends from
Japan to the Republic of Korea and Taiwan.” [4]

The
article cites a Chinese air force colonel and military strategist as
contending that “China is in a crescent-shaped ring of encirclement.
The ring begins in Japan, stretches through nations in the South China
Sea to India, and ends in Afghanistan. Washington’s deployment of
anti-missile systems around China’s periphery forms a crescent-shaped
encirclement.”

Regular
Pentagon military exercises in Mongolia, the Philippines, South Korea,
Thailand and Cambodia as well as solidification of military ties with
the nations of the Indian subcontinent – Pakistan, India and Bangladesh
– are further cause for concern in Beijing.

The
China Daily feature also quoted an expert in military affairs at the
Institute of Political Science and Law as saying “The US anti-missile
system in China’s neighborhood is a replica of its [the U.S.'s]
strategy in Eastern Europe against Russia. The Obama administration
began to plan for such a system around China after its project in
Eastern Europe got suspended.”

In
fact the current U.S. administration has by no means abandoned plans to
surround Russia as well as China with a ring of interceptor missile
installations and naval deployments.

Last
month’s revelations that Washington is going to station land-based
interceptors in Bulgaria and Romania were followed by a report that in
addition to the Patriot missile batteries that will be set up in
eastern Poland next month “The US is still looking to build missile
silos in northern Poland” and, even more alarming, “The US is also
interested in building longer-range missile silos near the
Poland-Kaliningrad border. These would be capable of shooting down
missiles from as far as 5,500 kilometers away….” [5]

The
distance between the capitals of Poland and Iran is less than 4,000
kilometers, so American missiles with a range of 5,500 kilometers are
designed for other purposes. They could take in a broad stretch of
Russia.

The
above-cited Chinese feature noted in addition that “the ring encircling
China can also be expanded at any time in other directions….Washington
is hoping to sell India and other Southeast Asian countries the Patriot
Advanced Capability (PAC)-3 missile defense system.”

The
U.S. has had Patriot interceptor missiles deployed in Japan, South
Korea and in Taiwan even before the planned delivery of 200 more to the
third state.

“Analysts
say that China is closely monitoring US-India missile defense
cooperation since any integration of India into the US global missile
defense system would profoundly affect China’s security.” [6]

On
February 24 Russian Lieutenant General Yevgeny Buzhinsky was
paraphrased by one of his nation’s main news agencies as stating “China
could strengthen its nuclear capability in response to U.S. global
missile defense plans.”

Indicative
of what reaction U.S. missile shield deployments in China’s
neighborhood could provoke, he said: “At present, China has a very
limited nuclear potential, but my recent contacts with Chinese military
representatives indicate that if the United States deploys a global
missile defense system, in particular in the Far East, China will build
up its offensive capability.” [7]

In
response to U.S. insistence on supplying Taiwan with hundreds of
Patriot missiles, Blackhawk helicopters and Harpoon missiles, on
February 23 the Pentagon announced that China had delivered on its
pledge to postpone military contacts with Washington by canceling
scheduled exchanges, including “a visit by Adm. Robert F. Willard,
commander of U.S. Pacific Command, and visits to the U.S. by China’s
chief of the general staff, Chen Bingde, and a Chinese regional
commander.” [8]

A
Russian commentary on March 2 placed the developments in stark
perspective. “The differences between the USA and China have gone so
far that some time ago Beijing announced that all contacts with
Washington in this field would be stopped….The visit to China by
Pentagon Chief Robert Gates, which was set for the first half of this
year, is also put into question. Besides, bilateral consultations on
strategic security were also delayed on Beijing’s initiative.” [9]

Another analysis from the same country added a historical dimension to the burgeoning crisis in U.S.-China relations.

“This
winter has been a cold one for China-US relations. So many serious
disagreements between the two countries have not surfaced
simultaneously for decades….In the past China and the US avoided taking
harsh measures against each other serially, but evidently things have
changed beyond recognition over the past several months.” [10]

As
mentioned above, the U.S. is implementing plans to replicate the
interceptor encirclement of Russia in regards to China. China’s sense
of alarm and its government’s response, then, can be expected to
parallel those of Russia.

In
late February Polish President Lech Kaczynski ratified a Status of
Forces Agreement for American troops to be based at the Patriot missile
battery near Russia’s Kaliningrad district.

All
American and NATO claims to the contrary, “Poland’s former Defense
Minister Radoslaw Sikorski and the Polish president himself earlier
admitted that they are not concerned about threats from Iran, but they
are interested in establishing an ‘American umbrella’ above Poland,
thus trying to show that they see Russia as an aggressor and a threat
to Poland.”

“According
to the agreement, about 100 American soldiers will service up to eight
US Patriot missile launchers” [11] in an installation that “will be
equipped with elements allowing it to be integrated with the Polish
defense system.” [12]

Early
last month General Nikolai Makarov, chief of Russia’s General Staff,
warned that American interceptor missile plans jeopardize his nation’s
national security and have sabotaged the finalization of a successor to
the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), which has been in limbo
since December 5.

Makarov said of the U.S. project, “We view it very negatively, because it could weaken our missile forces.” [13]

Echoing
his fears over the fate of START talks, on February 19 Russian Deputy
Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said that Washington’s missile project
“in the most immediate sense” is negatively influencing negotiations on
a replacement to a Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty. [14]

Five
days later Konstantin Kosachev, head of the State Duma committee for
international relations, said “If the connection between the strategic
arms reduction treaty and missile defense is not exhaustively fixed by
the sides in preparing the treaty… this would automatically create
obstacles for subsequent ratification of the document in the State Duma
and create additional difficulties for further advance[s] in cutting
strategic offensive weapons.” [15]

The
provocative decisions by the U.S. on missile deployments in Poland,
Romania and Bulgaria since the expiration of the START last December
lead to no other conclusion than the White House and the Pentagon
intend the indefinite postponement if not the aborting of any
comprehensive agreement to limit and reduce nuclear arms.

Russia’s
permanent representative to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, has recently voiced
the concern that the U.S. still plans to base anti-ballistic missile
facilities in Poland and the Czech Republic [16] in spite of statements
by President Barack Obama and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates last
September 17 that previous plans for both countries are being replaced
by “stronger, smarter, and swifter” deployments.

The U.S. has not substituted the missile encirclement of Russia with that of China. It is conducting both simultaneously.

As
it is doing so, the Pentagon announced on February 12 that “A U.S.
high-powered airborne laser weapon shot down a ballistic missile in the
first successful test of a futuristic directed energy weapon, the U.S.
Missile Defense Agency said….” [17]

A
Reuters report of the test launched from a base in California over the
Pacific Ocean, one which has been touted as finally realizing the
Ronald Reagan administration’s plans for the Strategic Defense
Initiative, popularly known as Star Wars, described its purpose: “The
airborne laser weapon is aimed at…providing the U.S. military with the
ability to engage all classes of ballistic missiles at the speed of
light while they are in the boost phase of flight.” [18]

One
of weapon’s manufacturers, the Boeing Company, issued a press release
for the occasion which said in part: “This experiment marks the first
time a laser weapon has engaged and destroyed an in-flight ballistic
missile, and the first time that any system has accomplished it in the
missile’s boost phase of flight….The laser is the most powerful ever
installed on an aircraft….” [19]

Northrop
Grumman, another partner in the project (Lockheed Martin being the
third), added: “While ballistic missiles like the one ALTB [Airborne
Laser Testbed] destroyed move at speeds of about 4,000 miles [6,500 km]
per hour, they are no match for a superheated, high-energy laser beam
racing towards it at 670 million mph [one billion kph].” [20]

The
Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency was no less enthusiastic about the
results, stating “The revolutionary use of directed energy is very
attractive for missile defence, with the potential to attack multiple
targets at the speed of light, at a range of hundreds of kilometres….”
[21]

The airborne laser weapon is mounted on a modified Boeing 747 commercial airliner. Its potential range is global.

Ten
days later it was reported by the U.S. Army that the High Energy Laser
Systems Test Facility at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico
will receive a new laser weapon and “The Army may soon blast missiles
out of the sky with a laser beam.” The weapon contains “100-kilowatt
lasers that can rapidly heat a target, causing catastrophic events such
as warhead explosions or airframe failures.”

Pentagon
officials said it has “successfully worked in the laboratory and on the
battlefield and now they want to begin shooting down missiles with it.”
[22]

Airborne
laser anti-missile weapons will join the full spectrum of land, sea,
air and space interceptor missile components to envelope the world with
a system to neutralize other nations’ deterrence capacities and prepare
the way for conventional and nuclear first strikes.

Notes

1) Bloomberg News, March 1, 2010
2) Bloomberg News, March 2, 2010
3) Wikipedia
4) China Daily, February 22, 2010
5) Warsaw Business Journal, March 2, 2010
6) China Daily, February 22, 2010
7) Russian Information Agency Novosti, February 24, 2010
8) Stars and Stripes, February 25, 2010
9) Voice of Russia, March 2, 2010
10) Roman Tomberg, Collapse of the G-2 Myth, or Stalemate in China-US Relations Strategic Culture Foundation, March 2, 2010
11) Russia Today, February 27, 2010
12) Polish Radio, February 28, 2010
13) Associated Press, February 9, 2010
14) Associated Press, February 19, 2010
15) Russian Information Agency Novosti, February 24, 2010
16) Voice of Russia, February 23, 2010
17) Reuters, February 12, 2010
18) Ibid
19) Defense News, February 12, 2010
20) Associated Press, February 13, 2010
21) The Guardian, February 12, 2010
22) MyStateline.com, February 22, 2010

Rick Rozoff is a frequent contributor to Global Research.  Global Research Articles by Rick Rozoff