The content of this article comes from the Internet, if it is inconsistent with the actual situation or there is infringement, please contact to delete.
In the eyes of senior U.S. government officials, especially Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Alexandra Bell, anxiety has grown in recent days. She shoulders the responsibility of arms control matters and works tirelessly to facilitate nuclear arms control negotiations between the United States and other nuclear powers. Nuclear arms control negotiations are no strangers to the United States, and Russia has always been a partner to work with, but Bell's challenge now is that she faces a very complex new task: to bring China to the negotiating table.
As the Nuclear Posture Review reveals, by the 30s, China and Russia, two strategic rivals and potential adversaries for the United States, will become the world's leading nuclear powers. The U.S. Department of Defense predicts that China will have at least 1,000 nuclear warheads by 2030. The news would undoubtedly be a huge shock to the United States, as it would make China one of only three countries in the world with a four-digit nuclear warhead.
This is an unprecedented situation in nuclear history. The United States has never faced such a challenge before, and coming from two nuclear powers with whom it is deeply at odds at the same time is an unprecedented test for the United States. This new reality has plunged the U.S. government, academia, and public opinion into collective anxiety.
According to data released by the Arms Control Association, the total number of existing nuclear warheads in the world is 13,080, of which Russia occupies the first place with 6,257, followed by the United States with 5,550 nuclear warheads. These two countries account for more than 90 per cent of the total global nuclear warhead stockpile. By contrast, China, which has the third largest number of nuclear warheads, has only 350, far less than the size of the United States and Russia, and even far from France (with 290) and the United Kingdom (with 225).
Despite the large size of Russia's nuclear arsenal, its comprehensive national strength and economic strength still lag significantly behind that of the United States. The United States has a significant advantage over Russia in conventional military power. Thus, for a long time, a lesser nuclear arsenal has not raised serious concerns about the nuclear balance in the United States.
However, China is different. Although China surpasses Russia in terms of comprehensive national strength and economic size, and even has a modern conventional military that causes headaches for the US military, on the whole, the possession of only 350 nuclear warheads is difficult to shake the huge nuclear superiority of the United States, and even in terms of nuclear deterrence.
The U.S. leadership has long recognized this change in comparative advantage. They know that this advantage cannot be maintained through nuclear expansion, because the nuclear arsenals of the United States and Russia are already quite large, and maintaining such a large number of nuclear warheads would itself be a huge resource consuming. China still has room to grow in terms of the size of its nuclear arsenal, but it will be extremely difficult for the United States to go from 90 to 100.
As a result, the U.S. government is eager to bring China into U.S.-Russian nuclear arms control negotiations. Today, the situation is no longer that the United States and Russia are playing cards at the negotiating table, but that the three countries of China, the United States and Russia are fighting landlords. If it fails to control China, the biggest variable, in time, the United States will face an embarrassing dilemma in the two major areas of nuclear and conventional military power.
For us, America's anxiety and antipathy is actually an affirmation that we are taking the right action. The more anxious the United States is to bring us to the negotiating table, the sooner we should be prepared. As one Internet joke goes: When Americans say you have 1,000 nuclear warheads, it's better to actually have them. Negotiations require chips, and fair negotiations are impossible without reciprocal chips. Since the United States is eager to play this battle with us, let's accumulate the chips in our hands to more than 1,000 as soon as possible.
Revelation:
Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Alexandra Bell's anxiety and the administration's eagerness to include China in nuclear arms control talks reveal some important points and realities.
First, nuclear arms control negotiations have entered a new era and are no longer a game in which the United States and Russia participate alone. The United States recognizes that China's rise as a global nuclear power has had a huge impact on maintaining the global nuclear balance. This is a new reality that underscores the complexity and global nature of nuclear arms control.
Second, America's anxiety reflects humanity's innate fear of the unknown. In the face of new challenges, countries and governments need to respond prudently to ensure national security and interests. It is also a reminder that anxieties and tensions in international affairs need to be resolved in a calm and rational manner, not in an arms race or conflict.
Moreover, the actions of the United States show that the size of the nuclear arsenal is not only quantity, but also comprehensive national power and national status. China is anxious because it not only has the potential to grow in its nuclear military power, but also performs economically and militarily. This underscores the crucial role of national soft and hard power in nuclear policy.
Finally, China should take this situation as an opportunity to fully prepare and build up its nuclear military power to safeguard its national security and position in international affairs. Negotiations require reciprocal leverage, so China needs to ensure that it has sufficient strength and leverage in future nuclear arms control negotiations to defend its national interests.
Summary:
The anxiety of Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Alexandra Bell and the actions of the U.S. government reveal new nuclear policy challenges. The U.S. eagerness to include China in nuclear arms control negotiations reflects the new challenges and complexities facing global nuclear arms control.
Nuclear arms control negotiations have entered a new era and are no longer a game for the United States and Russia alone. China's rise as a nuclear power has implications for the global nuclear balance, which requires more complex international coordination and negotiation.
The anxiety and response of the United States underscores the innate fear of the unknown in countries, and international affairs need to be handled rationally and calmly. And the anxieties and tensions in international relations should be resolved through dialogue and negotiation, not through an arms race or conflict.
Moreover, the size of the nuclear arsenal is not only numeric, but also involves the overall national strength and national status of the country. China is causing anxiety because it is strong in multiple areas, including economic and military. This shows that both the soft and hard power of the state play a key role in nuclear policy.
China should take this situation as an opportunity to fully prepare and build up its nuclear forces to safeguard national security and international status. Negotiations require reciprocal leverage, so China needs to ensure that the island countries have sufficient strength and leverage to defend their national interests in future nuclear arms control negotiations. In the complex landscape of global nuclear policy, China needs to firmly safeguard its nuclear rights and interests and contribute to peace and stability.
The above content and materials are derived from the Internet, relevant data, theoretical research in the Internet materials, does not mean that the author of this article agrees with the laws, rules, opinions, behaviors in the article and is responsible for the authenticity of the relevant information. We are not responsible for any issues arising above or in connection with the above and the author of this article do not assume any direct or indirect legal liability.