US Must Reject CCP’s Push for a No-First-Use Nuclear Policy

Military vehicles carry China's DF-41 nuclear-capable intercontinental ballistic missiles in a military parade at Tiananmen Square in Beijing on Oct. 1, 2019. (Greg Baker/AFP via Getty Images)

Commentary

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has called for the United States to adopt a no-first-use nuclear policy and abandon its “nuclear umbrella” for allies in Europe and Asia, following Beijing’s suspension of arms control talks with Washington over Taiwan tensions.

On July 23, the CCP released a statement: “China adheres to the no-first-use policy, based on its understanding of the nature of nuclear weapons and nuclear war.” This statement aligns with its National Defense Policy, which not only asserts no first use but also that China will not use nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear foe. The CCP often propagandizes Beijing’s commitment to humanity, stating, “A nuclear war has no ultimate victor, but only brings huge disasters to humanity.” The China Daily called it a “significant peace move.” However, calling for the enemy to lay down their weapons can be a clever ruse before launching an attack.

The United States is naturally skeptical of the CCP’s alleged “no first use” policy because of its nuclear arsenal buildup. Beijing explains this apparent contradiction: “China made the choice of developing nuclear weapons in a special historical period to cope with nuclear blackmail, break nuclear monopoly, and prevent nuclear war. China’s development of nuclear weapons is not for the purpose of threatening other countries, but for self-defense, safeguarding national strategic security, and contributing to world peace and stability.”

During the Cold War, there were only two nuclear powers. Today, there are nine: the United States, Russia, France, China, the United Kingdom, Pakistan, India, Israel, and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK, or North Korea). Russia has the largest nuclear arsenal, followed by the United States, with China in third position. At its peak in the mid-1980s, the Soviet Union had 40,000 to 45,000 nuclear warheads. Today, Russia has 6,375 warheads, including 1,710 deployed, many of which can target the United States. China has compiled around 410 nuclear warheads, with plans to expand to 1,000 by 2030. China’s ICBMs, like the DF-41, can reach the United States and carry multiple warheads. North Korea has about 50 nuclear bombs, including ICBMs that can reach the United States.

Under a new partnership, North Korea provides munitions to Russia, raising fears of Russian support for North Korea’s nuclear advancements. Iran, despite speculation, does not currently possess nuclear weapons, but it is working toward that goal and is expected to reach a breakout soon. Its main target would be Israel, as Iran is unlikely to build rockets capable of reaching the United States.

Of all the nuclear powers, only China, Russia, and North Korea pose a direct threat to the United States. DPRK law outlines several instances under which it would be lawful for North Korea to launch a first nuclear strike, including if its allies are attacked and it perceives a direct threat to its own security. North Korea is also the only official ally of China, bound by the Sino-North Korean Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation, and Mutual Assistance, signed on July 11, 1961, and renewed in 2021. This treaty ensures mutual assistance in the event of an attack on either country. That means North Korea could potentially trigger a nuclear war without Beijing’s permission or be used by the CCP as a proxy to launch an attack on the United States or its allies. Consequently, even if the CCP has a no-first-use doctrine, this does not necessarily apply to North Korea.

The United States doesn’t have a no-first-use doctrine. The U.S. Nuclear Posture Review states that the United States reserves the right to use nuclear weapons first in extreme circumstances to defend its vital interests, allies, and partners from “nuclear employment of any scale – and high consequence attacks of a strategic nature using non-nuclear means.” The ambiguous definition of “attacks of strategic nature” is similar to the strategic ambiguity in the Taiwan strategy, complicating the PLA’s planning and serving as a deterrent. It’s suspicious that the CCP demands the United States eliminate the nuclear umbrella protecting its non-nuclear allies. That would leave Japan and South Korea vulnerable to North Korea and Europe vulnerable to Russia. Additionally, the CCP’s calls for arms reduction or changes in nuclear posture could be a ploy to weaken the United States before an attack.

The CCP statement says, “Each State Party shall in exercising its national sovereignty have the right to withdraw from the Treaty if it decides that extraordinary events, related to the subject matter of this Treaty, have jeopardized the supreme interests of its country.” This is disturbing because it provides the CCP with an out, allowing it to withdraw and then potentially launch a first strike. Additionally, the term “national sovereignty” often refers to Taiwan. Therefore, this could be interpreted as Beijing claiming a right to use nuclear weapons if the United States defends Taiwan against a CCP invasion.

Although some think tanks and voices within the United States are echoing the CCP’s calls for the United States to adopt a no-first-use policy, this would be a step in the wrong direction, decreasing deterrence. Consequently, U.S. defense officials are considering further expanding the U.S. nuclear arsenal in response to the buildup by China and Russia.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.