China's chief military officer has issued the first official confirmation of the existence of a programme to develop a ‘carrier-killer’ missile that could allow China to challenge US naval dominance of the Pacific decades before it’s able to field a carrier fleet.
Gen. Chen Bingde announced that the modified Dongfeng 21-D missile will be able to strike ships nearly twice as far away as previously believed by US naval analysts, at a maximum range of 2,700 kilometres after launching from land.
Speaking to the China Daily, though, Chen tried to play down the PLA’s progress in developing the advanced missile system:
‘The missile is still undergoing experimental testing and will be used as a defensive weapon when it is successfully developed, not an offensive one,’ Chen was reported as saying. ‘It is a high-tech weapon and we face many difficulties in getting funding, advanced technologies and high-quality personnel, which are all underlying reasons why it is hard to develop this.’
Still, US naval leaders estimated that the Dongfeng system had reached ‘initial operational capacity’ as early as last December, using a technical term referring to technology in development that’s ready to begin performing some, but not all, of its intended functions. Large technical projects in the Chinese government are often developed under wraps, with the full extent of their progress saved to be used as a surprise for foreign audiences. Chen may also have sought to soothe the fears of US naval experts, who have been shaken by news of DF-21's development.
Experts have pointed out that accurately targeting carriers will require more than better missiles – they will need long-range radar systems and advanced military satellites to guide them. But analysts estimate that China will be able to produce 10,000 of the new missiles for the price of a single US aircraft carrier – so even with poor targeting, they could pose a serious threat.
US military leaders have, for their part, generally attempted to project sangfroid in the face of news about China’s developing area denial power, arguing that a single missile won’t change the balance of power in the region. But a missile capable of striking a ship nearly 3,000 kilometres from China's coast could end the US’s traditional ability to sail through disputed waters with impunity. It would certainly lead future US presidents to think twice before sending carriers to pass through the Taiwan Straits during standoffs between the two Chinas.
David Cohen is a freelance journalist. He blogs at www.sinocentric.net and his writing has appeared in the Christian Science Monitor, the Guardian Online, the Global Times, the China Daily and the Lowy Interpreter among other publications.








JB
If capable of doing what they state, it’ll be a massive headache for the US. I think the major problem for China is getting targeting data.
Predict
The more time they have the more capable they be.
There will be 2 choice:
Let’s their military ablility grown in full scale arm race HOPE they will be lost.
I dont certain they will be lost in long time race thought.
Let’s surpress it to not start the arm race from start when we still can surpress it.
It’s a question about our ability not their.
Frank
You are promoting “Nuclear War Now”?
Right?
JB
It seems to be in fashion at the moment for some reason.
Frank
The person who is promoting nuclear war has to have a sick mind.
Leonard R.
Predict has it predictably correct.
These missiles are aimed at the United States.
China is preparing for war with the US. The US needs to prepare for war with China. Case closed.
This is not complicated.
ozivan
I agree with Leonard R. I say..Why try to hide the fact ?
The trigger point would be over Taiwan.
Over other quarrels, China would be stupid to nuke anyone.
Bruce Chung
“The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.”
Time to ratchet things up a notch or two, the time to cut them off completely is arriving rather quickly.
Reason
I’ll wager that this ASBM system never hits a single ship in combat.
It’s all hype… The PLAAF would be better off getting old jets full of explosives and ramming them into a carrier, like the Kamikazes …. and even they weren’t that effective at stopping the US Navy.
HYPE HYPE HYPE HYPE… will all come to nothing and fall way short of expectations, just like other big projects… The Three Gorges dam and High speed rail being two current ones.
And even if a suite of missiles could hit a carrier – The US navy has 11 carriers, with numerous others that could be brought back to life in a wartime situation.
The US Navy is never going to think.. “Oh you sunk one of our carriers.. we’re gonna give up now.” Carriers are designed to fight.. and sink if necessary. In WW2 the US lost 10 carriers! China greatly underestimates the US if it thinks that by sinking the George Washington the US will scuttle out of the Western Pacific with its tail between its legs.
Even if this system works… which it wont.. but let’s just give them the benefit of the doubt and say it does sink a carrier – then it will be open season on the Chinese Navy and its C4ISR systems… so it will only ever work once… as the US navy will blockade the Sh*t out of China and strangle it to death…. helped willingly by Japan, S.Korea, Britain, Australia, Canada, France, India and pretty much every other navy worth mentioning…
Really… this is not a deterrence for the US navy… you can bet your bottom dollar that the US navy will be sticking its carriers right in the line of fire of this so-called ASBM and daring the PLA to use it….
Frank
“I’ll wager that this ASBM system never hits a single ship in combat.”
I hope so.
The purpose of this weapon is not to sink a ship. Is to let the owner of the ship think a little longer.
From the white Americans here, you can tell some of them are not thinking.
megakids
Your analysis remains at kindergarten level.
The US has 11 carriers, so it’s OK to have one or two hit. That’s what you said.
paul
You are kinda ‘hyped’ about the US Navy aren’t you?
Reason
No…. I never said it’s “ok” to have one hit…
I said hitting one or even having the ability to hit one will not deter the US navy.
ronniq
What makes you think all the other countries you mentioned will join in to fight China along with US, say in case of issues over Taiwan. Are you insane. Not 1 single country will join in to fight. Why the hell should they. They sont have an issue with China over Taiwan or anything else for that matter.
So please stop making stXXupid stories.
yang zi
DF21-D is truely a revolutionary weapon, if it can ever be successively developed, which i have doubt. If US stops messing with Chinese affairs like Taiwan, South China Sea disputes, China can offer to stop the development of this weapon.
Badajosnon Macabaian
There is no war yet China has been updating and building up its armed forces. For what? To bully its neighbors. China never departed from its long time hegemonistic intensions or ambitions. It simply wants to overrule the US and thus rule the world. China has already proven long time ago as a master of deception and treachery.
Albonia
It’s obvious that you don’t know anything about china. The name china means the middle kingdom. And traditionally china has been an advanced civilization. China is decades behind the us in technology. When china well-establishes its j-20 the us will have moved on to its 6th generation fighters or at the very least, better technology than right now.
Grant
This may actually blow back in China’s face. If the U.S can’t use carriers so easily it might very well shift to submarines which could lead to dangerous escalation.
Leonard R.
Congratulations to China on this achievement.
The United States needs to respond with nuclear weapons if China attacks a US aircraft carrier. One U.S. carrier is worth more than twenty Chinese cities.
In the meantime, it’s good that the US is developing weapons to counter that.
But ultimately it doesn’t matter. If China attacks an American carrier, the United States needs to respond with overwhelming force and that includes nuclear.
ozivan
Little wonder China is working so hard to modernise its lethal power, developed and launched more military satellites, etc. It’s your types that help push them to achieve more. Not a bad idea..actually !! It takes time but China will find her way there..!!
Frank
“One U.S. carrier is worth more than twenty Chinese cities.”
Why?
Is that because Chinese are colored people?
a_canadian_observer
@Frank: No. It’s because copies are not worth the same as the original.
Albonia
Chinese cities are not copies of American cities. There isn’t a Chinese empire state building. Or any other similar skyscrapers. So I am confused in where you got your info. With your American logic I can say your 1800s tech was copied from Britain because they were the
Pioneers of industrial technology.
megakids
Wow, what a great analysis! Only US has nuclear.
And only China is afraid of nuclear deterant.
a_canadian_observer
@megakids: A friend of mine once showed me a fake watch made in china. It looks just like a Rolex (has Rolex logo as well). But it died after a few months later. Enough said.
Badajosnon Macabaian
China, the land of fake products. Fake ROLEX & RADO watches. All products from China are fakes and very low quality. China the number one violator of intellectual property rights. Better boycott all products from China.
ThomasW
This is the trouble that the US should take it very seriously! Need more long-range stealth bombers, long-range supersonic cruise missiles, new subs, prompt global strike gliders, X37Bs, etc., to counter those potential threats!Money? It’s the dollar, the US currency!
Pacifica
Such a technically complicated missile system will have many points of failure.
Liao Gangzheng
True, plus US just have to conduct electronic warfare and blind china so that it cant use those missiles. They may not even need to send a carrier there at all thanks to the ASBM! LOL!!!
Frank
You mean ICBM.
Right?
Anon
I’m curious what analysts think a DF-21D will cost $510,000 a copy. Seems low by an order of magnitude or three.
The_Observer
Whether the missile works or not (the Chinese said they were developing it not that it was implemented successfully yet) the more important issue would be if the threat of these and other Chinese defenses serve their purpose. That is, keeping foreign nuclear-powered aircraft carriers at a further distance from mainland China and out of the Taiwan strait in times of trouble between China and it’s rebel province, Taiwan. In my opinion, that is the bottom line Chinese analysis.
Duke Chan
This is a propaganda by the chinese government for the chinese people. This weapon will never be realistic. China shot itself in the foot by saying it is under development because it allows the west and US a very good reason to contain china.
paul
I guess reading is indeed not positively correlated with intellect. I pray to God none of you occupy any high positions anywhere in the public or private sector. It is disappointing to see that such a good publication has readers with such mediocre thoughts.
I will pray alongside you
Paul, I will pray alongside you.
I don’t understand either why this publication in particular seems to attract such hate-mongering and “my missile is bigger than yours”/”we’ll wipe you out first” rhetoric. I wonder how many of those commenting so stupidly actually study the field of expertise they are sharing their pearls of wisdom on.
To those of you arguing that “one U.S. carrier is worth more than twenty Chinese cities” … “because copies are not worth the same as the original”, I simply recommend you think through (if you are able to concentrate for that long) the logical extension of your sloganeering (‘argument’ would be too generous a word, because it implies empirical evidence and coherent logic and argumentation).
But rest assured, Paul, these trigger-happy guys don’t live up to the legacy of Cold War hawks, because you have to be hired into actual policy-making positions for that privilege. Threatening lives in an anonymous comment box won’t exactly look good on a CV. There are other avenues for bilious hatred. Exercise maybe?
Melamine
DF-21 is just a paper missile.
Pebble
This is not happening. This ASBM will not be able to work. The PLA can’t string all this together
This piece here shows that the PLA, just like other big projects in China projects is subject to massive national unrealistic euphoria
http://chinarisingblog.blogspot.com/2011/07/chinas-great-leap-forward-in-weapons.html
HuangKai
It’s a joke so many foreigners fear or laugh at Chinese DF21 missle. Why are you react so intensively on this? It’s just a land-based missile that only covers near land sea, and far from even Hawaii.The sole purpose of it is to prevent other bold nations from enterring affairs near China.
I see you guys as thieves that peeking into someone’s house everyday and suddenly saw a rifle gun appears in it, and shouting “what can he own this?”. Just leave China alone, okay? Put more focus on your domestic medical service or debts. China will find its own way out, which maybe not satisfying US so much.
Strategist
The DF21 missile serves no other purpose than for defense but it will encourage irrational american militaristic minds to spend more on weapons until America bankrupts itself.
Ordinary americans needs to question why their economy is in shambles while their militant interests enjoy the good life.