It is all happening re China. It seems that the new defence pact, AUKUS has kicked the hornet’s nest. Mouth pieces for the CCP have said that Australia now becomes a nuclear target, as if we were not nuclear targets before. Sure, the CCP says that non-nuclear nations would not be nuked, but from the people that gave us Covid from the Wuhan lab, either accidentally or deliberately, why trust them? The core issue is the way the nukes will be delivered, with a hot topic being nukes from space. But, what is not being discussed with the seriousness it deserves is the use of nukes to generate EMP events, by detonation in the stratosphere, to knock out all electronics. That is cheap and deadly, and nothing has been done to defend against it, beyond return the event.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/us-air-force-official-china-might-strike-space
“As Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall has said before, his priorities are "China, China, and China." His keynote address at the Air Force Association Air, Space & Cyber Conference continued that trend, talking up the possibility of space warfare against China.
Kendall warned China has the potential to "actually put weapons in space," and likening the situation to the Cold War. He further warned China might be able to make attacks effectively undetectable for early warning systems.
This is almost a perfect, tailor-made talking point for the US military, as it facilitates potentially endless spending on space warfare simply to counter what China might do. This was the whole justification for the US Space Force, and its appetite for wildly expensive weapons systems of dubious use, in the first place.
"There is a potential for weapons to be launched into space, then go through this old concept from the Cold War called the Fractional Orbital Bombardment System," Kendall warned the conference, "which is a system that basically goes into orbit and then de-orbits to a target."
Space Operations Chief Gen. John Raymond has been talking up the growing capabilities of China to deny America access to space, vowing "we can’t let that happen," and saying the US must be prepared for this fight.
It’s not clear why the US military is so convinced China wants to either fight America in space or try to deny them access to space. Either way, the officials agree that the answer is expensive preparedness and amassing weapons for the presumptive battle.
As with the Cold War, this could go on more or less forever, or until one side just runs out of money.”
“During an Australian TV primetime segment this week, the well-known China-based expert Victor Gao, who is vice president of the Center for China and Globalization and once served as communist leader Deng Xiaoping's translator, issued a chilling scenario and shock to his Aussie audience over the controversial AUKUS defense pact between the US, Australia and the UK.
Gao bluntly warned that the deal which will see Washington give Canberra nuclear submarine technology now makes all of Australia a target for nuclear strike:
"The watershed moment will be if Australia is armed with nuclear submarines to be locally produced in Australia, Australia will lose that privilege of not being targeted with nuclear weapons by other countries," Gao warned.
He then appealed to the "23 million Australians" who will now live with this anxiety if the deal is completed in the coming years over "possible nuclear war" on their doorstep and over their cities.
Gao posed that the stakes are incredibly high: "And that should be the wake up call for the Australians - the 23 million Australians. Do you really want to be a target in a possible nuclear war? Or do you want to be free from the 'nuclear menace' going forward?"
Of course the subtext, almost unbelievably, is that Beijing is declaring that Australia will become fair game for nuclear first strike. The incredulous ABC Australia news host then questioned back at him: "It is extraordinary that you're talking about nuclear war and attacks on Australia," the anchor said.
The questioning then turned to whether what Gao was saying reflects the position of Chinese government, to which he responded...
Listen, as a general policy Australia is not targeted with nuclear warheads right now... now if the Australian government wants to... go nuclear, with nuclear submarines, they will lose that privilege of not being targeted with nuclear warheads going forward. It's as simple as that... this is the most profound consequence.
He charged that it's a "gross violation" of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty by the US and UK, underscoring the "consequences" of this for Australia.
The ABC host questioned directly, "Are you saying that Australia will be targeted by China? Are you warning that Australia now is under threat?"
Gao that repeated that his words have been "clear" - reiterating that China will see Australia as in breach of having a nuclear free zone and that this will carry with it profound consequences. He then repeated his "thinly-veiled threat that the AUKUS pact announced last week was a 'gross violation of international law' that will have 'profound consequences' for 'brainless' Aussies."
Meanwhile, here's Rabobank's take on the stunning interview and not so subtle threat....
I have to share last night’s ABC interview with China’s Victor Gao as a sample of the current zeitgeist in this region. It is worth a watch in its entirety if you don’t live in the region: imagine if this was your prime-time TV slot last night.
Gao was emphatic about Australia being "logically" targeted for a potential nuclear attack because it wants nuclear-powered submarines. Notably, he is correct in saying this threat is clear strategic logic. Yet geostrategists would point out that Australia wanting such subs is also clear strategic logic – of the need for a balance of power and deterrence against any threats.
Also recall, this is happening as China lobbies Australia to support its entry into the CPTPP trade partnership - which would of course help Beijing prop up those soon-to-be-needed-even-more trade surpluses, structurally.”
“The AUKUS pact that was revealed last week to the shock and dismay of France and the EU, which will involve the US transferring nuclear submarine technology to Australia, has resulted in continued nuclear jawboning out of China this week.
First, as we detailed earlier in the week a Chinese state-linked analyst and expert announced to "23 million Australians" in a prime time interview with an Aussie national broadcaster that "Australia will lose that privilege of not being targeted with nuclear weapons by other countries" - as Victor Gao put it to the stunned interviewer.
Following these comments, former diplomat Sha Zukang - who previously served as the longtime Chinese ambassador for disarmament affairs to the UN - told a conference in Beijing on Thursday that China should review its "no first strike policy" in the wake of recent developments.
The speech, which was first reported in the South China Morning Post, called for China's leadership to "fine tune" its nuclear policy as a counterweight to the ongoing pressure campaign coming from Washington and its allies in the Indo-Pacific. It follows Chinese officials denouncing plans for the US to deliver at least eight nuclear-powered subs to Australia.
While Beijing is accusing Australia of reneging on its commitment to a nuclear free zone, particularly calling it out as a violation of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), Canberra officials are differentiating nuclear-powered technology from the deployment of nuclear arms.
Here's what the influential and now retired ambassador Zukang said in part in his remarks:
"The strategic pressure on China is intensifying as [the US] has built new military alliances and as it increases its military presence in our neighborhood," he said.
For the most part, Sha clarified that China ought to keep its "no first strike policy" for most countries, but may start thinking differently for the US. The policy, Sha said, may not apply between China and the US unless the two nations "negotiate a mutual understanding on no first use of nuclear weapons, or unless the US ceases to take any negative measures that undermine the effectiveness of China’s strategic forces."
So while suggesting the menacing prospect of a dramatic reversal of its current no first strike policy for some countries, it appears Zukang is arguing a reversal or at least tweaking of China's stance would inevitably hasten a future nuke treaty with the US, though which in reality would obviously remain a huge gamble in terms of removing a key barrier to the prospect of nuclear confrontation.
Also recall, ironically enough, that this is happening as China lobbies Australia to support its entry into the CPTPP trade partnership - which would of course help Beijing prop up those soon-to-be-needed-even-more trade surpluses, structurally.”