The growing nuclear belligerence from the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and Russia should be a major concern of Americans and their allies. The PRC’s test of either an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) DF-41 or of a Submarine Launch Ballistic Missile (SLBM) JL-3 from Hainan on September 24 was an undeniable effort to signal its nuclear strength to the world. It was the first such a test in 44 years. The missile’s spent first and second stages landed on either side of Luzon in an important coercive signal to the Republic of the Philippines, principally, but also the small states of the Pacific, that the PRC is a formidable nuclear state and Manila is not. Manila depends upon protection from nuclear threats as a result of its alliance with the United States.

The test was also meant to undermine the confidence of these states in the alliance with the U.S. The stark message of the test was nuclear bullying—to convey that there is nothing the U.S. can do to help the Philippines or other states to avoid Beijing’s wrath if it so chooses. The Philippines today hosts the U.S. Typhon land-based mid-range missile system in the northern Philippines. Typhon can launch either SM-6 or Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles, which are of far shorter range than the DF-41 or JL-3. The test of an intercontinental missile was Beijing’s effort to assert escalation dominance by demonstrating that its missiles could strike the U.S. and so introduce doubt in the minds of Filipino officials as to the credibility of the U.S. commitment.

In the Cold War with the Soviet Union, French President Charles De Gaulle wondered aloud whether the U.S. would trade New York for Paris. That is, if the Soviets attacked NATO, Washington was pledged to escalate to the strategic level, involving a nuclear exchange between the U.S. and the Soviet Union that was certain to see New York destroyed. De Gaulle surmised that the U.S. valued New York more than Paris. So, if push came to shove and a war started in Europe, the U.S. would abandon its commitment to its NATO allies. In a similar fashion, Beijing is attempting to cast doubt in the minds of politicians in Manila and elsewhere around the region that the U.S. would honor its alliance commitments and that it would not trade Los Angeles for Manila. Fortunately for the U.S., it has an excellent ally in the Philippines. According to the Associated Press, Chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines Gen. Romeo Brawner, Jr., told reporters that “if I were given the choice, I would like to keep the Typhon here in the Philippines forever because we need it for our defense.”

On September 25, Russian President Vladimir Putin held a meeting with the Russian Security Council, after which several major changes to Russia’s declaratory nuclear doctrine, The Fundamentals of State Policy on Nuclear Deterrence, were announced. Russia reaffirmed the importance of its nuclear triad—bombers, ICBMs, and SLBMs—and its right to use nuclear weapons in the case of an attack against Russia or Belarus but added this was the case even if either state were attacked with conventional weapons, including UAVs. Russia’s nuclear doctrine increases the already significant role of nuclear weapons, as Russia is plainly signaling they can execute nuclear attacks against non-nuclear states, or attacks on Russia made with the support of a nuclear power. There have been observations that Ukrainian nuclear power plants might be added to Russia’s conventional bombing campaign against Ukraine.

The actions by the PRC and Russia underscore that the balance of power in the nuclear realm is rapidly turning against the U.S. Both states possess formidable arsenals and are throwing their nuclear weight around. In particular, the PRC’s belligerent actions are clear and dangerous indications that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has ordered the military to race for nuclear superiority over the U.S. through their “strategic breakout.” If achieved, it will defeat the credibility of the U.S. extended deterrent and threaten the U.S. homeland through escalation dominance.

While Beijing still purports to adhere to a “no first use” policy toward nuclear war, the fact remains that in the past three years, the PRC has built over 300 nuclear ICBM silos in central and western China, has upgraded the submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBM) aboard their sea-based leg of their triad, expanded their ballistic missile submarine production facilities, and introduced a new nuclear bomber, the H-20, which very closely resembles the U.S. B-2 bomber.  Both Admiral Richard and General Cotton have termed the PRC’s nuclear expansion as “breathtaking.” Additionally, we have seen PLA Air Force H-6 bombers flying nuclear bomber profiles with their Russian Long Range Aviation counterparts into the Alaskan Air Defense Identification zone.

By every metric, the CCP is flexing its strategic muscles by expanding its nuclear arsenal and its strategic reach.  Most worrisome is that this activity comes just days after the Commander of the PLA’s Southern Theater Command, General Wu Yanan, attended the Indo-Pacific Command’s Chiefs of Defense conference in Honolulu—a meeting that was said to help cool tensions between Beijing and Washington.  This promise was made against the backdrop of the PRC cutting off military-to-military (mil-to-mil) talks with the U.S. and the Biden-Harris administration’s obsession to restart such talks by sending a “Conga-line” of senior cabinet officials to Beijing over the past two years.

Yet within days of General Wu’s visit, the PLA Strategic Rocket Force conducted this test launch of an ICBM into the South Pacific.  Not only does the test put to bed the notion that the PLA Strategic Rocket Force (PLARF) is rife with corruption and disloyalty to General Secretary Xi Jinping, but it also sends a clear and unambiguous message to the region that Beijing’s military power is equal to or greater than the U.S.’s in the region.

Most worrisome for Americans is that this test demonstrates the CCP has both the intent and capability to attack the American homeland with nuclear weapons—something PRC military officials have talked about doing for over 20 years.  This test should also be a reminder that nuclear disarmament talks, which were pushed by the Biden-Harris administration, are toothless in the face of the strategic goals of the CCP to defeat the U.S. The right response is to address immediately the grave problems in the U.S. nuclear infrastructure and arsenal.

***

James E. Fanell and Bradley A. Thayer are authors of Embracing Communist China: America’s Greatest Strategic Failure. The views expressed are their own.