Chinese missile threatens US Navy’s Pacific fleet

World’s first anti-ship ballistic missile could prevent US from protecting Taiwan

LAST UPDATED 9:39 AM, NOVEMBER 18, 2009

Internet censorship came up, as did global warming and trade sanctions. But one subject that was not raised – publicly at least – before US President Barack Obama left Beijing for South Korea today was China's apparent attempt to scare the US Navy out of the western Pacific Ocean.

According to a Bloomberg report published yesterday, US Naval Intelligence has established that China's development of the world's first anti-ship missile, long mooted, is nearing readiness.

With a range of nearly 900 miles, and capable of being fired from mobile land-based launchers, the missile is "specifically designed to defeat US carrier strike groups" by destroying aircraft on the carrier's deck and control towers.

Coupled with a new 'over-the-horizon' radar system the Chinese are also developing, the threat of the missile could make the South China Sea a no-go zone for the US Navy - with potentially dramatic consequences.

The US currently keeps five aircraft carriers based in the Pacific and their mission includes the defence of Taiwan in the event of a Chinese attack on what Beijing sees as a breakaway province.

It is understood the Chinese began developing the anti-ship missile immediately after the Taiwan crisis in March 1996 when Bill Clinton sent two aircraft carriers and escort warships into the Taiwan Strait area after China fired missiles near the island before its presidential election.

If the US Navy were to pull its carriers out of the region, the Taiwanese would be unprotected.

The Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) has been monitoring the development of the new missile for some time. A report on the missile by Scott Bray, the ONI's senior China expert, was issued in July but only made public this week after Bloomberg requested it.

Bray warned that China has made "remarkable progress" on the missile. "In little over a decade, China has taken the programme from the conceptual phase" to "near fielding a combat-ready missile," he said.

How anxious should the Obama administration be?

Paul Giarra, a defence consultant who specialises in China's military threat, laid out the risk of a no-go zone when he said: "No American military operations - air or ground - are feasible in a region where the US Navy cannot operate."

US Defence Secretary Robert Gates said in September that China's "investments in anti-ship weaponry and ballistic missiles could threaten America's primary way to project power and help allies in the Pacific - particularly our forward bases and carrier strike groups."

The Chinese response is that the West is over-reacting. Dai Xu, a Chinese military expert, told the Global Times: "China is indeed developing anti-ship ballistic missiles. It is not a secret. During the 60th anniversary National Day military parade, China exhibited such missiles.

"However, the media report is rather exaggerated... In fact, attacking an aircraft carrier with the missile is not an easy thing... To detect and lock on to a moving target in the ocean, such as aircraft carriers or other large warships, is still a very challenging issue, because ballistic missiles are mainly used for attacking large fixed targets."

LAST UPDATED 9:39 AM, NOVEMBER 18, 2009

Add to:

Comments

Hide comments

The first anti-ship missile? Does anyone else remember the French Exocet missiles fired by the Argentines at the HMS 'Shiny' Sheffield? Anyone else remember the entire loss of the ship for one missile? Some people either do not know their missiles, or they are banking on us, the dumb public, in being ignorant and short of memory. You can't fool all of the people all of the time you know.

Posted by michael jose at 11:05am on November 18, 2009

America won't come to Taiwan's aid now anyhow. O'Bomber went to Beijing on bended knee, *begging* the Chinese not to call in America's flunked debts. The price he paid was total cave-in on Tibet, Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia, Myanmar, and Taiwan. Now China will just walk in and take over - and Obama will sit grinning like a spineless pet pekinese.

Posted by Neil McGowan at 12:31pm on November 18, 2009

"investments in anti-ship weaponry and ballistic missiles could threaten America's primary way to project power and help allies in the Pacific - particularly our forward bases and carrier strike groups." . This statement in itself is the scariest threat to the world...no wonder the yanks do not want to leave afghanistan...they want to 'project power'...and the poor brit boys are dying for America's ability to 'project power'...

Posted by ASSAD REHMAN at 12:40pm on November 18, 2009

I think that Mr Jones has forgotten two things about Exocet. First it can and was air launched against our vessels and secondly could be carried by our ships and was programmed to be "friendly". The article is about ballistic capability which in essence refers to a fixed launcher, be it silo or land-mobile. With the development of anti-missile systems and the deployment of dedicated missile carrying ships as pickets being able to fire such weapons it is possible to create a protective bubble for a carrier force. Missile launches could be detected by satellite (which already happens in the case of nuclear silo based missiles) and forwarded to the fleet protection system giving an early warning of a strike. As for anti-ship missiles we already have submarine based Harpoon which are more difficult to detect and counter.

Posted by jakelly404@hotmail.com at 1:35pm on November 18, 2009

"The poor brit boys are dying" so the freedom of individual rights can be projected around the world. The Brits and their allies will enter in to where cowards and tyrants flee in defeat; and they usually flee back to a British protectorate. Hail Britannia, Britannia rules the waves. Britons never ever ever will be slaves ... and they will always be there to help those who genuinely seek freedom. Oh yes, and God Bless their cousins the USA!

Posted by craigsolve at 5:36pm on November 18, 2009

China is a great power and it is only natural that they develop their military power accordingly. Look at the activities of the Us since 1945!

Posted by Manny Goldstein at 5:47pm on November 18, 2009

I think this is a first, Exocet was not a "ballistic" missile. It was a low altitude "sea skimming" missile.

Posted by Martin Dixon at 7:26pm on November 18, 2009

Dear Michael Jose, I agree - people do need to know their missiles: Exocet was/is a tactical anti-ship missile much like the plethora of such weapons going back to weapons such as the Fritz X successfully used by the Germans in WW II. A ballistic anti-ship weapon is a variation on cruise missile technology ie a strategic weapon that can be used in tactical environments for high value targets such as a US CVN class carriers. I think your references to ignorant/dumb et al do indeed hit the target (sic). Know your missiles indeed!

Posted by kevin thorpe at 8:50pm on November 18, 2009

What racist, sinophobic twaddle. It's like saying that America have invented a missile that can reach Mexico, and that the Chinese aren't allowed to send their warships there. Which sounds perfectly reasonable, because it's their area. Yet because it's the Chinese, they somehow can't develop weapons to defend their area? Need I remind you who has the most military forces stationed away from their country - America. Who has the most military bases outside of their country - America. Who dabbles in lands and seas thousands of miles away from home - America. None of the above applies to China, yet China are the ones getting the abuse. Maybe it's time to put up signs saying "No dogs, No Chinese" again? Maybe the US should reintroduce the "Anti-Chinese Act" that was used to deny Chinese immigrants the same human rights as a citizen in America? Maybe offload drugs and make the populace dependent on it so we can rebalance the trade deficit? Massacre those of Chinese descent in Malaysia and Singapore because they "looked" communist? However the media want to spin it, history has shown us that it is America, Britain and to a lesser extent Europe, who has done more harm to China (and indeed, the world) than vice-versa. And who honestly believes that America doesn't have something up their sleeve x100 for anything China makes? $500bn was spent on US defence last year, compared to China's $80bn - and that's just the official figures.

Posted by Mazino Marello at 1:48am on November 19, 2009

I wonder if it has escaped 'craigsolve's' intelligence that the British troops are dying whilst fighting in American ill-concieved badly led fiascos? Americans are known across the Islamic world as beni-el-kalb which translated means sons of dogs. When Britain had its Empire it ruled the world correctly and is still spoken of favourably by those who grew up in it today. But Americans? Why is it they travel internationally claiming to be Canadians I wonder? And my use of Arabic - I grew up in Aden, the British Protectorate until 1967, and where the USS Cole was attacked. As a result I speak a modicom of Arabic.

Posted by Paul Beaumont at 11:01am on November 20, 2009