Nuke Party

According to the Global Times, the upcoming National Day parade on October 1 will include "five new types of domestically designed missiles." Speculation about which missiles will be featured includes:

Military aficionados have been expecting to see the Dongfeng 41, known as the DF-41, and the CSS-X-10, which is said to be a third-generation, solid-fuel, intercontinental ballistic missile.

and

A new submarine-launched ballistic missile, Julang 2, also known as JL-2 and CSS-NX-4, is also highly anticipated by fans of military hardware to make an appearance at the parade. It is said to have a maximum range of 8,000 kilometers and be designed to be installed onboard current and next-generation Chinese nuclear-powered submarines. Li Jie, a naval expert, didn't exclude the possibility of Julang-2's appearance on October 1.

RIA Novosti explained these improvements in the broader deterrence context:

China has made notable progress in the development of its nuclear deterrent since the last military parade on Tiananmen Square in 1999. The source said that China had developed nuclear and conventional missiles, both solid-fuel and liquid-fuel missiles, with different ranges, quick emergency response and precision strikes.

The debate about Chinese strategic ambitions will rage on with the fielding of these developments and be explained as further evidence of problematic modernization, both qualitatively and quantitatively, by some and completely consistent with their emphasis on minimum deterrence and maintaining a basic second strike capability by others. The AFP article on the subject included a reference to a recently released RAND report on China's international bevaior which looks like a good read. After recently doing some research on U.S. missile defense in East Asia I was interested by the explanation from the Global Times article that:

"The statement indicates that the force can survive a nuclear attack before carrying out a counterattack. Any country that attempts to attack China with nuclear weapons must get ready for revenge, even if it has an anti-missile system," the expert said, adding that China's nuclear missiles, though few in number, have a high strike accuracy and formidable power.

in that the fact that "anti-missile system" is explicitly mentioned in a statement about second strike capability highlights the degree to which missile defense is an issue that concerns that Chinese.

In regards to the actual parade itself, senior military expert at the PLA University of National Defense Li Daguang was quick to downplay any negative perception of the parade itself by explaining:

"Some countries, observing China's parade with colored glasses, show off their weapons around the world on the battlefield instead," Li said. Li Jie argued that the parade can reflect the current situation and tendency of China's military weaponry, as well as a way of showing China's military openness and transparency, and how it is aligned with international military standards.

While it is tough to say the degree to which the National Day represents meaningful transparency, it is interesting to note what Admiral Keating just said:

Admiral Timothy Keating, the head of the US Pacific Command, said the US and Australia had agreed to make the approach to the Chinese Ministry of Defence. "We are anxious to engage with them at the earliest opportunity," he told the Sydney Morning Herald. "We want to understand much better than we do now China's intentions. We would say: 'Don't stand in isolation in the Pacific'. China does publish a [defence] white paper but we find it to be less than fulfilling," he said.

While any mil-mil cooperation between the US and China (and Australia) is probably somewhat down the line, the Chinese transparency question will be a huge one to watch from a nuclear perspective. As numbers start to come down, Chinese lack of transparency could become a large obstacle on the path to further reductions. At what point they should be engaged in formal arms control talks remains unclear but efforts to constructively chip away at distrust and secrecy should be valued.

//wikimedia commons/Max Smith