Possible Chinese Nuclear Testing Stirs U.S. Concern
Beijing might secretly be conducting small nuclear tests at its Lop Nur site, report says
China might be secretly conducting nuclear tests with very low explosive power despite Beijing’s assertions that it is strictly adhering to an international accord banning all nuclear tests, according to a new arms-control report to be made public by the State Department.
The coming report doesn’t present proof that China is violating its promise to uphold the agreement, but it cites an array of activities that “raise concerns” that Beijing might not be complying with the “zero-yield” nuclear-weapons testing ban.
The concerns stem from the high tempo of activity at China’s Lop Nur test site, extensive excavations at the site, and Beijing’s purported use of special chambers to contain explosions.
Another factor feeding U.S. suspicions is the interruption in past years of data transmissions from monitoring stations on Chinese territory that are designed to detect radioactive emissions and seismic tremors.
The Trump administration’s allegation is included in an unclassified summary of an annual review of international compliance with arms-control accords. The review has been in preparation for some time and is likely to add to existing strains over China’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic, its militarization of the South China Sea and trade disputes.
It also comes as President Trump is seeking to open nuclear-arms talks with Beijing in the hope of negotiating a new nuclear deal that also includes Russia and covers all nuclear weapons.
China’s Embassy in Washington didn’t respond to requests for comment.
Some former arms-control officials said that the Trump administration appeared to be more concerned with scoring points against China than resolving potential disputes through diplomacy.
“If the United States has concerns that nuclear-yield producing testing has been done by China, we should discuss our concerns with Beijing—and discuss ways to build confidence that such tests are not happening,” said Steven Andreasen, who was the top National Security Council official on arms control during the Clinton administration.
The agreement at the core of the dispute is the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, which was concluded in 1996. The accord allows a range of activities to assure the safety and reliability of nuclear weapons, including experiments involving fissile material, as long as they don’t produce a nuclear-explosive yield.
The treaty isn’t legally in force because not enough nations have ratified it, though major powers, including the U.S. and China, say they are abiding by its terms. While the U.S. and China have signed the agreement, neither has ratified it.
One activity that has fed U.S. suspicions has been interruptions in the flow of data in past years from monitoring stations in China that measure radioactive particles and seismic tremors.
The stations are part of an international network of hundreds of sites set up to verify compliance with the test-ban treaty. Participating nations are responsible for running the stations and have been voluntarily transmitting data to the Vienna-based organization that is to oversee the accord as the agreement has yet to formally go into effect.
A spokeswoman for the body—the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization—said there has been virtually no interruption in the data transmissions by the Chinese since September 2019.
Data transmissions were interrupted previously, she said, but that was the result of the negotiating process between the CTBT organization and the Chinese government on arrangements for putting the stations in operation.
“Data transmission from all certified stations was interrupted in 2018 after the testing and evaluation and certification process was completed,” she said. “In August 2019, ongoing negotiations on post-certification activity contracts with Chinese station operators were concluded and data transmission resumed for all five certified stations.” In contrast, the administration’s report accuses China of “blocking the flow of data from the monitoring stations.”
China likely will double the size of its nuclear stockpile over the next decade, Lt. Gen. Robert Ashley Jr., the director of the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency, said in a May 2019 appearance at the Hudson Institute, a Washington think tank.
Gen. Ashley noted then that progress China was making “raised questions” whether it was strictly adhering to the test ban treaty. China’s arsenal is estimated to be about 300 nuclear warheads, according to the Federation of American Scientists. The U.S. has a stockpile of a 3,800 nuclear warheads that could be carried on long-range and short-range delivery systems, but only 1,700 are deployed, the group says.
Daryl Kimball, the executive director of the Arms Control Association, a nongovernmental group, said activity at Lop Nur isn’t proof the Chinese have been engaging in low-yield testing.
“The most effective way to resolve concerns about very low-yield nuclear explosions and enforce compliance with the 1996 Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty is for the United States—and China—to ratify the treaty and help bring it into force,” Mr. Kimball said. “When it does, states have the option to demand intrusive, short-notice on-site inspections.”
The U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency asserted last year that Russia had violated the zero-yield standard at its nuclear test site in Novaya Zemlya, a remote archipelago above the Arctic Circle, though it didn’t say when this might have occurred.
The new State Department report, which is based on U.S. intelligence, says that the U.S. doesn’t know if this occurred in 2019. But it asserts that some Russian’s activities since 1996 “have demonstrated a failure to adhere to the U.S. ‘zero-yield’ standard, which would prohibit supercritical tests.”
质疑精神值得表扬，但是基本的军事知识要掌握。这篇文章有一个很重要的分析来源是interruption in past years of data transmissions from monitoring stations on Chinese territory that are designed to detect radioactive emissions and seismic tremors. 去年中共停止了核放射物跟地震冲击测量的数据分享。这个是啥，核不扩散条约缔约国都安装有这几个装置，每年互相上交审核，表明没有进行核试验的证据。朝鲜当年就是不敢给国际原子能机构进入安装这些装置，因为心虚。 这个其实老早在英文的军事论坛就有过讨论，为什么土鳖要突然终止分享这些数据？分析结论就是要进行战术核武器的试验了，也就是城市巷战跟登陆战用的低当量核武器。 大型核弹五常都有大量数据，可以计算机模拟爆炸了，不需要真的爆。战术核武器才需要试验，因为放射性控制，释放地形啥的都模拟不出来。
质疑精神值得表扬，但是基本的军事知识要掌握。这篇文章有一个很重要的分析来源是interruption in past years of data transmissions from monitoring stations on Chinese territory that are designed to detect radioactive emissions and seismic tremors. 去年中共停止了核放射物跟地震冲击测量的数据分享。这个是啥，核不扩散条约缔约国都安装有这几个装置，每年互相上交审核，表明没有进行核试验的证据。朝鲜当年就是不敢给国际原子能机构进入安装这些装置，因为心虚。 这个其实老早在英文的军事论坛就有过讨论，为什么土鳖要突然终止分享这些数据？分析结论就是要进行战术核武器的试验了，也就是城市巷战跟登陆战用的低当量核武器。 大型核弹五常都有大量数据，可以计算机模拟爆炸了，不需要真的爆。战术核武器才需要试验，因为放射性控制，释放地形啥的都模拟不出来。 meningitis 发表于 4/15/2020 8:20:21 PM
质疑精神值得表扬，但是基本的军事知识要掌握。这篇文章有一个很重要的分析来源是interruption in past years of data transmissions from monitoring stations on Chinese territory that are designed to detect radioactive emissions and seismic tremors. 去年中共停止了核放射物跟地震冲击测量的数据分享。这个是啥，核不扩散条约缔约国都安装有这几个装置，每年互相上交审核，表明没有进行核试验的证据。朝鲜当年就是不敢给国际原子能机构进入安装这些装置，因为心虚。 这个其实老早在英文的军事论坛就有过讨论，为什么土鳖要突然终止分享这些数据？分析结论就是要进行战术核武器的试验了，也就是城市巷战跟登陆战用的低当量核武器。 大型核弹五常都有大量数据，可以计算机模拟爆炸了，不需要真的爆。战术核武器才需要试验，因为放射性控制，释放地形啥的都模拟不出来。 meningitis 发表于 4/15/2020 8:20:21 PM
质疑精神值得表扬，但是基本的军事知识要掌握。这篇文章有一个很重要的分析来源是interruption in past years of data transmissions from monitoring stations on Chinese territory that are designed to detect radioactive emissions and seismic tremors. 去年中共停止了核放射物跟地震冲击测量的数据分享。这个是啥，核不扩散条约缔约国都安装有这几个装置，每年互相上交审核，表明没有进行核试验的证据。朝鲜当年就是不敢给国际原子能机构进入安装这些装置，因为心虚。 这个其实老早在英文的军事论坛就有过讨论，为什么土鳖要突然终止分享这些数据？分析结论就是要进行战术核武器的试验了，也就是城市巷战跟登陆战用的低当量核武器。 大型核弹五常都有大量数据，可以计算机模拟爆炸了，不需要真的爆。战术核武器才需要试验，因为放射性控制，释放地形啥的都模拟不出来。 meningitis 发表于 4/15/2020 8:20:21 PM
质疑精神值得表扬，但是基本的军事知识要掌握。这篇文章有一个很重要的分析来源是interruption in past years of data transmissions from monitoring stations on Chinese territory that are designed to detect radioactive emissions and seismic tremors. 去年中共停止了核放射物跟地震冲击测量的数据分享。这个是啥，核不扩散条约缔约国都安装有这几个装置，每年互相上交审核，表明没有进行核试验的证据。朝鲜当年就是不敢给国际原子能机构进入安装这些装置，因为心虚。 这个其实老早在英文的军事论坛就有过讨论，为什么土鳖要突然终止分享这些数据？分析结论就是要进行战术核武器的试验了，也就是城市巷战跟登陆战用的低当量核武器。 大型核弹五常都有大量数据，可以计算机模拟爆炸了，不需要真的爆。战术核武器才需要试验，因为放射性控制，释放地形啥的都模拟不出来。 meningitis 发表于 4/15/2020 8:20:21 PM
质疑精神值得表扬，但是基本的军事知识要掌握。这篇文章有一个很重要的分析来源是interruption in past years of data transmissions from monitoring stations on Chinese territory that are designed to detect radioactive emissions and seismic tremors. 去年中共停止了核放射物跟地震冲击测量的数据分享。这个是啥，核不扩散条约缔约国都安装有这几个装置，每年互相上交审核，表明没有进行核试验的证据。朝鲜当年就是不敢给国际原子能机构进入安装这些装置，因为心虚。 这个其实老早在英文的军事论坛就有过讨论，为什么土鳖要突然终止分享这些数据？分析结论就是要进行战术核武器的试验了，也就是城市巷战跟登陆战用的低当量核武器。 大型核弹五常都有大量数据，可以计算机模拟爆炸了，不需要真的爆。战术核武器才需要试验，因为放射性控制，释放地形啥的都模拟不出来。 meningitis 发表于 4/15/2020 8:20:21 PM
质疑精神值得表扬，但是基本的军事知识要掌握。这篇文章有一个很重要的分析来源是interruption in past years of data transmissions from monitoring stations on Chinese territory that are designed to detect radioactive emissions and seismic tremors. 去年中共停止了核放射物跟地震冲击测量的数据分享。这个是啥，核不扩散条约缔约国都安装有这几个装置，每年互相上交审核，表明没有进行核试验的证据。朝鲜当年就是不敢给国际原子能机构进入安装这些装置，因为心虚。 这个其实老早在英文的军事论坛就有过讨论，为什么土鳖要突然终止分享这些数据？分析结论就是要进行战术核武器的试验了，也就是城市巷战跟登陆战用的低当量核武器。 大型核弹五常都有大量数据，可以计算机模拟爆炸了，不需要真的爆。战术核武器才需要试验，因为放射性控制，释放地形啥的都模拟不出来。 meningitis 发表于 4/15/2020 8:20:21 PM
哈哈我被批评了。请各位mm仔细阅读，不要被我的标题误导。标题就是为了抓眼球。嘻嘻。;)
Possible Chinese Nuclear Testing Stirs U.S. Concern
Beijing might secretly be conducting small nuclear tests at its Lop Nur site, report says
China might be secretly conducting nuclear tests with very low explosive power despite Beijing’s assertions that it is strictly adhering to an international accord banning all nuclear tests, according to a new arms-control report to be made public by the State Department.
The coming report doesn’t present proof that China is violating its promise to uphold the agreement, but it cites an array of activities that “raise concerns” that Beijing might not be complying with the “zero-yield” nuclear-weapons testing ban.
The concerns stem from the high tempo of activity at China’s Lop Nur test site, extensive excavations at the site, and Beijing’s purported use of special chambers to contain explosions.
Another factor feeding U.S. suspicions is the interruption in past years of data transmissions from monitoring stations on Chinese territory that are designed to detect radioactive emissions and seismic tremors.
The Trump administration’s allegation is included in an unclassified summary of an annual review of international compliance with arms-control accords. The review has been in preparation for some time and is likely to add to existing strains over China’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic, its militarization of the South China Sea and trade disputes.
It also comes as President Trump is seeking to open nuclear-arms talks with Beijing in the hope of negotiating a new nuclear deal that also includes Russia and covers all nuclear weapons.
China’s Embassy in Washington didn’t respond to requests for comment.
Some former arms-control officials said that the Trump administration appeared to be more concerned with scoring points against China than resolving potential disputes through diplomacy.
“If the United States has concerns that nuclear-yield producing testing has been done by China, we should discuss our concerns with Beijing—and discuss ways to build confidence that such tests are not happening,” said Steven Andreasen, who was the top National Security Council official on arms control during the Clinton administration.
The agreement at the core of the dispute is the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, which was concluded in 1996. The accord allows a range of activities to assure the safety and reliability of nuclear weapons, including experiments involving fissile material, as long as they don’t produce a nuclear-explosive yield.
The treaty isn’t legally in force because not enough nations have ratified it, though major powers, including the U.S. and China, say they are abiding by its terms. While the U.S. and China have signed the agreement, neither has ratified it.
One activity that has fed U.S. suspicions has been interruptions in the flow of data in past years from monitoring stations in China that measure radioactive particles and seismic tremors.
The stations are part of an international network of hundreds of sites set up to verify compliance with the test-ban treaty. Participating nations are responsible for running the stations and have been voluntarily transmitting data to the Vienna-based organization that is to oversee the accord as the agreement has yet to formally go into effect.
A spokeswoman for the body—the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization—said there has been virtually no interruption in the data transmissions by the Chinese since September 2019.
Data transmissions were interrupted previously, she said, but that was the result of the negotiating process between the CTBT organization and the Chinese government on arrangements for putting the stations in operation.
“Data transmission from all certified stations was interrupted in 2018 after the testing and evaluation and certification process was completed,” she said. “In August 2019, ongoing negotiations on post-certification activity contracts with Chinese station operators were concluded and data transmission resumed for all five certified stations.”
In contrast, the administration’s report accuses China of “blocking the flow of data from the monitoring stations.”
China likely will double the size of its nuclear stockpile over the next decade, Lt. Gen. Robert Ashley Jr., the director of the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency, said in a May 2019 appearance at the Hudson Institute, a Washington think tank.
Gen. Ashley noted then that progress China was making “raised questions” whether it was strictly adhering to the test ban treaty. China’s arsenal is estimated to be about 300 nuclear warheads, according to the Federation of American Scientists. The U.S. has a stockpile of a 3,800 nuclear warheads that could be carried on long-range and short-range delivery systems, but only 1,700 are deployed, the group says.
Daryl Kimball, the executive director of the Arms Control Association, a nongovernmental group, said activity at Lop Nur isn’t proof the Chinese have been engaging in low-yield testing.
“The most effective way to resolve concerns about very low-yield nuclear explosions and enforce compliance with the 1996 Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty is for the United States—and China—to ratify the treaty and help bring it into force,” Mr. Kimball said. “When it does, states have the option to demand intrusive, short-notice on-site inspections.”
The U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency asserted last year that Russia had violated the zero-yield standard at its nuclear test site in Novaya Zemlya, a remote archipelago above the Arctic Circle, though it didn’t say when this might have occurred.
The new State Department report, which is based on U.S. intelligence, says that the U.S. doesn’t know if this occurred in 2019. But it asserts that some Russian’s activities since 1996 “have demonstrated a failure to adhere to the U.S. ‘zero-yield’ standard, which would prohibit supercritical tests.”
显然目前回贴的只有你是读了文章的，发贴的楼主估计也没读。
有些人只是为了喷而喷，真相不重要
中国要是写个文章说美国现在进行核试验了，但是我没有证据，保管那被这些傻逼ID喷成筛子
赵立间不就是怀疑了一下，没给证据，18带祖宗都被这些精神白人批判透了
是啊，怎么和金三胖一样，需要关注的时候就核爆一下。
超限战
超过人类能忍受的限制的战争
说“觉得”是在混淆视听，这里面说的是有挺多现象让人怀疑中国在测试核武器，虽然这些目前不能作为100%证据。要拿到100%证据是要中美签订了协约之后去现场验证。
他们读也读不懂
hah..美国一直这样把，sue华为的一些案子也死同理
哈哈。ignorance and arrogance often come in hand in hand。 写个标题抓眼球而已。担心大家没有报纸订阅，我已经很努力滴把全文贴过来了。
哇这个我真的不了解。谢谢mm启蒙。我google一下背景知识。谢谢
记下笔记：Tactical nuclear weapon (战术性核武器)
Re
是说没实锤，但有很多疑点的意思吧
有没有分析为什么tg现在要做这些试验？
除了对付台湾跟美帝航母集群，我还真想不出什么情况下会用战术核武器。
因为觉得可能会用得到
我是非著名大叔，公的。
如果不是跟二战那样摧毁一个城市为什么一定要用核武器呢？战术核武器之前有人用过吗？
真敢用？真用了，美国就麻烦了，是用还是不用。。。
通常战术核武器就是中子弹，冲击波破坏小，放射穿透杀伤大。也就是以杀伤敌方有生力量为主要目的。美国的战术性核武器就是对付苏联的钢铁洪流坦克集群的，你想，几百辆坦克冲过来，那还得了，结果一发中子弹过来，
坦克还在，人都死了，多好，这么多坦克还可以弄去卖废铁。
城市巷战就这样，不想破坏城市建筑，又要杀死躲在建筑里面的敌人，那战术核武器就是最理想的大杀器了。
这个东西没人用过啊，谁敢用
好像以前打伊拉克前也是说对方是坏蛋有核武器但没证据的，后来还是打了
能住的，放射性残留少是战术核武器的特点。
是说伊拉克有化学武器，大规模杀伤武器。后来证明情报错误。
但是伊拉克的确有化学武器，还实战用过。
很多年以后还真找到了。就是数量没那么多
请教 大型核弹 和战术核武有什么区别啊？ 战术核武更小？
主要就是小。适合精确打击。
普通核弹当量太大了，你本来只想炸一个碉堡，结果把一个城市给炸了。
突然想到了对伊拉克战争
说的好到位！！！
灭党，为什么会灭族？
这是正解。
楼里几个自以为高明的7毛无非在自欺欺人罢了。
怀疑是攻台用途。
美国人真应该好好看看，没有底线的土共会毫不犹豫对任何对手使用核武器。
用。然后升级为战略核武器，把地球䔣一遍。活下来的皆为自然进化幸存胜利者。让你打脸，让你欺负人。
这是有病吧。自己皮肤黄就要管所有皮肤黄的人，别人拉泡屎也影响自己形象？
土共常规战争打不赢，只能用战术核武击毁美帝几个航母集群。剩下的事情，土共已经替美国人想（像）好了，美帝不会冒核大战风险反击土共，美帝在核攻击下损失几个航母集群死了上万人后只会拍拍屁股就走，土共不费一枪一弹打下台湾顺便收服日韩，然后趁势把太平洋变成土共的内湖...... 画面太美不敢想，只有大大才能发挥大手（sha）笔（bi）
情妇？赵家可能觉得旧的不去新的不来，省下一筆分手费。
这也是国内军坛的普遍看法，就是美帝死不起人，一个集群被灭，美帝国内就反了，政府只能求和。跟当年日本偷袭珍珠港前的舆论几乎一摸一样，不一样的是，当年日本民间也知道美帝强大，只是觉得美帝都是商人，一波攻击后就可以跟美国谈和了。现在国内小粉觉得土鳖已经可以跟美帝平起平坐了，实力甚至比美帝还强。
你看哪怕是在华人网，也有一些网友认为台湾是土鳖核心利益，美帝不会为了台湾跟土鳖死磕。如果一开战美帝死人了，战争就维持不下去了。
所以包子的参谋们如果也是持类似观点，那战争估计就不可避免了。但是我还是觉得包子的参谋们都是贪生怕死的废物，应该不会主动出击去惹美帝这么傻。
但愿大叔的分析是对的，我对包子没信心，觉得蠢得超人类了
包子读了那么多书，应该没那么傻。
但是，转移矛盾，借刀杀人，独尊一帝，这些都可以有。圣意要靠臣下揣摩，不可言传。参谋若只知其然而不知所以然，贸然谏言，搞不好是会掉脑袋的。