Another view on the Chinese Anti-Ballistic Missile Test

Here is the most interesting statement from Bodeen's writeup "Other analysts, however, said U.S. officials had been monitoring preparations for the test at least as far back as September." This revelation seems to fit into Zhouyu2002's argument posted on the China Defense forum earlier:

"While political prognosticators and Poli Sci types at Renmin University want to interpret this in purely political terms, they always miss very salient technical issues that undermine their argument."

A test of this type of system is the product of years of planning and preparation, particularly for a maiden test, political considerations are more like to postpone or cancel an already-scheduled test rather than greenlight it. As the test itself has already been planned and money spent for it years in advance. This is taken for granted with US ABM tests, that are always interpreted technically rather than politically by US observers."

Maybe there is a technical reason for Hillary Clinton to downplay the missile test.

Here is Bodeen's write up as published in today's WaPo.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/15/AR2010011501707_pf.html

China wins transparency praise with missile test

By CHRISTOPHER BODEEN
The Associated Press
Friday, January 15, 2010; 11:37 AM

BEIJING -- China's decision to go public just hours after this week's missile test shows the government has learned from calls to be more upfront and get its military, political leadership and diplomats on the same page.

Beijing hasn't described Monday's test, other than to say that it was conducted within the country's airspace and employed homegrown technologies.

Despite that, the simple act of publicly announcing the firing of the missile interceptor has enabled Beijing to successfully avoid the hail of international criticism it endured after its January 2007 downing of a defunct weather satellite.

In that earlier case, Beijing only confirmed the test days later - after news of it was leaked by U.S. officials. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesmen were initially kept in the dark about it, while President Hu Jintao and other top leaders not fully informed of the likely repercussions, especially over the massive cloud of dangerous space debris that resulted from the satellite's pulverization.

In contrast, this time around, the official Xinhua News Agency reported the test Monday evening in a brief statement that was repeated the next day by Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu at a regularly scheduled news conference.

Along with describing the test as purely defensive in nature, Jiang said no space debris had been produced that could in any way threaten satellites.

"In institutional terms, this shows the capacity of the Chinese system to learn from previous mistakes and improve bureaucratic coordination, which has been a persistent weakness," said Philip Saunders, a senior research fellow at National Defense University's Institute for National Strategic Studies.

Saunders said the new approach was based on the fact that China could not keep such a test secret, even though it was conducted over Chinese territory.

"China knew that the test intercept would be observable by other countries, and that if there was no announcement, China would be criticized for excessive secrecy," he said.

Missile intercepts require advanced technology such as satellite sensors and guidance systems that can place a surface-to-air missile on course to smash into and destroy an incoming weapon.

All countries surround their intercept programs in secrecy, although China is known to have purchased a large number of Russian surface-to-air missiles during the 1990s and has since pressed ahead with its own HQ-9 interceptor, along with a more advanced missile system with an extended range.

Such interceptors would be of relatively little use against U.S. cruise missiles, although they could be effective against ballistic missiles deployed by Russia or India, China's massive neighbor to the south with which it has a growing military rivalry and lingering territorial disputes.

U.S. officials said they were not informed of the test before hand, but had observed the launch of two separate missiles and a collision outside the atmosphere.

Other analysts, however, said U.S. officials had been monitoring preparations for the test at least as far back as September.

U.S. Defense Department officials will be taking the Chinese missile intercept and anti-satellite tests into review as they draft the administration's Space Posture Review that will clarify American national security space policy and strategy for the near term, said Gregory Kulacki, senior analyst and China project manager for the Global Security Program under the Union of Concerned Scientists.

"The test will drive home the importance of talking to China about missile defense and (anti-satellite) technologies before China completes the development of these interceptors and moves towards deployment," Kulacki said.

The Chinese Anti-Ballistic Missile Test and the Sino-US Relationship.

The recent Chinese anti ballistic missile test has drawn a muted response from the US government which marks a major departure from the heated exchanges between the Chinese and US governments after the 2007 anti-satellite missile test.
If the Chinese leadership is using the anti-ballistic missile test (here) as a message to the US on the pending weapon sales to Taiwan, the US is not taking the bait. On Monday, the US department of defense stated that they wanted to “maintain a positive, cooperative and comprehensive military relationship with China” (here) and on the same day, the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton went on record stating that the missile defense test was not a response to the US arms sale to Taiwan (here) (here) and she continues to seek "a strategic and economic dialogue with China" (here)

There will always be up-and-downs in the Sino-US relationship and the usual speculation by pundits, but in reality, China has little influence over US policy towards Taiwan and by working with the US, it will yield more positive results as was demonstrated during Bush’s 2nd term. A hard-line stance, on the other hand, will prove counterproductive. At the same time, the US also realizes that it has little influence over China’s military modernization program. Bringing attention to China's anti-ballistic missile capacity, a capacity China will have sooner rather than later, would also be counterproductive.

In the meantime, both sides seem to have a bigger google to fry.

U.S. Seeks Positive Military Relationship with China
http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=57497

By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Jan. 13, 2010 – The United States seeks to maintain a positive, cooperative and comprehensive military relationship with China, senior Defense Department officials told the House Armed Services Committee today.

Wallace “Chip” Gregson, assistant secretary of defense for Asian and Pacific security, acknowledged that the U.S. relationship with the largest nation in the world is complicated.

China is a partner in some respects, but a competitor in others, he explained, and the United States must engage constantly with China and seek to lessen uncertainty.

Uncertainty is the major stumbling block to Sino-American relations, Navy Adm. Robert Willard, commander of U.S. Pacific Command, told the committee.

Willard noted inconsistency between Chinese security statements and reality on the ground. China insists its military program is defensive only, and that it seeks a peaceful and harmonious environment in which its economy can grow and prosper, the admiral said. But the Chinese military has increased its capabilities in power projection and in asymmetric and conventional forces.

“That ambiguity that currently exists, and our attempts to reconcile that, are the security issue that we hope to tackle in a military-to-military dialogue with our [Chinese] counterparts,” Willard said.

Gregson said the department is particularly concerned about Chinese developments in the nuclear arena, cyberspace and space.

The military-to-military relationship with China is important and must be nourished, the admiral said, and a good dialogue between the United States and China will help spread security throughout Asia.

“It’s the reason for our emphasis to the Chinese on the need for continuity, some constancy in terms of that dialogue,” he said. “We think that it’s lagging behind the other engagements between our nation and the People's Republic of China.” The Defense Department must speed up its engagement to match corresponding U.S. efforts on the economic and political levels, he added.

The United States will maintain its presence in the Asia-Pacific region “as robustly as we have in the past as we continue to engage the Chinese in dialogue and, hopefully, foster an improved relationship and get to some of the ambiguities,” the admiral said.

Gregson said U.S. engagement with China and U.S. engagement with the region are inseparable.

“Our consistent and increased engagement with the region, our enhancements of our alliances and partnerships there -- not only in the East Asian region but, increasingly, through the Indian Ocean area -- will be essential to us shaping the environment that will allow us to also shape or develop cooperative, comprehensive relationships with the Chinese,” he said.